Cahaba River:
Biological and Water Quality Studies
Birmingham, AL
March/April, July and September, 2002
(sat)
CT\C^°
Science and Ecosystem Support Division
Ecological Assessment Branch
980 College Station Road, Athens, Georgia 30605
-------
CONTENTS
Contents 1
Acknowledgments 2
Summary of Findings 3
Introduction 5
Background 5
Study Area 6
Study Methods 11
•Benthic Macroinvertebrates 11
•Snail Density 11
•Periphyton 12
•Physical 14
•Stream Geomorphology and Classification 14
*In situ Water Quality 15
•Water Quality Sampling 15
•Flow 15
Quality Assurance/Quality Control 16
Study Results 16
•Benthic Macroinvertebrates 16
•Snail Density 19
•Habitat Evaluation 20
•Stream Geomorphology and Classification 20
*In situ Water Quality 22
•Flow 22
•Periphyton: Stream Runs 23
•Water Quality Sampling 27
Discussion 29
References 39
Appendix A: Photos of Selected Sampling Locations 45
Appendix B: Benthic Macroinvertebrate Collections 58
Appendix C: Water Quality Sampling 65
Appendix D: Periphyton 74
Appendix E: Hydraulic Geometry Graphs, Photos of Bed Surface
Material and Particle Size Distribution Graphs 89
Appendix F: "A Biological Assessment of Selected Sites in the
Cahaba River System, Alabama 109
Appendix G: GIS Land Use Analysis 110
Appendix H: NPDES Violations: Retrieval file, Majors in Cahaba Basin 113
1
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Rapid bioassessments, in situ water quality measurements, and habitat evaluations were conducted by
Hoke S. Howard, Lonnie Dorn, Ron Weldon, Morris Flexner and Joe W. Compton of the USEPA
Region 4, Science and Ecosystem Support Division (SESD), Athens, Georgia. Bob Quinn of the
USEPA Region 4, SESD, Athens, Georgia and Dr. Ronald L. Raschke of RLR Associates, Athens,
Georgia conducted periphyton and algal growth potential studies. Sediment characterization studies
were conducted by Morris Flexner, SESD, and Chris McArthur and Hudson Slay of the USEPA
Region 4 Water Management Division (WMD), Wetlands, Coastal and Watersheds Branch. Ed
Decker of the USEPA, Region 4, WMD, Standards, Monitoring, and TMDL Branch provided the
Introduction and Background sections and input to editing of the report. Hoke S. Howard, Morris C.
Flexner, Bob Quinn, and Ronald L. Raschke co-authored the final report. Chemical analyses were
conducted by the Analytical Support Branch of the USEPA Region 4, SESD, Athens, Georgia. Staff of
the Alabama Department of Environmental Management, specifically, Lynn Sisk, Vickie Hulcher, and
Bill Lott, provided valuable information on past studies, site access, and NPDES discharge location and
information. Pat O'Neil and staff of the Geological Survey of Alabama conducted under contract to
EPA, Region 4 an ichthyological survey of the Cahaba River; their report is provided within. Don
Nonis, Donnie Williams, and Trudy Stiber of the USEPA Region 4, SESD, Office of Quality
Assurance and Data Integration provided GIS mapping capabilities and land use data. Peer input was
provided by John Marlar, USEPA Region 4, WMD and Mark Koenig of the USEPA Region 4,
SESD, Athens, Georgia, Dave Melgaard of the USEPA Region 4, WMD and Vickie Hulcher of the
Alabama Department of Environmental Management.
Appropriate Citation:
Howard, Hoke S1., Bob Quinn1, Morris C. Flexner1, and Ronald L. Raschke2 2002. Cahaba River:
Biological and Water Quality Studies, Birmingham, Alabama. March/April, September and
July, 2002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Science and Ecosystem Support
Division, Ecological Support Branch.
'U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Science and Ecosystem Support Division,
Ecological Support Branch, 980 College Station Road, Athens, Georgia 30605.
24265 Old Lexington Road, Athens, Georgia 30605.
2
-------
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
! Excessive sedimentation and nutrient enrichment are affecting the biology of the Cahaba River
watershed. Deleterious effects of sediment deposition on the fish and benthic macroinvertebrate
communities were evident in the mainstem Cahaba River below Trussville to below Helena and at
several tributaries to the Cahaba (unnamed tributary to Little Cahaba Creek, Little Cahaba River, and
Buck Creek). Excessive nutrient inputs (nitrogen and phosphorus) to the Cahaba system from both
point and non-point sources have allowed the excessive and widespread growths of filamentous algae.
! Past studies of the Cahaba River watershed (Onorata et al. 2000) in the Birmingham area have
documented the decline in pollution-intolerant fish species with a concomitant increase in pollution-
tolerant fish species. Data from an ichthological survey conducted under contract for the 2002 EPA
studies (O'Neil 2002) reveals this same pattern. Endangered species such as the gold-line darter and
the Cahaba shiner have been adversely affected. O'Neil (2002) suggests possible causes for
disruptions to the fish community from nutrient loading (point and non-point sources), possible nitrogen
deposition originating from the high automobile density in the immediate airshed, sediment bedload and
perhaps runoff of toxics and other associated non-point sources.
! The filamentous green alga, Cladophora. often associated with nutrient enrichment and nuisance
conditions, was predominant and widespread during the study.
! Total phosphorus and total nitrogen ranged from 12 to 960 |ig/L and 230 to 21,094 |ig/L,
respectively. The upper reaches of the Cahaba were generally phosphorus limited, followed by
nitrogen limitation in the middle segment, and then tending toward phosphorus limitation again in the
lower reaches.
! Cahaba waters of 12 |ig/L TP and 230 |ig/L TN maintained as a monthly mean should restore the
Cahaba system to maximum use by reducing nuisance excursions of over 40% periphyton cover and
over 100 mg/m2 chlorophyll a biomass.
! The mainstem Cahaba from below Trussville to Helena contains excessive amounts of sediments that
have degraded the habitat and altered the benthic community structure and species diversity within this
section of the river. Sediment characterization studies documented a shift from coarser substrates at the
upper Cahaba River stations to finer substrates at the Cahaba River stations below Trussville and the
heavily developed middle reach of the Cahaba. The literature documents that the preferred substrates
of pollution-sensitive benthic macroinvertebrates, such
3
-------
as the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera, are the coarser substrates (gravels, pebbles,
cobbles) whereas fine particle substrates (sand, silt) are preferred by pollution-tolerant benthic
macroinvertebrates (chironomids and other burrowing forms). EPT fauna, common in the coarser
substrates, are more readily available as forage for fish than the benthic macroinvertebrates common to
the finer substrates.
! GIS land change analysis for the Cahaba River watershed documented dramatic increases in the
"disturbed" land use class since 1990. As of 1998, over 38% of the watershed falls into the
"disturbed' land use class; this is up from 8.8% in 1990. Land use analysis of Buck Creek, a major
tributary to the Cahaba River, indicates that over 63% of that watershed falls into the "disturbed" land
use class. With the large amount of both impervious and disturbed lands in the watershed, storm-
generated runoff, laden with sediments and/or nutrients, represents potential impacts to both water
quality and biology of the Cahaba system.(Welch, E.B. 1992; Waters, T.F. 1995)
! Results of studies by EPA in 2001 and 2002 raise an issue concerning listing under the state's
§303(d) list (1998; 2000). The issue involves that section of the Cahaba River above US 280 to 1-59
which is now listed for siltation. It is apparent, based on current EPA studies, that the §303(d) listing of
this section of the mainstem Cahaba River should be reevaluated to possibly include nutrients.
! An examination of a Permit Compliance System (PCS) retrieval file of the major discharges (>1
mgd) to the Cahaba River and associated tributaries revealed incidences of NPDES permit violations,
for nutrient or nutrient related parameters, over the last several years.(Permit Compliance System,
Database retrieval, 10/15/2002) Compliance issues within the Cahaba watershed need to be
addressed.
4
-------
INTRODUCTION
In order to characterize the present biology and water quality, the U.S. EPA Region 4, Water
Management Division (WMD) requested staff of the Science and Ecosystem Support Division (SESD)
to conduct studies of the Cahaba River and associated tributaries during the spring and summer of
2002. Studies were conducted in March /April, July and September of 2002 and focused on the
causes of impairment in the Cahaba River. The objective of these studies was and is to provide
supporting information for determination of an appropriate target for the development of a Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for the §303(d) listed segments of the Cahaba River.
Under §303(d) of the Clean Water Act, states are required to compile a list of impaired waters and
submit that list to EPA for approval. Impaired waters are those which do not meet applicable state
water quality standards, i.e., do not support their designated use(s). These waters are then scheduled
for development of a TMDL, which provides a plan that can be implemented to restore the designated
use of the water. Federal regulations require that states consider all existing and readily available
information when compiling a §303(d) list. EPA considers the formal listing process under the
Endangered Species Act to be readily available information, and the loss of use of a water by a listed
aquatic species due to degradation of water quality and/or aquatic habitat to be evidence of impairment.
Consequently, such waters must be included on state §303(d) lists and addressed by TMDLs designed
to restore conditions suitable for the endangered species. States have responsibility for the
development of TMDLs, which are subject to EPA approval. (Note: In this case, the Alabama
Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) is working with EPA to determine an appropriate
target for this TMDL. The applicable water quality criteria in this case is narrative, ADEM
Administrative Code, Rule 335-6-10-.06(c) under Minimum Conditions Applicable to All State
Waters. Therefore, the process of developing a target for this TMDL will require a numeric translation
of a narrative water quality criteria to reflect a level of nutrients that would protect the aquatic habitat
for the species of concern.
BACKGROUND
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has listed several threatened or endangered aquatic
species (2 fish and 8 mollusks) whose historical range included the Cahaba River and its tributaries.
These species are now seriously threatened or extirpated there, and USFWS has concluded the main
cause is habitat degradation resulting from excess nutrients and sediments. Consequently, Alabama's
1998 §3 03(d) list (and subsequent lists) includes portions (listed in several segments) of the mainstem of
the Cahaba River, i.e., (1) a portion of the Cahaba River mainstem, impaired due to nutrients, from the
Highway 280 bridge to the Highway 82 bridge at Centreville, and (2) a larger portion of the Cahaba
River mainstem, impaired due to siltation, from the 1-59 bridge to the Highway 82 bridge at Centreville.
These two mainstem Cahaba reaches are depicted in Figure 1 which provides the study reach and
sampling stations.
5
-------
Field biologists of the USFWS have characterized the degradation of essential habitat caused by excess
nutrient enrichment more specifically as an overabundance of attached filamentous green algae, which
variously covers, coats, and fills-in substrate, rendering those surfaces and crevices either unavailable or
unuseable by the listed species for subsistence and reproduction, during critical periods of their life
cycle. This condition has resulted from a shift in algal periphyton community structure from historical
diatom domination to a filamentous algae domination. This change, coupled with the effect of excess
sedimentation, has had adverse affects on feeding, physical attachment, and reproduction for all the
listed species.
The undesirable shift in algal community structure is presumed to be a response to elevated
concentrations of phosphorus, and possibly nitrogen, above historical levels in this segment of the
Cahaba River. The levels of instream phosphorus/nitrogen which drive this undesirable shift appear to
be much lower than the extremes commonly seen in more classical excess eutrophication problems and
the associated depletion of instream dissolved oxygen. Since the desired levels of TP/TN can be
reasonably assumed to be significantly below that which would trigger eutrophication driven dissolved
oxygen crashes, traditional eutrophication modeling with dissolved oxygen endpoints would not likely
be an effective tool in this situation, i.e., to restore essential habitat for these species. The approach, in
this case, will require accurate prediction of management levels of total phosphorus/nitrogen in ranges
that capture the relationship between algal community structure as affected by instream TP/TN
concentration. A determination of the critical levels (and timing) of the TP/TN, below which the
historical diatom domination of the periphyton community prevails will allow selection of an appropriate
target and subsequent development of a TMDL that can prescribe nutrient loads protective of the
designated use. Then implementation of that TMDL could be expected to produce load reductions that
would result in a reverse shift of the recent trends and restoration of critical aquatic habitat, returning the
use of the water for the affected species.
STUDY AREA
The headwaters of the Cahaba River originate to the east of Irondale, Alabama in the Ridge and Valley
ecoregion (67). The river flows through subecoregions 67f (Southern Limestone/DolomiteValleys &
Low Rolling Hills), 67g (Southern Shale Valleys) and 67h (Southern Sandstone Ridges). Ecoregion
67f is composed of mixed and deciduous forests, pasture and cropland and a physiography
characterized by undulating to rolling valleys with rounded hills and some steep ridges. Streams in the
Southern Limestone/Dolomite Valleys and Low Rolling Hills are moderate to low gradient with
bedrock, cobble, gravel, and sandy substrates (Griffith et al. 2000). The Southern Shale Valleys are
composed of mixed and deciduous forests with some pasture and cropland and a physiography
characterized by undulating to rolling valleys, and some low, rounded hills and knobs. Streams in the
Southern Shale Valleys are moderate to low gradient with bedrock, cobble, gravel, and sandy
substrates (Griffith et al. 2000). Ecoregion 67h is composed of mixed and deciduous forest and a
physiography characterized by high, steep ridges, some broader ridges to the south and some narrow
6
-------
intervening valleys. Streams in 67h are high to moderate gradient with rock, cobble, and gravel
substrates.
All study station locations are provided in Table 2 and shown on Figure 1; photos of most study
stations are presented in Appendix A. Major permitted municipal wastewater discharges are shown on
Figure 1 and also provided in Table 1.
7
-------
Cm1i*1)* "Rivrrr fir. Asiom-jlnlTf '':n,-inrs. MMTiriJ AjjiiI KDC?.
San pi bp; Locations and Penr..:ted risciiarqe;
UT-J
Pk.tri^e e /
A*.m4j25 ]
;y:oc5625? j
¦if Srmgiing Site;
Receiving wot3ro
Sreaaie
F^?J1 i
-------
Table 1. NPDES permitted discharges, Cahaba River drainage
Facility
NPDES
Design Flow
MGD
Disinfection method
Gold Kist WWTP
AL0003395
n/a
*C12/DeC12
Trussville WWTP
AL0022934
4
*UV
Liberty Park WWTP
AL0067814
1.5
C12/DeC12
Birmingham Riverview WWTP
AL0045969
1.5
UV
Hoover-Inverness WWTP
AL0025852
1.2
UV
Birmingham Hwy 411 WWTP
AL0055255
0.5
UV
Leeds WWTP
AL0067067
2.0
UV
Cahaba River WWTP
AL0023027
12.0
C12/DeC12
Hoover-Riverchase WWTP
AL0041653
1.5
UV
Alabaster WWTP
AL0025828
3.0
UV
Pelham WWTP
AL0054666
4.0
UV
North Shelby County WWTP
AL0056251
3.0
UV
Oak Mountain State Park WWTP
AL0050831
0.94
C12/DeC12
Helena WWTP
AL0023116
4.95
UV
Tannehill State Park WWTP
AL0056359
0.08
Not required
Centreville-Brent WWTP
AL0044857
1.6
Not required
note: Oak Mountain has 4 plants w/4 flows
* C12/DeC12 = Chlorination/Dechlorination
UV = Ultraviolet radiation
9
-------
Table 2. Sampling station locations, Cahaba River and associated tributaries, March/April
2002, July 2002, and September 2002.
Station No.
Stream
Locale
Lat/Long
UT-l
Unnamed trib
L. Cahaba Ck
Camp Coleman Rd.
N33 37 35.2
W86 34 02.8
LCC-1
L. Cahaba Ck.
Camp Coleman Rd.
N33 37 35.4
W86 33 58.9
CR-1
Cahaba R.
CR 132
N33 38 36.4
W86 35 48.5
CR-AT*
Cahaba R.
US 11/SR 7
N33 37 23.5
W86 36 01.0
CR-BT1
Cahaba R.
CR 10
N33 36 17.7
W86 32 56.8
LCR-2
L. Cahaba R.
US 411
N33 34 20.0
W86 31 06.7
CR-AH2
Cahaba R.
CR 29
N33 24 56.3
W86 44 24.8
CR-BH
Cahaba R.
off Old Rocky Ridge Rd; Riverford Dr.
N33 23 13.9
W86 46 39.3
CR-6
Cahaba R.
Old Montgomery Rd. (Bains Bridge)
N33 21 48.6
W86 48 46.4
BC-1
Buck Ck.
CR 52
N33 17 08.2
W86 48 58.3
BC-2
Buck Ck.
SR 261
N33 17 50.4
W86 50 35.0
BC-3
Buck Ck.
CR 44/1st Ave.
N33 14 38.0
W86 49 19.6
BC-4
Buck Ck.
Keystone Rd.; off CR 64
N33 15 55.4
W86 48 58.6
BC-5
Buck Ck.
upstream confluence w/Prairie Ck.
N33 17 49.3
W86 50 15.4
CR-7
Cahaba R.
CR 52
N33 17 06.4
W86 52 59.5
SC-1
Shades Ck.
CR 12, Grey Hill Rd.
N33 13 15.9
W87 01 57.6
CR-9
Cahaba R.
CR 24
N33 05 48.2
W87 03 15.1
CR-11
Cahaba R.
US 82 nr. Centreville
N32 56 44.4
W87 08 24.8
* used as site control in lieu of CR-1; rains prior to sampling eliminated use of CR-1 as site control
^ameas CR-2 in EPA August 2001 study
2same as CR-5 in EPA August 2001 study
10
-------
STUDY METHODS
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Benthic macroinvertebrates are an excellent tool for detecting stress in aquatic systems. Due to their
limited mobility and relatively long life span, benthic macroinvertebrates integrate and reflect water
quality effects over time. Rapid bioassessments (USEPA, 1999) of the benthic macroinvertebrate
community were conducted at stations on the Cahaba and Little Cahaba Rivers.
A multi-habitat approach (USEPA Region 4, 2002) was utilized where habitats were sampled
according to a strict assignment as follows:
Riffles - 3 "kicks" in the faster current and 3 "kicks" in the slower current,
Snags/Woody debris - 5 pieces washed in sieve bucket or standard biological D-frame dipnet,
Leaf packs (CPOM) - equivalent to half dipnet,
Undercut banks - 6 one meter jabs with D-frame dipnet, and
Bottom substrate - 3 sweeps or kicks (disturb sediment to 3 cm. depth).
Benthic macroinvertebrate collections were "coarse" sorted in the field to remove larger sticks, leaves,
and rocks in order to keep the sample size manageable and also assure adequacy of preservation.
Collections from all habitats were combined to comprise one sample per station. Sample collections
were stored in plastic, one quart containers with 90% ethanol. Both inside and outside labels, with such
information as station designation, stream name, project name, date/time, and sample type, were placed
on sample containers.
Laboratory processing of the benthic macroinvertebrate samples involved sorting of organisms under a
illuminated magnifying lamp. Following sorting, benthic macroinvertebrates were identified to the genus
level and number of specimens were recorded on the laboratory bench sheets. Benthic
macroinvertebrate data was evaluated through the use of biometrics utilized for analysis of the EPA
August 2001 data.
Snail Density
Herbivory by abundant populations of snails was an issue raised during the August 2001 study. Field
personnel had observed large snail populations and evidence of herbivory at that time. In order to shed
some light on this issue, a simple measure of snail density was conducted during the summer (July) 2002
studies. A linear 50' transect was established in the riffle/run and snails were counted from three
replicate, randomly selected, square foot grids.
11
-------
Periphyton
Sixteen stations were targeted for placement of periphytometers and measurement of periphyton
percent cover in the springtime. These included all stations in Table 2 except station CR11. All
periphytometers were retrieved following the incubation period. The summer strategy reduced station
coverage to ten key stations for periphytometer placement and percent periphyton cover assessment.
These stations were CR-1, UT-1, CR-AT, CR-BT, CR-AH, CR-BH, BC-2, CR-6, CR-7, and SC-
1. Periphytometers were picked up at all of these stations except CR-BT, which was missing.
Periphytometers were placed in the open canopy of stream runs and toward the middle if possible.
Where canoe traffic was expected, periphytometers were placed more toward the side of the stream.
One periphytometer holding eight slides was placed at each station. Two periphytometers were placed
at CR-7 for quality assurance purposes. Periphytometer incubation period for the spring and summer
was expected to last four and three weeks respectively. However, rain and high flows in the springtime
hindered pickup at some stations. Periphytometers at stations SC-1, CR-6, BC-1, BC-3, BC-4, and
BC-5 incubated from twenty-seven to twenty-nine days. Periphytometers that remained in the water
from forty-one to forty-three days included stations BC-2, CR-1, UT-1, LCC-1, CR-AT, CR-BT,
LCR-1, LCR-2, and CR-AH. Stations CR-7 and CR-BH were not collected until day 70. The slides
had good growths of algae on them and there were no signs of sloughing; some herbivores were on a
few slides. The station UT-1 periphytometer was found sitting out of the water, and was not used for
chlorophyll a analysis. All of the stations were processed for diatom analyses. The rationale being that
those growths had reached and remained at "carrying capacity," and even though there was probably
herbivory, the slide scrapings and processing would include diatom frustules in the herbivores and their
excretions on the gelatinous mat of the slide. Additionally, outlier tests showed that none of the stations
were outliers. During the summer, periphytometers incubated for twenty to twenty-one days or
approximately three weeks.
At each station, slides were selected randomly from the periphytometers - two slides for species
diversity measurement and two slides for chlorophyll measurements. One slide each for species
diversity analysis were placed in two separate bottles containing 1% gluteraldehyde. One slide was
analyzed, the other slide was held in reserve for backup or duplicate analysis. In the same manner two
slides for chlorophyll a measurements were placed in amber bottles and put on ice immediately. One
was analyzed, the other held in reserve. EPA Region 4 chain-of-custody procedures were in place in
the field and the laboratory (USEPA, 2002). Ten percent of the samples held in reserve were analyzed
for quality control checks.
Slides for diatom analysis were scraped on both sides with a razor blade into a receptacle. The
scraped material was placed in a Waring® blender, diluted with distilled water, and broken up into a
slurry for placement on cover slips. Diatoms on cover slips were incinerated to free them of organic
matter and better expose the taxonomic markings on the frustules of cells. After incineration, they were
mounted in HYRAX®. Over 300 frustules were identified and counted under a 1000X magnification
American Optical microscope.
12
-------
Slides for chlorophyll analyses were scraped on both sides with a razor blade into a beaker.
Approximately 10 mL of 90% acetone solution was used in transferring the periphyton to the beaker.
The periphyton/acetone mixture was then poured into a glass grinding tube and macerated for
approximately one minute with a teflon tipped tissue grinder. After grinding, the sample was transferred
into a disposable 50 mL screw-cap centrifuge tube and the total volume adjusted to 25 mL with 90%
acetone. Samples were shaken vigorously and placed in the refrigerator at 4 °C to steep overnight. The
following day, samples were clarified by filtering through a solvent resistant disposable syringe filter into
a clean 50 mL centrifuge tube. Corrected chlorophyll a in the periphyton samples was determined by
spectrophotometric method (EPA Method 446.0).
Periphyton cover was measured using the point-intercept approach recommended in the Rapid
Bioassessment Protocols (USEPA, 1999). For this measurement, emphasis was put on stream runs
with the exception that three stations in the riffle habitat were included in the summer study (CR-1, CR-
6, and CR-7).
At each station and habitat type, two transverse transects were selected randomly along a stretch of
stream. Each transect was divided into three equidistant sections. Within each section a point was
selected randomly for placement of a viewing box. The viewing box was a half meter squared
plexiglass box with a 100-square grid. Growths within a square were included in the percent cover
measurement. In determination of periphyton percent cover, included were algal filaments, chains,
tubes, stalks, and one widespread submerged moss, Fontinalis. because filamentous algae were
intertwined among its "leaflets." Also, its growths would contribute to the reduction of habitat space for
the endangered clams and fishes. Six views or percent measures were attempted at each habitat type
and station. When the water level was beyond knee deep or sediment clouds obscured the view, fewer
points or subsamples were attempted. When water was deeper in the spring at some points, 4-inch or
6-inch diameter tubes were used to measure percent cover. When they were used, four sequential
views were made next to each other at each point to increase area viewed. Use of the tubes was at
stations CR-6, LCC-l,and UT-1. These areas were much smaller, but were included in the analysis. It
is believed that the counts were conservative throughout the study, and if anything, counts erred toward
smaller percentages. The periphyton growths were very heterogenous exhibiting a broad range of
cover at most stations (Appendix D, tables 5 & 6). Collections of soft periphyton along the transects
were preserved in 1% gluteraldehyde and identified to genus.
At three sites, CR-1, CR-6, and CR-7, periphyton samples were collected from natural substrate. At
each site, three samples were collected from a known area of substrata at random points along a
transect across the riffle area. Each sample was placed in a plastic container and put on ice until
returned to the laboratory for later analyses. Chlorophyll a concentration was determined by
spectrophotometric method following extraction in 90% acetone (EPA Method 446.0).
All statistical analyses were conducted with the program STATISTICA© version 6 (Statsoft). Data
were, when appropriate, transformed to fit the best normal distribution using the Shapiro-Wilkes test
for small sample numbers.
13
-------
Physical
The quality of the physical environ is a major determinant of biological diversity. Habitat evaluations,
when compared to reference sites or site specific control sites, identify degraded conditions and the
severity of such degradation. Streams in the Cahaba drainage required use of the High Gradient habitat
form (USEPA, 1999) since they drain moderate to high gradient landscapes. Natural high gradient
streams have substrates characterized by coarser sediment particles (i.e., gravel or larger) or frequent
coarse particulate aggregations along stream reaches. Parameters considered as part of the habitat
evaluation are: epifaunal substrate (available cover), embeddedness, sediment deposition, channel
alteration, frequency of riffles, bank stability, and riparian zone integrity.
Stream Geomorphology and Classification
Stream cross-sectional surveys, stream slopes, and Wolman "pebble counts," were conducted and
determined according to methods prescribed by Harrelson, et. al (1994), Rosgen (1996), Leopold,
(1994) and Wolman (1954) and according to the Ecological Assessment Standard Operating
Procedures and Quality Assurance Manual (2002). Conventional surveying equipment (e.g., Topcon®
total station) was used for the cross-sectional profiles and to calculate the channel slopes for the
Cahaba River watershed stations. Slopes were surveyed from the respective edges of water within the
river or creek (right or left bank from upstream to downstream) extending approximately 600-1200 ft.
depending on the line-of-sight at each station. Pebble counts were collected using Wentworth size
classes according to Wolman (1954). Particles smaller than 2mm were described as either very
coarse, coarse, fine, or very fine sands, or "silt/clay"using a texture-by-feel method and the aid of a
waterproof sand gauge. Representative riffles were sampled from bankfull to bankfull within the
channel, perpendicular to flow, at nine of the seventeen study locations and an effort to collect a
minimum of 100 particles at each riffle was made. Each particle that was selected from the streambed
surface at each site that was >2mm was measured with a metric ruler along its median axis. A
combined cumulative percent plot was calculated on a log10 scale to calculate the particle size
distributions and median particle sizes or D50 for each station (Appendix E). Each sample site was
classified by stream type according to Rosgen (1994). Additionally, an evaluation as to which of the six
stages of the channel evolution model (CEM) occurred at each site was made according to Simon
(1989).
14
-------
In situ Water Quality
Instantaneous measurements of pH, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, and water temperature may identify
water quality conditions which may affect aquatic biota. In addition, such parameters may reveal
exceedance(s) of state water quality standards relative to these parameters.
In situ water quality measurements were made prior to biological sampling and the habitat evaluation.
The field instrument utilized, a Hydrolab Quanta®, was positioned just below the water surface in an
undisturbed (upstream) area of the study station. Water quality data was recorded in the field record
book and included pertinent station information (station number, date, time, etc.). Field instruments
used for the in situ water quality measurements were calibrated according to the manufacturer's
instructions and USEPA Region 4, Standard Operating Procedures (USEPA, 2002).
Water Quality Sampling
Surface water samples were collected from the 17 Cahaba River and tributary stations listed in Table 2.
Sampling protocol followed SESD Standard Operating Procedures (USEPA, 2002) and/or Standard
Methods (APHA, 1995). Water quality samples were collected for nutrients, chlorophyll a, and algal
growth potential tests (AGPT). Sample containers, preservatives and methods of analysis are given in
Appendix C, Table CI. The nutrient samples were preserved to pH less than 2 with 10% H2S04 at the
time of collection.
Chlorophyll samples were filtered through GF/C glass fiber filters on site. After filtration, the filters were
folded in half, wrapped in aluminum foil, labeled with station name, date, time, and volume filtered on
labeling tape and stored in a water-tight container on ice. Corrected chlorophyll a was determined using
the fluorometric procedure (EPA Method 445.0).
Ten stations were sampled for algal growth potential and limiting nutrient tests. Grab samples were
collected in two liter autoclavable bottles. The AGPT samples were analyzed according to the
procedure described in The Selenastrum capricornutum Printz Algal Assay Bottle Test (Miller et
al., 1978).
All water samples were stored on ice at 4°C until returned to SESD laboratory for processing.
Handling, custody, and transport of samples followed guidelines described in the Ecological
Assessment Laboratory Operations and Quality Assurance Manual (USEPA,2002).
Flow
During the study, estimates of stream flow were obtained from existing USGS stations or by means of
stream gaging by the field team. In-stream flow measurements were accomplished by use of a standard
pygmy current meter and a wading rod. Due to time constraints and the availability of USGS data,
stream velocity measurements by the field team were measured at the 0.6 foot depth location and
limited to quarter point locations along the stream width. Stream depth and width were determined
with a wading rod and cloth/steel engineers tape.
15
-------
QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL
Field and laboratory methods utilized on this project adhered to USEPA approved guidance and
methodology (USEPA, 2002). For QA/QC purposes, duplicate sampling was conducted at one of the
sampling stations.
STUDY RESULTS
Benthic macroinvertebrates
As discussed in the EPA August 2001 study report, a valid ecoregional reference site from a biological
perspective is not available for the Ridge and Valley ecoregion. Previously, station CR-1 was utilized
as a site control for the August 2001 studies. However, rains prior to sampling and evidence of
scouring prevented the use of CR-1 as a site control for the March/April 2002 studies. As a result,
station CR-AT, approximately 1.4 miles downstream of CR-1 was utilized as a site control. An
examination of March/April 2002 metric results indicated CR-AT was a suitable site control. For
example, station CR-AT had the highest number of taxa collected (36) and a large number of pollution-
sensitive EPT taxa (15) were present.
Although benthic macroinvertebrate samples were collected during the July 2002 (summer) sampling,
extremely low water levels precluded the utility of sample analysis since comparability and
representativeness would be severely affected.
Results of Rapid Bioassessments identified impairment of the benthic macroinvertebrate community at
three tributaries to the Cahaba River: the unnamed tributary (UT-1), Little Cahaba River (LCR-2) and
Buck Creek (BC-2). In addition, mainstem Cahaba River stations (CR-BT, CR-AH, CR-BH, CR-6
and CR-7), with the exception of CR-AT, exhibited some degree of impairment based on multimetric
analysis of the benthic macroinvertebrate data. A complete summary of metric results for benthic
macroinvertebrate data is presented in Table 3; habitat evaluation scores are also included in this table.
The following benthic metrics, utilized during the 2001 study, were used for the 2002 studies:
• EPT Index - summation of the total number of taxa representing the Ephemeroptera (mayflies),
Plecoptera (stoneflies), and Trichoptera (caddisflies),
• Taxa Richness - total taxa collected from the site,
• % EPT - percentage of the total fauna, numerically, represented by the generally pollution-sensitive
Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera,
• % Ephemeroptera - percentage of the total fauna, numerically, represented by Ephemeroptera,
• Biotic Index (genus level) - overall community pollution tolerance at a site; takes into account pollution
tolerance values for individual organisms and their abundance,
16
-------
• % Dominant Taxon - measures the dominance of the single most abundant taxa,
• Indicator Assemblage Index (IAI) - measures change in the relative abundance of tolerant and
intolerant organisms by contrasting numerical abundances of these organisms at the reference or site
control to the numerical abundances of other stations. IAI is calculated as follows:
IAI = 0.50 (%EPTb/%EPTa + %CAa/%Cab),
where:
0.50 = constant
%EPTb = total relative abundances of EPT fauna at test site
%EPTa = total relative abundances of EPT fauna at site control
%CAa = total relative abundances of Chironomids and Annelids at site control
%Cab = total relative abundances of Chironomids and Annelids at test site.
Of these seven benthic metrics, six emerged as sensitive to stress and aided in identifying perturbation
relative to the benthic macroinvertebrate community: EPT Index, Taxa Richness, % EPT, %
Ephemeroptera, % Dominant Taxon, and the Indicator Assemblage Index (IAI).
The EPT Index ranged from 4 to 13 at the test sites while the site control, CR-AT, had an EPT Index
of 15 (Table 3). The EPT Index decreases in response to increasing perturbation. The lowest EPT
Index values were found at UT-1 (the unnamed tributary), BC-2 (Buck Creek), and Little Cahaba
River (LCR-2); EPT Index values at these three stations were 4, 4, and 6 , respectively. The remaining
mainstem Cahaba River stations had an EPT Index ranging from 7 to 11 (Table 3). Shades Creek
(SC-1) had an EPT Index of 13 which is quite similar to that of CR-AT (15), the site control.
The greatest Taxa Richness was seen at CR-AT; 36 taxa were collected from CR-AT. Four of the
six Cahaba River mainstem stations (CR-AT, CR-BT, CR-BH and CR-6) had Taxa Richness values in
the range of 31 to 36; also within this range was Buck Creek station BC-4 (31). Taxa Richness
decreases in response to increasing perturbation. The lowest Taxa Richness values were at UT-1 (24)
and BC-2 (25). Similar Taxa Richness values ranging from 26 to 29 taxa were observed at LCC-1,
LCR-2, CR-AH, CR-7, SC-1 andBC-3.
17
-------
Table 3. Summary of Metric and Habitat Evaluation Results, Cahaba River and associated
tributaries, March/April, 2002.
Station
EPT
Index
Taxa
%EPT
%Ephem
BI
%Dom
Tax
IAI1
%Chir&
Ann
Hab 4 eval.
LCC-1
9
26
42
31
4.25
38
1.19
8.9
155
UT-1
4
24
41
2
6.15
28
0.72
20.72
149
CR-AT*
15
36
55
39
5.30
9
n/a
14.41
152
CR-ATa
13
37
44
24
5.51
12
n/a
33.84
n/a
CR-BT2
10
32
45
26
5.11
19
0.61
35.07
133
LCR-2
6
28
8
5
6.68
44
1.09
7.58
85
CR-AH3
9
29
13
9
4.79
45
0.35
30.93
100
CR-BH
11
33
45
11
6.01
29
0.62
34.29
127
CR-6
7
31
30
9
5.47
26
1.78
4.76
136
CR-7
9
27
59
32
5.72
24
1.25
10.05
150
SC-1
13
27
58
47
4.83
23
2.04
4.74
169
BC-2
4
25
19
13
6.14
45
0.29
58.51
123
BC-3
10
29
24
20
5.58
62
1.33
6.47
118
BC-4
8
31
36
26
5.53
21
0.56
30.09
143
* used as site control in lieu of CR-1; 1.1" rain prior to spring sampling eliminated use of CR-1 as site control
1 Indicator Assemblage Index -change in relative abundance of tolerant and intolerant organisms; Scoring criteria as
follows:
IAI >0.80
IAI 0.65 - 0.80
IAI 0.50-0.64
IAI <0.50
No impairment
Minimal impairment
Substantial impairment
Excessive impairment
2same as CR-2 in EPA August 2001 study
3same as CR-5 in EPA August 2001 study
4 Habitat evaluation categories:
166-200 = optimal
113-153 = suboptimal
60-100 = marginal
0-43 = poor
CR-ATa = duplicate sample
18
-------
Results for the metric %EPT were highest at CR-7 (59), SC-1 (58), and CR-AT (55). High density of
the facultative Baetid mayflies (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae) and facultative Cheumatopsyche caddisflies
(Trichoptera) contributed 34 of the 59 %EPT at CR-7.
The metric %EPT decreases in response to increasing perturbation. Little Cahaba Creek (LCC-1), the
unnamed tributary (UT-1), and two mainstem Cahaba River stations (CR-BT and CR-BH) had %EPT
values in the range from 41 to 45 (Table 3). High densities of facultative benthic macroinvertebrates
affected the %EPT results at LCC-1, UT-1 and CR-BH. A high density of the facultative mayfly
Stenonema (Ephemeroptera) contributed 29 of the 42%EPT at LCC-1. The facultative Hydropsy chid
caddisflies (Trichoptera) contributed 39 of the 41%EPT at UT-1. Density of the facultative
Hydropsychid caddisflies (Trichoptera) contributed 31 of the 45%EPT at CR-BH.
A group of six stations, LCR-2, CR-AH, CR-6, and Buck Creek stations 2, 3, and 4, exhibited a
range of %EPT from 8 to 36 (Table 3). The Little Cahaba River (LCR-2), a tributary to the Cahaba
had the lowest %EPT (8) followed by CR-AH (13), a mainstem Cahaba River station, and Buck
Creek station BC-2 (19).
Results for the metric %Ephemeroptera (Table 3) revelealed Shades Creek (SC-1) as having the
greatest density of pollution-sensitive mayflies (47%) followed by the site control, CR-AT (39%).
Abundance of pollution-sensitive mayflies decreases with increasing perturbation. Little Cahaba Creek
(LCC-1) and mainstem Cahaba River station CR-7 had 31 and 32 %Ephemeroptera, respectively.
The unnamed tributary (UT-1), Buck Creek (BC-2), Little Cahaba River (LCR-2), mainstem Cahaba
River stations CR-AH, CR-BH and CR-6 recorded the lowest ranges of %Ephemeroptera ranging
from 2 to 13. Mid-range observations of %Ephemeroptera were seen at CR-BT (26), BC-3 (20) and
BC-4 (26).
The lowest %Dominant Taxon of 9 was recorded at the site control, CR-AT (Table 3). The metric
%Dominant Taxon increases with increasing perturbation. Values ranging from 19 to 29 %Dominant
Taxon were observed for CR-BT, CR-BH, CR-6, CR-7, SC-1 and BC-4. Elevated %Dominant
Taxon results were present at LCC-1 (38; Simulium). LCR-2 (44; Pleurocera). CR-AH (45;
Simulium). BC-2 (45; Naididae), and BC-3 (62; Pleurocera).
The IAI contrasts the ratio of tolerant versus intolerant organisms (abundance) at the site control with
the test sites. IAI values approaching 1.0 indicates similar community balance. IAI scores decrease
with increasing perturbation. Buck Creek station BC-2 had the lowest IAI result (0.29) followed by
CR-AH (0.35), BC-4 (0.56), CR-BH (0.62), and UT-1 (0.72). IAI results (Table 3) indicated SC-1,
CR-6, BC-3, CR-7 and LCC-1 were most similar to the site control, CR-AT.
Snail Density
Snails were most abundant in the middle reach of the study area. Specifically, stations CR-AH, CR-
BH and CR-6 had the greatest density with 1001, 581 and 721 individuals/m2. CR-1 had the lowest
snail density (32 individuals/m2). Snail density at CR-2, CR-AT, CR-7 and CR-11 was
19
-------
430, 387, 291 and 0 individuals/m2, respectively. Table 4 (below) provides snail densities observed
during the spring 2002 study.
Table 4. Snail density (#/m2)
STATION
DATE
#snails/m2
CR-1
7/10/02
32
CR-AT
7/10/02
380
CR-BT
7/10/02
430
CR-AH
7/10/02
1001
CR-BH
7/09/02
581
CR-6
7/09/02
721
CR-7
7/09/02
291
CR-11
7/08/02
0
Habitat evaluation
Habitat evaluation scores in the "marginal" category were observed at LCR-2 (85) and CR-AH (100).
Shades Creek, SC-1, had a habitat evaluation score in the "optimal" category. All other study stations
were in the "suboptimal" category based on habitat evaluation scores. BC-2 and BC-3 scored in the
low end of the "suboptimal" category. Sedimentation was a major factor affecting the habitat evaluation
scores at all stations with the exception of SC-1. Habitat scores are provided in Table 3.
Stream Geomorphology and Classification
The stream geomorphology and classification data from this study is summarized in Table 5 and
presented in more detail in Appendix E. Stream slopes at each of the nine stations surveyed ranged
from 0.01% at CR-BH to 0.81% at LCC-1, extending over distances ranging from approximately 600
to 1200 feet. The median particle size class or D50 at each station ranged from a very coarse sand of
1-2 mm at stations CR-BH and CR-7 to bedrock (4096 mm) at station LCC-1. The percentage of
bed surface material that was measured at each site that was <2 mm (sands, silts and clays) ranged
from a low of 13.89%) at station CR-1 to a high of 58.96%) at CR-BH. Five of the nine stations were
classified as C4 stream types according to the Rosgen classification of natural rivers (Rosgen, 1994).
The C4 stream type is a slightly entrenched, meandering, gravel-dominated, riffle/pool channel with a
well developed floodplain with gentle gradients of less than 2%, display a high width to depth ratio and
are somewhat sinuous (Rosgen, 1996). One of the nine stations, CR-BH was classified as a C5 stream
type which is similar to a C4 but sand-dominated instead of gravel-dominated. Two of the stations,
CR-6 and CR-7, were classified as F4 stream types. The F4 stream type is similar to the C4 stream
type but is more deeply entrenched, and as a result has typically abandoned its former floodplain
(Rosgen, 1996).
20
-------
The remaining station, LCC-1, was classified as Blc. The Blc stream type is a moderately entrenched
channel with channel slopes less than 2%, typically associated with bedrock or bedrock controlled
drainage ways, faults, folds and joints. Channel materials are dominated by bedrock but can also
include boulders, cobble and sand (Rosgen, 1996). Stages of the CEM were identified at each of the
nine stations where stream geomorphological data was collected. Stages ranged from Class I at station
LCC-1, indicating a very stable, premodified channel to Class V at stations CR-AH, CR-1, CR-AT,
CR-BT and CR-BH, indicating a very unstable channel with bed aggradation, channel widening and
bank slumping.
Table 5. Summary of Stream Geomorphology and Classification Results, Cahaba River and
associated tributaries, September, 2002.
Station
Date
Water
Surface
Slope
Slope
Distance
(ft.)
Median
Particle
Size (D50)
% Sands, Silts,
& Clays
Particles < 2mm
Rosge
n
Stream
Type
Simon
CEM
Class
CR-1
9/11/0
2
0.25 %
599
20 mm
13.89
C4
V
CR-AT
9/11/0
2
0.13%
835
15 mm
29.73
C4
V
LCC-1
9/11/0
2
0.81%
611
5000 mm
17.54
Blc
I
CR-BT
9/11/0
2
0.24%
732
12 mm
39.64
C4
V
CR-AH
9/10/0
2
0.07%
949
20 mm
37.76
C4
V
CR-BH
9/12/0
2
0.01%
1202
1 mm
58.96
C5
V
CR-6
9/09/0
2
0.02%
975
4 mm
40.48
F4
IV
CR-7
9/10/0
2
0.28%
835
2 mm
50.00
F5
IV
SC-1
9/10/0
2
0.27%
729
37 mm
24.81
C4
in
21
-------
In situ Water Quality
Table 6 provides a summary of all in situ water quality measurements made during the study periods.
In situ water quality measurements were taken prior to any stream activity; the measurements were
made just below the water's surface and were recorded in the field record.
Conductivity values for the spring 2002 sampling were lower than summer 2002 at all stations. Lowest
conductivity was observed at Little Cahaba Creek, CR-1 and CR-AT; spring/summer 2002
conductivity values at these stations ranged from 143 to 242 |imhos/cm (Table 6). Elevated
conductivity values were observed at the unnamed tributary (UT-1) for both the spring and summer
2002 sampling events; conductivity at UT-1 was 888 and 963 |imhos/cm for spring summer 2002,
respectively.
With the exception of Little Cahaba Creek and Shades Creek, all other tributaries to the Cahaba River
generally exhibited higher conductivity values for the 2002 sampling than the mainstem Cahaba River
stations (Table 6). For example, Buck Creek, the unnamed tributary and the Little Cahaba River had
conductivity values ranging from 364 to 963 |imhos/cm in spring/summer 2002 while mainstem Cahaba
River stations had conductivity values ranging from 148 to 366 |imhos/cm (Table 6). In situ
spring/summer 2002 measurements of pH were fairly consistent at the Cahaba River mainstem stations
with the exception of summer 2002 measurements at CR-9 and CR-11 (Table 6); in situ pH
measurements at these stations ranged from 7.29 to 7.73. Elevated pH values of 8.34 and 8.93 were
observed in summer 2002 at CR-9 and CR-11, respectively.
No violations of water quality standards for dissolved oxygen were observed at any study stations. It
should be noted that dissolved oxygen measurements represented instantaneous measurements at one
point in time; no diel studies of dissolved oxygen were conducted as part of the spring/summer 2002
EPA studies. Lowest observed in situ dissolved oxygen measurements occurred at Buck Creek
stations BC-1 and BC-4 and Cahaba River mainstem station CR-7 during the summer 2002 sampling;
dissolved oxygen (mg/L) at BC-1 and BC-4 at this time were 6.10 and 5.85, respectively while
dissolved oxygen at CR-7 was 6.15 mg/L. Little Cahaba River (LCR-2) exhibited lower dissolved
oxygen values than mainstem Cahaba River stations; dissolved oxygen values were 6.94 and 6.99,
respectively, during the spring and summer 2002 sampling events. Spring 2002 ranges for dissolved
oxygen at Cahaba River mainstem stations ranged from 7.72 to 10.24 mg/L while the summer 2002
dissolved oxygen values ranged from 6.15 to 9.20 mg/L.
Flow
Flow data is presented in Tables 7 and 8 and includes both USGS stream flow (cfs) during the study
period and the in-stream flow measurements by the field team.
22
-------
Periphyton: Stream Runs
The filamentous algae identified during the study included the green algae Cladophora. Ulothrix.
Spirogvra. Mougeotia. Chaetophora. Stigeoclonium. and pseudoparenchyma tufts of probably
Cladophora: blue-green algae Shizothirx. Rivularia. Anabaena. Cvlindrosporum. and Microcoleus:
diatoms Cvmbella. Melosira. Biddulphia. Fragilaria: and a stream moss, Fontinalis (Table D7).
Cladophora was predominant and widespread at most stations in the springtime persisting into the
summer (Table D7). An examination of spring time periphytometer slides showed that green
filamentous algae were present, but the growths were not obvious like those growing on natural
substrates.
Distribution of filamentous periphyton at stations generally was heterogenous except at station BC-2 in
the spring where 100% cover was observed at each point measured (Appendix A, Figure 15; Tables
D5 and D.6). Mean percent cover ranged from 0.3% at station CR-6 in the summer to 100% at
station BC-2 in the spring (Table D8). The median for all stations was 21.5% and the 25th percentile,
10%) (Appendix D, Figure 1). Those stations with mean percent coverage equal to
23
-------
Table 6 . In situ Water Quality Measurements, Cahaba River and associated tributaries,
March/April and July, 2002.
Station
Date/Time
PH
Conductivity
((imhos/cm)
Dissolved oxygen
(mg/L)
Water
temperature (°C)
LCC-1
3/12/02 0915
7.60
143
n/a
10.80
LCC-1
7/10/02 1110
7.91
201
7.62
29.63
UT-1
4/23/02 1035
7.78
888
9.09
17.58
UT-1
7/10/02 1100
7.84
963
7.62
24.39
CR-1
4/23/02 1315
7.65
148
9.85
18.79
CR-1
7/10/02 1205
7.73
164
7.98
25.73
CR-AT*
4/23/02 0847
7.47
163
8.97
15.76
CR-AT*
7/10/02 0945
7.29
242
8.21
26.20
CR-BT1
4/23/02 1520
7.92
265
10.24
20.90
CR-BT1
7/10/02 1345
8.16
388
8.60
28.31
LCR-2
4/24/02 0830
7.41
364
6.94
17.36
LCR-2
7/10/02 1500
7.59
379
6.99
28.44
CR-AH2
4/24/02 1050
7.58
210
8.95
21.32
CR-AH2
7/10/02 0800
7.55
259
7.05
27.69
CR-BH
4/23/02 0805
7.52
223
7.78
19.83
CR-BH
7/09/02 1500
7.53
256
6.92
29.20
BC-1
4/22/02 1425
7.59
365
6.56
20.68
BC-1
7/09/02 1000
7.52
471
6.10
24.16
BC-2
4/22/02 1525
7.73
386
6.74
21.10
BC-2
7/09/02 1200
7.96
388
7.98
26.41
BC-3
4/22/02 1315
7.80
417
7.63
20.18
BC-3
7/09/02 1025
7.72
416
6.64
23.94
BC-4
4/22/02 1355
7.65
515
6.28
20.40
BC-4
7/09/02 1110
7.54
534
5.85
25.26
BC-5
4/22/02 1455
7.81
331
6.94
20.45
24
-------
Table 6 . (continued) In situ Water Quality Measurements, Cahaba River and
associated tributaries, March/April and July, 2002.
Station
Date/Time
PH
Conductivity
((imhos/cm)
Dissolved oxygen
(mg/L)
Water
temperature
(°C)
BC-5
7/09/02
7.81
391
7.30
25.08
CR-6
4/23/02 0930
7.55
246
8.15
19.88
CR-6
7/09/02 1325
7.62
366
7.06
27.95
CR-7
4/23/02 1330
7.73
278
8.59
20.87
CR-7
7/09/02 0825
7.66
344
6.15
26.83
CR-9
4/24/02 0910
7.63
225
7.72
20.78
CR-9
7/08/02 1625
8.34
252
9.00
30.72
CR-11
7/08/02 1435
8.93
255
9.24
30.01
SC-1
4/23/02 1530
8.20
242
10.46
20.42
SC-1
7/08/02 1730
8.07
276
8.58
28.40
-------
Table 7 . USGS Flow data from April 22-24, 2002 and July 7-10, 2002
USGS gage
locale
Site
number
cfs
4/22
cfs
4/23
cfs
4/24
cfs
7/08
cfs
7/09
cfs
7/10
Trussville
02423130
22.0
21.0
19.0
1.20
.63
.70
Mountain
Brook
02423380
93.0
89.0
80.0
47.0
25.0
23.0
Cahaba
Heights
02423425
99.0
92.0
72.0
9.80
10.0
6.40
Hoover
02423496
94.0
93.0
74.0
12.0
18.0
22.0
Acton
02423500
95.0
96.0
79.0
26.0
33.0
32.0
Helena
02423555
200.0
194.0
172.0
52.0
54.0
54.0
Centreville
02424000
782.0
749.0
729.0
617.0
584.0
568.0
Table 8. Flow (cfs) from quarter points during EPA studies in March/April, 2002.
Stream
Station
cfs
3/11
cfs
3/12
cfs
4/22
cfs
4/23
Little Cahaba
Creek
LCC-1
34.88
Unnamed
tributary
UT-1
1.53
Cahaba River
CR-1
7.78
Cahaba River
CR-BT
12.41
Little Cahaba
River
3.80
Cahaba River
CR-AH
86.08
Cahaba River
CR-BH
51.45
Buck Creek
BC-3
6.28
Buck Creek
BC-4
12.18
Buck Creek
BC-2
46.08
Shades Creek
SC-1
39.92
26
-------
or less than 10% included LCC-1, CR-BT, and CR-BH in the spring, and CR-1, UT-1, and CR-6 in
the summer (Table D9). Figure 1 data (Appendix D) was significantly skewed (alpha 0.05)
downward. A square root transformation of the data brought the skewness and kurtosis within
the alpha 0.05 bounds moving the data more toward a normal curve distribution (Appendix D, Figure
2). Conversion of the transformed data gives a 21.4% and 10.0% percent median and 25th percentile
respectively, very close or exactly the same as the median and 25th percentile of the raw data
(Appendix D, Figure 1).
Periphyton diatom mean diversity (d-bar) was not significantly skewed and only slightly out of bounds
at alpha 0.05 with respect to kurtosis. Transformations were applied to the data, but normality suffered
so we used the distribution of the untransformed data (Appendix D, Figure 3). Mean diversity ranged
from 1.179 at BC-2 in the summer to 4.229 at station UT-1 in the spring (Table D12 ). The median
was 3.174 and the 25th percentile was equal to or less than 1.997 d-bar (Appendix D, Figure D3).
Those stations equal to or less than 1.997 d-bar included CR-1, LCC-1, LCR-2, CR-7 in the spring,
and CR-1, CR-6, and BC-2 in the summer (Table D9). Stations UT-1 and BC-5 in the spring more
than doubled the 25th percentile d-bar of 1.997 (Table D12). Other stations encountered with high d-
bars, less than 4.000 and equal to or greater than 3.000, at least once during the study, included CR-
AT, CR-BT, LCR-2, CR-AH, CR-BH, CR-6, BC-1, BC-2, BC-4, SC-1, and UT-1.
During the spring study, periphyton chlorophyll a ranged from 5.0 mg/m2 at Shades Creek (SC-1) to
67.9 mg/m2 at Buck Creek (BC-5). The seven stations in the Cahaba River had an average chlorophyll
a value of 31.8 mg/m2 with a low of 11.6 at Riverford Drive (CR-BH) and a high of 59.0 mg/m2 below
Trussville (CR-BT). The corrected chlorophyll a concentrations and the number of days the
periphytometers were in place are given in Table D1.
Water Quality Sampling
The spring results for nutrients and chlorophyll a in the water column are given in Table C2. Nitrate
nitrogen was very high (26 mg/L) in the unnamed tributary (UT-1). In the Cahaba, nitrate ranged from
0.23 mg/L at CR-1, the most upstream station, to 3.8 mg/L at CR-BT, the first station downstream of
UT-1. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) and ammonia (NH3N) were low at all stations except Buck
Creek at Helena (BC-2) where the TKN was 3.8 mg/L and the ammonia was 3.4 mg/L.
Phosphorus concentrations ranged from below the detection limit of 0.025 mg/L at CR-1 (and five
other stations) to 0.91 mg/L at UT-1. The largest phosphorus concentration in the Cahaba was 0.24
mg/L at Bains Bridge (CR-6). The results of the algal assay limiting nutrient tests are listed in Table C4.
Phosphorus was the limiting nutrient at the upper stations, CR-1 to CR-BT, while nitrogen was limiting
from CR-AH (Caldwell Mill Road ) to CR-7 (Co. Rd. 52). At CR-9 (Hwy. 24) nitrogen and
phosphorus were co-limiting. No samples were collected at CR-11 (US82 near Centreville) during the
spring study.
The chlorophyll a concentrations in the water column were generally low. Values ranged from 0.30 |ig/L at
Shades Creek to 8.4 |ig/L at Little Cahaba Creek off Camp Coleman Road (LCC-1). In the Cahaba, the
largest chlorophyll a concentration was 4.6 |ig/L at CR-AH, Caldwell Mill Road (Table C2).
27
-------
Results of nutrients and chlorophyll a analyses from water samples collected during the July study are listed
in Table C3. Nitrate and phosphorus concentrations were generally higher during the summer study than in
the spring. Nitrate at UT-1 was again very high at 27 mg/L. The first Cahaba River station downstream,
CR-BT, had a nitrate concentration of 5.9 mg/L. Further downstream at CR-AH, Caldwell Mill Road and
CR-BH, Riverford Drive, nitrate drops below 1.0 mg/L, but then increases to 6.0 mg/L at CR-6 (Bains
Bridge). TKN and ammonia concentrations are low, with only one station, BC-2, having a TKN above
1.0 mg/L.
Phosphorus values for the July 2002 study ranged from below the detection limit of 0.025 mg/L at CR-1
to 1.1 mg/L at Little Cahaba River (LCR-2). The highest phosphorus concentration of the Cahaba River
stations was 0.96 mg/L at Bains Bridge. The limiting nutrient experiments show phosphorus to be limiting at
the upstream station, CR-1, nitrogen limiting to algal growth in the middle reach(CR-AH, Caldwell Mill
Road to Bains Bridge, CR-6) and then phosphorus limiting further downstream at CR-11 (Table C4).
Chlorophyll a concentrations in the water column were for the most part higher during the summer study.
This was especially true for the stations on the Cahaba from Caldwell Mill Road (CR-AH) downstream to
CR-11. The values ranged from 0.28 |ig/L at CR-1 to 13.8 |ig/L at CR-9.
Untransformed total phosphorus (TP) data had a median of 143 |ig/L ranging from 12 to 960 |ig/L
(Appendix C, Figure 4). Figure 4 data (Appendix C) shows that 75% of the measurements in the system
were distributed toward lower concentrations of TP. To better fit a normal curve and correct for
skewness and kurtosis, the data were transformed using a square root transformation which moved the
skewness and kurtosis statistics within the alpha 0.05 bounds and improved the normal distribution of the
data. The transformed data in Figure 5 (Appendix C) translates to a median of 225 |ig/L and a 25th
percentile of 27 |ig/L of TP. Stations within the 27 |ig/L percentile include CR-1, CR-AT, LCC-1, BC-3,
and SC-1 in the spring, and CR-1, LCC-1, BC-3, and SC-1 in the summer (Table D9).
Untransformed total nitrogen (TN) had a median of 1260 |ig/L with a range of 230 to 21,094 |ig/L
(Appendix C, Figure 6). Total nitrogen also was skewed and a natural log transformation corrected for
skewness and kurtosis (Appendix C, Figure 7). The median of 7.1389 and 25th percentile of 6.3630 in
Figure 7 converts to 1260 |ig/L TN and 580 |ig/L TN; the same as the untransformed data. Those stations
in the TN 25th percentile were CR-1, CR-AT, LCC-1, and SC-1 in the spring, and CR-AT, LCC-1, and
CR-BH in the summer (Table D9).
Stations CR-1 and LCC-1 were in the lower quartile for at least one of the seasons with respect to
percent cover, d-bar, TP, and TN. Background station CR-1 which had a minimum mean percent cover
of 8.3% also exhibited greater values of 23.2% in the spring and 21.8% at the riffles in the summer (Table
D8).
Those stations in the lower TP quartile had TP values ranging from 12 to 27 |ig/L and percent periphyton
coverage ranging from 0.8 to 38% (Table D9; Table D10). Likewise, those stations in the lower TN
quartile ranged from 230 to 580 |ig/L TN with a range in percent cover from 0.8 to 38% (Table D9 ;
Table Dll).
28
-------
DISCUSSION
Historically, one would expect in the Cahaba tributaries and mainstem a periphytic community of
predominantly diatom communities with d-bars equal to or less than 2.0 and little or no filamentous algae.
Mean diversity (d-bar) is a very sensitive index reflecting community changes to small nutrient increases
(Raschke 1993). Huston (1979) and Ballock et al. (1976) point out that diatoms are very sensitive to
enrichment because of differences in growth rates under different concentrations rather than pollution
tolerance. Increased phosphorus in relatively stable oligotrophic systems with low d-bars equal to or less
than 2.0 results in some populations decreasing and others increasing because of their inate ability to adapt
or utilize a new source. Peaks of production promote opportunistic migrants, which create high diversity
while the resources last (Tilman, 1977; Kilham & Kilham, 1978; Washington, 1984; and Raschke, 1993).
If the nutrient input continues unabated, then diversity will seek new d-bar levels of 3, 4 or greater.
Apparently, this is what is happening to the periphyton and especially the diatom community of the Cahaba
watershed. Excessive nitrogen and phosphorus inputs from point and non-point sources have not only
driven the d-bar up in all orders of streams, but it has enabled the excessive and widespread growths of
filamentous periphyton which have impaired uses of the Cahaba system. In this situation, more diversity is
not good. A good example of this is station UT-1; UT-1 adjacent to LCC-1, had a diversity of 4.2. In
contrast, stations CR-1 and LCC-1, both in the vicinity of UT-1, had d-bars less than 2.0 (Table D9).
Station BC-5, located on Buck Creek, also had a diversity of greater than 4.0. Both stations (UT-1 and
BC-5) are the recipients of high amounts of nutrients emanating from anthropogenic sources upstream. The
cause for concern is not the presence of filamentous algae or other aquatic plants like mosses, but
excessive growths over space and time contributing to impairment of designated uses. Generally, results
and observations from this study confirm that filamentous periphytic growths are a predominant feature of
the Cahaba system. One alga, Cladophora. is very prevalent, sometimes covering 100% of an area and
developing strands several feet long (Tables D7 & D8; Appendix A, Figure 15 ). In the summer, the blue-
green alga Shizothrix. and a diatom Melosira (Table D7) accompanied it. Study personnel noted that
Cladophora and Fontinalis were very obvious residents of the streambed.
Fontinalis is an aquatic moss without a vascular system and no true roots; therefore it, like algae, absorbs
nutrients from the water column. It is a widespread genus that can entirely cover a streambed and in some
cases extend out two meters from its substrate. Its leaves are home for a variety of insects and algae. In
general, species in this genus occur in clean water, but the same species can live in concrete ditches
receiving rice paddy effluent or on substrates of enriched streams (Communication from Glime 2002).
Cladophora can be found associated with Fontinalis in polluted waters (Arendt 1981).
Spatial heterogeneity varied tremendously at stations (Tables D5 & D6) where points along one transect
could range from 1% to 100% cover. The same pattern of periphytic aereal coverage existed on the few
riffles measured. At several points along transects there was zero percent periphyton cover, with rocks or
cobble appearing smooth. While these gaps in coverage were observed, it was not apparent that their
occurrence provided sufficient habitat of suitable character, location, and timeframe necessary to meet
crucial requirements in the life cycles of the federally protected fish and mollusks. However, there are
times, as alluded to earlier, that algal coverage may be 100%. At these times, a possibility exists that
extensive algal coverage may pose a concern to fish and mollusk life cycle processes. Dr. Paul Hartfield
(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), in a special report (2002), indicates that:
29
-------
[ "although the physical effects of nutrification and algal growth on mussels has not been directly addressed
in the literature, field observations by Service biologists indicate a direct relationship between dense
filamentous algal growth and lack of mussel recruitment in streams and loss of mussel species. Recent
studies on early mussel life history indicate that heavy filamentous algal growth promoted by nutrification
may physically disrupt mussel/fish interactions and/or juvenile mussel survival. In hatcheries, filamentous
algae reduces mussel juvenile survival by reducing flow, increasing sedimentation, and by deleterious
effects on the unicellular algal community on which the mussels feed")
In personal communication (2002), Hartfield indicates that among all field malacologists he contacted,
there was a clear consensus of opinion that the occurrence of excessive attached algal growth closely
correlates with decline and disappearance of mussel populations. In addition to the effects on mussels
discussed here, the data strongly suggests that periphyton growths also affect other uses like recreation,
aesthetics, and even fishing(Table D8; Appendix A, Figure 15 ).
In addition to the periphytic growths, another finding that translates to impacts to aquatic fauna (fish and
benthic invertebrates) of the Cahaba River is the excessive sedimentation that has taken place in the
Birmingham area. EPA spring/summer 2002 studies of the biology and water quality of the Cahaba River
and associated tributaries, as defined by a reach from 1-59 near Trussville to US 82 near Centreville,
revealed findings quite similar to those conducted by Onorata et. al (1998). Onorato et al. studied
ichthyofaunal assemblages of the Cahaba within a similar study area to that utilized by EPA in 2002. In
these studies, Onorato et al. attribute negative impacts to the ichthyofauna to the extensive urban
development occurring in the watershed in the last two decades. Using remote sensing classification and
GIS techniques, we performed change analysis focusing on the MRLC "disturbed" land use class as
opposed to the "undisturbed" class for 1983, 1990, and 1998 (Appendix Gl). The "disturbed" land use
class includes land uses such as residential, commercial, industrial, transportation and bare ground. The
"undisturbed" land use class is basically forested lands (deciduous, mixed, and evergreen) and grasslands.
This GIS analysis reveals a remarkable increase in the "disturbed" class after 1990. For example, the
percentage of the Cahaba watershed "disturbed" increased from 8.8% in 1990 to 38.7% in 1998. Wang
et al. 1996 found that when urbanization exceeds 10%, the Index of Biotic Integrity scores were
consistently very low. In addition, habitat was adversely affected.
Consistent with the EPA 2002 findings, Onorata et al 1998 found that the upper watershed (St. Clair
County and northeastern Jefferson County) was affected primarily by sedimentation of non-point source
origins while the middle reach of the Cahaba (within the urbanized Birmingham area) was affected not only
by non-point sources (sediments and nutrients) but also by multiple point sources primarily originating from
multiple wastewater treatment facilities. The most downstream Cahaba River station in the Onorato et al.
studies, UAB-15 (over 8 miles downstream from direct impacts of Birmingham), exhibited improved
ichthyofaunal assemblages. A similar finding was observed in both the 2001 and 2002 EPA studies where
biological and/or water quality results yielded marked improvements at CR-11 near Centreville (over 24
miles downstream from direct impacts of Birmingham).
Recent studies of the ichthyofaunal assemblages of the Cahaba River (O'Neil 2002) found that their
Altadena site, two miles downstream from the Caldwell Mill Road crossing and in the heart of the heavily
developed part of the watershed, ranked "poof' based on the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) score. The
report by O'Neil (2002) was conducted under contract to EPA, Region 4 and stands as an addendum to
30
-------
this report (Appendix F). Other investigators have documented biological and/or water quality
degradation attributable to the intensive and extensive development of the Cahaba watershed in the
Birmingham area (EPA 1995, 1997; Howell et al. 1982; Pierson et al. 1989; Davenport 1996; Onorato et
al. 1998; Onorato et al. 2000). Recent studies of the historical changes in fish communities (Onorato et
al. 2000) attribute the decline, and in some cases extirpation, of pollution-intolerant fish species such as the
Alabama shiner (Cyprinella callistia). the coal darter (Percina brevicauda). the tricolor shiner
(Cyprinella trichoristia). the Cahaba shiner (Notropis cahabaeX the gold-line darter (Percina
aurolineata). the blue shiner (Cyprinella caerulea). and the green-breast darter (Etheostoma iordani)
to the extensive urbanization and resultant water quality and habitat degradation that has occurred over the
last two decades. All of these fish species are affected by siltation and sedimentation (personal
communication, Dr. Scott Mettee). Because of excessive sedimentation, habitat evaluation scores in the
middle reach were affected and fell into the suboptimal to marginal range. Quite apparent is the filling of
crevices or spaces between the natural rock substrates by sediments thus affecting both fish and benthic
macroinvertebrates. A photograph taken during the sediment characterization studies provides a good
example of this (Appendix E, Figure 24). The Alabama shiner and the tricolor shiner are crevice spawners
(Onorato, et. al, 2000) thus the filling of the crevices in between the rocks or cobble directly impact these
fish. In addition to impacts to the fish fauna, the filling of these crevices also impacts the principle fish food,
the benthic invertebrates (personal communication, Dr. Robert Angus; Onorato et al. 2002). Two species
of concern because of their endangered status, the gold-line darter and the Cahaba shiner, were only
collected in recent fish collections (O'Neil 2002) from the lower portion of our study area. The Cahaba
shiner was only collected at Centreville (US 82) while the gold-line darter was collected at Centreville (US
82), Riverbend (CR 26), and Piper Bridge (CR 24). Past studies by Howell et al. (1982) reported that
siltation and pollution associated with wastewater treatment facilities were responsible for the elimination of
these two species from the Cahaba River at CR 52. In contrast to the decline in intolerant fish species,
recent studies (Onorato et al. 1998; O'Neil 2002) also document an increase in tolerant species such as
the silverstripe shiner (Notropis stilbius\ blacktail shiner (Cyprinella venusta). and riffle minnow
(Phenacobius catostomus).
With the heavy development of the Cahaba River watershed in the last decade, nutrient enrichment
originating from both point and non-point sources is also a valid concern. This enrichment, along with the
previously raised concerns with periphytic growth and excessive sedimentation, has contributed to the
decline in the overall ecological health of the Cahaba system.
The Trussville area constitutes the upper Cahaba portion of the spring/summer 2002 EPA studies.
Although not as heavily developed as the middle or Birmingham area of the watershed, sedimentation
originating from non-point sources is apparent. Stations least impacted were CR-1, CR-AT and LCC-1.
Data from periphyton studies indicate that CR-1 and LCC-1 are in the lower quartile for at least one of the
seasons with respect to percent cover, d-bar, TP, and TN (Table D9). Both CR-1 and LCC-1 are
located upstream of the city of Trussville. LCC-1 is located on a second order stream, Little Cahaba
Creek, while CR-1, located on the Cahaba River at CR 132, is a third order stream. An unnamed
tributary, where station UT-1 is located, joins with the Little Cahaba Creek (downstream of LCC-1) near
Camp Coleman and represents a potential source of enrichment for the Cahaba River. UT-1 receives high
amounts of nutrients from the discharge of Gold Kist Corporation, a poultry processing facility. Little
Cahaba Creek enters the Cahaba River upstream of station CR-BT. Station CR-BT is also downstream of
the Trussville WWTP.
31
-------
Like the periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrate communities above the Trussville area appeared to be in
better ecological health than other Cahaba River stations. For example, CR-AT and LCC-1 had good
representation of the generally pollution-sensitive EPT fauna (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and
Trichoptera). Almost half of the benthic macroinvertebrate fauna at these stations was comprised of EPT
fauna. In addition, Shades Creek, at the lower end of our study area and prior to its confluence with the
Cahaba River, also appeared to have good ecological health; EPT fauna comprised over half of the
organisms collected at the Shades Creek station (SC-1). One common shared characteristic of the
Cahaba watershed above Trussville and the Shades Creek station was better habitat quality as indicated
by the habitat evaluation scores. Cahaba River stations above Trussville and Shades Creek station SC-1
were characterized by a benthic macroinvertebrate assemblage composed of from 30 to 50% mayflies. A
noticeable finding revealed in the spring 2002 benthic macroinvertebrate studies was that the mayflies
(Ephemeroptera) appeared to be the most affected by anthropogenic pollution.
Similar to the periphyton and benthic macroinvertebrate community information for the upstream most
study stations, CR-1, CR-AT and LCC-1, the Wolman pebble count information that was collected to
characterize the bed surface material at each of these sites yielded median particle sizes or a D50 of 20
(coarse gravel), 15 (medium gravel) and 5000 (bedrock) mm, respectively. The D50 for SC-1
downstream was 37mm, a very coarse gravel. These four sites all yielded the largest median particle sizes
and the lowest percentages of sands, silts and clays (particles < 2mm) of the nine stations in the Cahaba
River watershed where bed surface material was sampled (Table 5). The percentages of sands, silts and
clays at CR-1, CR-AT, LCC-1 and SC-1 were 13.9, 29.7, 17.5 and 24.8, respectively.
Comparatively, in the assessment of water quality conditions in the Chattooga Watershed (EPA 1999),
generally, small cobble to small boulder-sized particles (D50 of 75-300 mm) were predominately
associated with upper valley reference (least-impacted) reaches in the Blue Ridge physiographic province
(Wharton 1978) where stream segments typically produced optimal habitat assessment scores and more
robust EPT indices (15-18, mean = 16). Very coarse sand to small cobbles (D50 of 2-80mm) were
predominately associated with the more sediment-laden, impacted, lower valley reaches found in the Blue
Ridge and Upper Piedmont provinces where stream segments produced suboptimal to marginal to poor
habitat assessment scores and less robust EPT indices (9-15, mean = 12). The percentages of sands, silts
and clays <2 mm in the reference reaches of the Blue Ridge ranged from 9-19%, with a mean of 11%
whereas the sediment impaired, lower valley reaches contained sands, silts and clays ranging from 13 to 54
%, with a mean of 26%. Comparatively, the Cahaba River stations that were sampled for particle sizes
contained coarse sand to bedrock-sized particles (D50 of 1-5000 mm) and stream segments that produced
habitat assessment scores from optimal to suboptimal to marginal with EPT indices ranging from 7-15,
mean =11. The percentages of sands, silts and clays <2 mm at the Cahaba River stations ranged from 14
to 59%), with a mean of 35% (Table 5).
The amount of sediment that moves into a stream network from hillslopes, other land surfaces, or is eroded
by fluvial systems can vary greatly among watersheds because of the numerous factors involved in
erosional processes (Beschta 1996). These factors include climate (precipitation and temperature
regimes), topography (terrain steepness, aspect), vegetation (type and density), soils (particle sizes and
erodability), and geology (characteristics of parent material and bedrock). In addition, human
perturbations and management practices that affect watersheds and stream systems can greatly augment
32
-------
natural rates of erosion and sediment yield (Beschta 1996). These factors should be considered when
contrasting the sediment information above regarding the Cahaba and Chattooga River watersheds.
Degraded habitat is of concern below Trussville (CR-BT), the heavily urbanized middle reach of the
Cahaba River, the Little Cahaba River and Buck Creek. Station CR-BT is located downstream of the
Trussville WWTP and the confluence of Little Cahaba Creek. Obvious nutrient enrichment is revealed in
water chemistry results for CR-BT; nitrate nitrogen concentration was 3.8 mg/L at CR-BT in spring 2002
and 5.9 mg/L in summer 2002 . As alluded to earlier, Little Cahaba Creek received wastewater from the
Gold Kist Corporation via the unnamed tributary. Station UT-1, located on this unnamed tributary to Little
Cahaba Creek, had a poor macroinvertebrate community; the taxa of pollution-sensitive EPT fauna at UT-
1 (4) was the lowest of all study stations. As discussed earlier, this station was also characterized by
elevated nitrate nitrogen levels in both the spring (26 mg/L) and summer of 2002 (27 mg/L).
At CR-BT, we begin to see a shift to a smaller median particle size of medium gravel (D50 = 12 mm) from
the coarser gravel and bedrock found at stations CR-1, CR-AT and LCC-1, respectively (Table 5). The
only exception to the shift to smaller median particle sizes in the mainstem of the Cahaba from upstream to
downstream occurs at station CR-AH (D50 = 20 mm). One possible explanation for the larger median
particle size at this station could be the presence of a low-head concrete dam immediately upstream of the
site at the Caldwell Mill Road bridge (see photo, Figure 14, Appendix E). A significant increase in the
percentage of sands, silts and clays also occurs from less than 30% at the three stations above Trussville to
approximately 40% at CR-BT (Table 5). Lenat et.al. (1979) summarized the effects of sediment on
benthic macroinvertebrates into two categories: 1. With small amounts of sediment, density and standing
stock of the benthos may be decreased due to reduction of interstitial habitat, although structure and
species richness may not change. 2. Greater sediment amounts that drastically change substrate type (i.e.,
from cobble-gravel to sand-silt) will change the number and type of taxa, thus altering community structure
and species diversity, but often with increasing densities. Similar to what Lenat describes above, this study
observed a community shift at stations CR-BT, CR-AH, and CR-BH associated with the addition of
greater amounts of sediments. For example, the habitat score for CR-BT was suboptimal (133) and an
increase in the percentage of tolerant chironomids and annelids to 35% also occurred (Table 3). This
community structure and species diversity shift was also evident at CR-AH and CR-BH downstream,
where the percentage of chironomids and annelids increased above 30% (31% and 34%, respectively)
and the percentage of sands, silts and clays remained elevated (38% and 59%, respectively) compared to
the stations upstream. An increase in work on the basic ecology of organism-substrate relationships
confirmed the general conclusion that coarser particles (gravel, pebbles, cobbles) are preferred by EPT
(the most preferred and available fish-food organisms), whereas fine-particle substrates (sand, silt) are
inhabited by chironomid larvae and other burrowing forms that often are not readily available to foraging
fish (Erman and Erman 1984; Minshall 1984). These are the conclusions most often reached by
investigators studying the effects of sediment from anthropogenic sources, which almost invariably increase
fine particle accumulations and alter the mix of invertebrate taxa (Waters, 1995).
Another tributary to the Cahaba River, Little Cahaba River, was sampled below the US 411 WWTP at
the US 411 crossing. This tributary enters Lake Purdy and after exiting Lake Purdy joins the Cahaba
River approximately 2 miles upstream of the US 280 crossing of the Cahaba River. The Little Cahaba
River station (LCR-2) had a depauperate benthic community and poor habitat quality. The field team
observed an opaque/blue-gray water color at LCR-2 often characteristic of wastewater influence. The
33
-------
area defined by the confluence of the Cahaba and the Little Cahaba Rivers, along with Cahaba River
stations CR-AH, CR-BH, CR-6 and CR-7, lie in the heart of the heavily developed portion of the
watershed study area. Multiple point sources and non-point sources originating from
commercial/residential development within this area of the watershed have contributed to the water quality
and biological impairment indicated by the EPA 2002 studies.
The Cahaba River stations in the heavily urbanized middle reach (CR-AH, CR-BH and CR-6) had
mayflies comprising 13% or less of the benthic macroinvertebrate collections. Likewise, tributaries where
impairment was indicated (unnamed tributary UT-1, Little Cahaba River and Buck Creek) also exhibited
low mayfly density. In fact, the unnamed tributary (UT-1) and the Little Cahaba River had only 2% and
5% mayfly density, respectively. In regard to nutrient inputs, periphytic growths in this middle reach of the
Cahaba have given rise to large populations of grazers such as the net-spinning caddisflies
(Hydropsychidae) and snails (Gastropoda). Normally filterers/collectors, Hydropsychid caddisflies also
will graze on periphyton (Brigham, et. al, 1982). Snails were the major source of herbivory at station CR-
AH where a snail population averaging over 1000 individuals/m2 resided. Grazing can be the major factor
controlling accumulation of benthic algae (Jacobyl985, 1987; Lamberti et al., 1987; McCormick and
Stevenson, 1989). If enrichment occurs, grazing can offset or lessen increase in biomass. Snail densities
of 40 to 80 per square meter are considered intermediate (Borchardt, 1996). Periphytic growths were
common in the riffle/runs of CR-AH and evidence of herbivory by the resident snail population was noted
by the field team. Another grazer, the blackfly larvae Simulium (Diptera) was the predominant organism
at CR-AH comprising 45% of the total individuals. This phenomenon follows the generalized community
response to organic waste described in Klein (1962) where decreased competition and increased food
supply results in a shift from mayflies (Baetidae) to blackflies (Simulium). Three point sources are located
upstream of station CR-AH: Hoover-Inverness WWTP, Birmingham Riverview WWTP, and Liberty
Park WWTP.
Further downstream of CR-AH, heavy sediment deposition was still a factor affecting habitat quality. Both
stations CR-BH and CR-6 exhibited low habitat evaluation scores in the suboptimal category due to
sediment related factors, unstable banks, and lack of vegetative cover. Mayflies were still affected in this
reach and facultative net-spinning caddisflies (Hydropsychidae) and snails were abundant in response to
food supply availability. Grazers, such as the snails, are known to increase in the immediate area of
enrichment in response to increased autotrophic production (Welch, 1992). Increased abundance of net-
spinning caddisflies, as observed at CR-BH, CR-6, and CR-7, is consistent with the shift in fauna from
Simulium (predominant at CR-AH) to facultative Hydropsychid caddisflies as described by Klein (1962).
In addition, snails were abundant at both CR-BH and CR-6 and evidence of grazing was apparent on
natural rock substrates in the riffle/runs. Station CR-6 is approximately 2.5 miles downstream of the
Cahaba River WWTP. Elevated nitrate nitrogen (6.0 mg/L) was reported in the summer 2002 water
chemistry results for CR-6.
It has been demonstrated that fine sediment (<6.5 mm) in spawning gravels suffocates trout eggs and
reduces macroinvertebrate populations (Bjornn and Reiser, 1991; Cordone and Kelly, 1961; Hall and
Lantz, 1969). Sediment <6.5 mm above 40% levels can eliminate a trout fishery as well as many
macroinvertebrate species (Everest and Harr, 1982). Sediment levels for particle sizes <6.5mm based on
Wolman pebble counts were observed below 20% at stations CR-1 and LCC-1, below 30% at SC-1,
and below 35% at CR-AT. Sediment levels for particle sizes <6.5 mm based on Wolman pebble counts
34
-------
were observed above 40% at stations CR-BT and CR-AH, above 50% at stations CR-6 and CR-7, and
above 60% at station CR-BH. Additionally, CR-BH had the smallest median particle size or D50 of 1mm
(coarse sand) and the highest percentage of sands, silts and clays (59%) as well as the flattest water
surface slope (0.01%) of the nine stations sampled (Table 5).
Buck Creek, another major tributary to the Cahaba River, enters the Cahaba approximately six miles
downstream of station CR-6. Buck Creek has multiple point source wastewater discharges. Wastewater
treatment plants at Alabaster, Pelham, and Helena discharge to Buck Creek while wastewater treatment
facilities for North Shelby County and Oak Mountain State Park discharge to Cahaba Valley and Peavine
Creeks, tributaries to Buck Creek. In addition to these point sources, the Buck Creek watershed is
heavily developed (commercial and residential) thus affording a high potential for non-point source
pollution. Impervious surfaces are a prominent feature in the Buck Creek watershed thus enhancing runoff
during storm events. The most current land cover information (1998) for the Buck Creek watershed from
just below the intersection of SR 119 and US 31 to Helena reveals that over 63% of the total acreage is in
the class "disturbed"(Appendix G2). Because of all these factors, the ecological health of Buck Creek has
been compromised. A station was selected on Buck Creek (BC-3) above most point sources and the
more intensively developed area; this station (BC-3) was below the 25th percentile value of 27 |ig/L total
phosphorus in both the spring and summer 2002 sampling events. In addition, BC-3 supported a diverse
EPT fauna (10 taxa). All other Buck Creek stations were impaired. Station BC-2 in Helena represents
the most down gradient stream station on Buck Creek; BC-2 is approximately two miles from the
confluence with the Cahaba River and less than 0.25 miles downstream of the Helena WWTP. Effects of
multiple wastes sources, both point and non-point, are reflected in the spring and summer 2002 water
chemistry analyses for BC-2. For example, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen at BC-2 was 3.8 mg/L in spring 2002
and 1.0 mg/L in summer 2002 which represents the highest of all study stations. Ammonia nitrogen at BC-
2 in the spring of 2002 was 3.4 mg/L; ammonia nitrogen at this level gives rise to a concern for ammonia
toxicity to aquatic organisms (fish and invertebrates). In addition to the obvious water quality concerns,
BC-2 is also degraded from a biological standpoint. In response to obvious nutrient enrichment,
filamentous algal coverage at BC-2 in spring 2002 was 100% at each point measured. Long strands of
Cladophora were prevalent at this time (Appendix A, Figure 15). In regard to the benthic
macroinvertebrate community of BC-2, only four pollution-sensitive EPT taxa were collected. On the
other hand, pollution-tolerant worms (Oligochaeta) were overly abundant (45% of total organisms) at BC-
2. Station BC-2 was also the most dissimilar in the abundance ratio of tolerant and intolerant organisms as
compared to the site specific control at station CR-AT. Impairment was also noted at BC-5 which is
approximately 0.5 miles upstream of BC-2. BC-5 is approximately one half mile downstream of Cahaba
Valley Creek (has 2 WWTP discharges) and approximately one mile downstream of the Pelham WWTP.
Station BC-5 was not wadeable therefore benthic macroinvertebrates were not sampled. However, as
mentioned previously, periphyton mean diversity (d bar) was elevated at BC-5 in probable response to
nutrient enrichment from both point and non-point sources.
Cahaba River station CR-7, approximately three miles downstream of the confluence of Buck Creek, is
nutrient enriched based on water chemistry analyses. Nutrient enrichment at CR-7 has resulted in a
periphyton biomass of 200 mg/m2 which exceeds a value of 150 mg/m2' suggested as a level below which
an aesthetic quality use will probably not be appreciably degraded by filamentous algae or its effects
(though not supported as a threshold of protection for water quality and benthic habitat) (EPA, 2000). As
a result of this increased food availability, grazers such as Pleurocera snails (Gastropoda), Baetid mayflies
35
-------
(Baetidae), and Cheumatopsvche caddisflies (Hydropsychidae) comprise over 64% of the total benthic
macroinvertebrate fauna. These three species of invertebrates are considered facultative in regard to
pollution tolerance. Even though these facultative EPT taxa were numerically abundant, diversity of EPT
taxa was low. Only nine EPT taxa were collected from CR-7. This is consistent with the low EPT Index
observed at other Cahaba River stations within the heavily developed middle reach of our study area. The
increase in numerical abundance of mayflies noted at CR-7 is attributable to the abundance of the
facultative Baetid mayflies that are predominant at this station. Moderate to heavy sedimentation was
indicated by the habitat evaluation process. Embeddedness was approaching 50%; as mentioned earlier in
the text, the filling of the spaces or crevices of the natural substrates is detrimental to both fish and benthic
invertebrates. The Wolman pebble count information collected at CR-7 confirmed the heavy
sedimentation that was also indicated by the habitat evaluation process. The D50 at CR-7 was a very
coarse sand of 2 mm, and similar to the embeddedness, the percentage of sands, silts and clays measured
at this site was 50% (Table 5).
As mentioned earlier in the text, studies by EPA in 2001 and others have documented improvements in
water quality and/or biology in the lower reaches of the Cahaba River below Helena. EPA (2001)
documented both an improved benthic macroinvertebrate community and decreased nutrient/chlorophyll a
concentrations at station CR-11 near Centreville at US 82. Biological data (benthic macroinvertebrates
and periphyton) are not available for stations CR-9 (Piper Bridge) or CR-11 in 2002 but nutrient analysis
(specifically, nitrate and phosphorus) indicates lower concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus at these
stations than was observed from stations within the heavily developed middle reach of the Cahaba. A
possible explanation to improvements in stream water quality and biology may be attributable to the
increased flow in the lower reach of the Cahaba. From Helena (below station CR-7) to Centreville (US
82), twenty perennial tributaries enter the Cahaba River. A dramatic increase in the flow is evident by
contrasting USGS gage data from Helena and Centreville during the spring and summer study periods.
For example, flows at the USGS gage at Helena during the three days of the spring 2002 study averaged
188 cfs while the USGS gage at Centreville during the same period averaged 753 cfs. During the three
days of the summer 2002 study, average flow at the Helena gage was 53 cfs while the average flow at the
Centreville gage was 589 cfs.
From a national perspective two nutrients, phosphorus and nitrogen, usually limit aquatic plant growth
(EPA, 2000). EPA (2002) recommends for various reasons that TP and TN be used in developing
criteria to control growth of algae and macrophytes. Ambient nutrient concentrations of 8 |ig/L total
phosphorus and 500-700 |ig/L total nitrogen may already be saturating for algal growth. (Borchardt,
1996). During the 2002 Cahaba studies, nitrates above this level were seen from CR-BT to CR-9 during
the spring study, and both phosphorus and nitrate above these levels during the summer study.
Benthic algal biomass does not always relate to nutrient levels. There are several necessary conditions
which must be satisfied before nutrients become a factor causing nuisance levels of algal growth in streams.
These conditions include suitable substrate, light, temperature, and water velocity (Nordin, 1985). A
suitable substrate is one which has relatively high surface area such as gravel and cobble as opposed to
mud or sand which are poor algal substrates. Light can be growth limiting. If there is insufficient light due to
riparian shading or turbidity, nutrient enrichment will have little or no effect on growth.
36
-------
In enriched streams, higher biomass communities often develop in runs and pools and are usually
dominated by filamentous green algae (Biggs, 1996). The highest risk of algal accumulation would be at
moderate velocities (10-50 cm/s). At high stream velocity (greater than 50 cm/s) risk of accumulation is
lower because of scouring and high rate of export (sloughing) which can offset high rate of growth. Cycles
of sloughing and accrual can be found in streams that have a moderate frequency of flood disturbances.
Time available for benthic algal accrual and nutrient supply influence the frequency and duration of benthic
algal proliferation in streams (Biggs, 2000). The accumulation of biomass generally occurs during extended
periods of flow stability between floods.
Both natural and artificial substrates are useful in monitoring periphyton and assessing waterbody
conditions (Stevenson and Bahls, 1999). Algae in streams tend to be very patchy in their distribution as
demonstrated in our periphyton percent coverage measurements. Artificial substrates are often used
because of this in situ heterogeneity, particularly in upstream/down-stream work where samplers can be
placed in similar physical conditions thereby reducing the effects of variables such as shading and current
velocity. Most investigators agree that periphytic diatom community development on artificial substrates
reflect the natural diatom community quite closely. However, algal biomass is generally lower on artificial
substrates with green and blue greens often under represented possibly due to short incubation time, two
weeks (Weitzel, 1979; Nordin, 1985). Most monitoring groups prefer sampling algal biomass growing on
natural substrates to improve ecological applicability of information and to reduce field time (Stevenson
and Bahls, 1999).
Aesthetic impairment due to algal biomass is difficult to quantify, but usually is associated with filamentous
algal forms (Dodds and Welch, 2000). A biomass range of 100 to 150 mg/m2 chlorophyll a may represent
a critical level for aesthetic nuisance, below this level filamentous coverage is less than 20 percent (Welch
et al, 1988). Seasonal mean and maximum chlorophyll a may be most relevant to those concerned with
controlling stream eutrophication. Dodds defined nuisance levels of benthic algal chlorophyll a as mean
values exceeding 100 mg/m2 and a maximum value exceeding 150 mg/m2 (Dodds et al., 1997). During the
2002 Cahaba studies, the periphyton chlorophyll a collected from the periphytometers ranged from 5
mg/m2 at Shades Creek during the spring to 95 mg/m2 at the unnamed tributary (UT-1) during the summer.
Natural substrate samples were also collected at three stations (CR-1, CR-6, and CR-7) during the
summer study. CR-6 and CR-7 both had maximum chlorophyll a concentrations above the 150 mg/m2
maximum value suggested to be protective of aesthetic uses and CR-7 had a mean concentration of 200
mg/m2, well above the 100 mg/m2 mean value suggested to be protective of aesthetic uses.
Because of the limited sampling conducted in 2002, the frequency distribution approach (EPA, 2000;
EPA, 1997) was used. The 25th percentile was selected as an upper limit to begin the process of setting
guidelines for the Cahaba River Basin. Background TP was a minimum of 12 |ig/L (Table D9) ranging to
27 |ig/L at the 25th percentile. Total nitrogen ranged from a minimum of 230 |ig/L at station LCC-1 to
580 |ig/L at the 25th percentile (Table D.9). Based on these studies, AGPT results show that phosphorus
or nitrogen or both are limiting in the Cahaba system. TN:TP ratios equal to or less than 10 usually
indicate, by weight, nitrogen limitation. Nitrogen in nitrogen-limited waters is usually the limiting plant
growth nutrient because of an excess of phosphorus in the system. Conversely, a TN:TP ratio by weight
of equal to or greater than 20 is accepted as P-limitation (EPA, 2000). Using the maximum
concentrations of 580 and 27 |ig/L for TN and TP respectively at the 25th percentile equates to a TN:TP
ratio (580/27) of 21.5, which is considered P-limiting (EPA Guidelines). At what we consider the site
37
-------
control stations, CR-1 and LCC-1, concentrations of 12.0 to 12.5 |ig/L TP and 230 to 240 |ig/L TN,
would produce TN:TP ratios ranging from 18.4 to 20.0 indicating a tendency toward phosphorus
limitation. The AGPT data confirm that CR-1 is P-limited (Table D12). No AGPT data are available for
LCC-1. An examination of the system reveals a broad range of mean percent cover ranging from 0.3% to
100% (Table D8) with a 25th percentile of 10% cover (Appendix D, Figures 1 & 2). Stations CR-1 and
LCC-1, which are in the lower TP 25th percentile, also were less than 10% periphyton cover except in the
spring when CR-1 had a mean of 23% periphyton cover (Table D10).
EPA (2000) in the "Nutrient Criteria Technical Guidance Manual for Streams" presents the following
helpful guidance in setting guidelines for the Cahaba system. The tendency for Cladophora to begin
dominating the periphyton has been observed at TP concentrations of 10 to 20 |ig/L. This general range
was selected by the Clark Fork Tri-State Council to limit maximum biomass levels. Percent coverage by
filamentous forms was less than 20 %, but increased in biomass and noticeably affected aesthetic quality.
A provisional guideline of a maximum 40% coverage of filamentous forms was proposed for New Zealand
streams to protect contact recreation. Stevenson (2001) reports that Cladophora growths are limited
from significant accrual below TP concentrations of 18 |ig/L and nuisance growths (>40% cover) generally
do not occur at TP concentrations below 36 |ig/L.
The 12 to 27 |ig/L TP and the 230 to 580 |ig/L TN are a good starting point for reducing excessive plant
growths in the Cahaba system. Those stations within these ranges contained mean percent periphyton
coverage ranging from 0.8 to 38 % (Tables D8 & D9). In our professional opinion, the lower values of 12
|ig/L and 230 |ig/L of TP and TN respectively as a monthly mean should minimize exceedances of high
biomass and over 40% coverage. Although we do not have winter data, we believe it would be prudent to
apply these monthly means year around because of the mild winters in the lower Temperate Zone and the
ability of Fontinalis and many gelatinous filamentous algae to thrive in cold waters. These lower levels
would reduce excess phosphorus and nitrogen driving the system to phosphorus limitation, and allowing
the non-filamentous diatoms to predominate at diversity levels of 3.0 or less d-bar while maintaining
periphyton chlorophyll a biomass below the 100 mg/m2 nuisance level observed by Dodds et al. 1997.
38
-------
REFERENCES
American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, and Water Environment
Federation. 1998. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 20th Edition.
Washington, D.C.
Arendt, K. 1981. Plant communities in flowing waters as indicators of water pollution with the examples of
the Uecker and Havel River systems. Limnologica 13 (2): 485-500.
Ballock, D., C. E. Dames, and F. N. Jones. 1976. Biological assessment of water quality in three British
Rivers, the North Esk (Scotland), the Ivel (England) and the Taf (Wales). Water Pollution Control
Federation 75: 92-114.
Barbour, M. T., J. Gerritsen, B. D. Snyder, and J. B. Stribling. 1997. Revision to RapidBioassessment
Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates, and Fish. EPA-
841-D-97-002.
Beschta, R.L. 1996. Suspended Sediment and Bedload, Chapter 7 In: Methods in Stream Ecology.
Hauer, F.R. and G.A. Lamberti (eds.). Academic Press, San Diego, CA. pp. 123-143.
Biggs B.J.F. 1996. Patterns in benthic algae of streams. In: Algal Ecology - Freshwater Benthic
Ecosystems. Stevenson, R. J., M.L. Bothwell, and R.L. Lowe (eds.). Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
pp. 31-56.
Biggs B.J.F. 2000. Eutrophication of streams and rivers: dissolved nutrient-chlorophyll relationships for
benthic algae. Journal of the North American Benthological Society. 19(1): 17-31.
Bjornn, T.C. and D.W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat requirements of salmonids in streams. Pages 83-138 in
Meehan.
Borchardt, M.A. 1996. Nutrients. In: Algal Ecology - Freshwater Benthic Ecosystems. Stevenson, R.J.,
M.L. Bothwell, and R.L. Lowe (eds.). Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
Brigham, A., W.U. Brigham, and A. Gnilka (editors). 1982. Aquatic Insects and Oligochaetes of North
and South Carolina. Midwest Aquatic Enterprises, Mahomet, IL.
Cordone, A. J. and D.W. Kelley. 1961. The influences of inorganic sediment on the aquatic life of streams.
California Fish and Game 47(2): 189-228.
Davenport, L.J. 1996. The Cahaba lily: Its distribution and status in Alabama. Jour. Of the Alabama Acad.
Of Science 67: 222-233.
DeLorme. 1998. Alabama Atlas and Gazetteer. Yarmouth, Maine.
39
-------
Dodds, W.K., V.H.Smith, and B. Zander. 1997. Developing nutrient targets to control benthic chlorophyll
levels in streams: a case study of the Clark Ford River. Water Research 31:1738-1750.
Dodds, W.K., J.R. Jones, and E.B. Welch. 1998. Suggested classification of stream trophic state:
distributions of temperate stream types by chlorophyll, total nitrogen, and phosphorus. Water Research
32:1455-1462.
Dodds, W.K. and E.B. Welch. 2000. Establishing nutrient criteria in streams. Journal of the North
American Benthological Society. 19(1): 186-196.
Erman, D.C. and N.A. Erman. 1984. The response of stream macroinvertebrates to substrate size and
heterogeneity. Hydrobiologia 108:75-82.
Everest, F.H. and R.D. Harr. 1982. Influence of forest and rangeland management on anadromous fish
habitat in western North America - silvicultural treatments. General Technical Report No. FR-93-1.
Glime, J. M. 2002. Personal Communication at www.bio.umass.edu/biologv/conn.river/fontinal.html
Griffith, Glenn E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, S. Lawrence, G. Martin, A. Goddard, V.J. Hulcher,
and T. Foster. 2000. Ecoregions of Alabama and Georgia. USEPA Region 4, USEPA Corvallis,
Alabama Department of Environmental Management, Georgia Environmental Protection Division, USDA
Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Forest Service, and U.S. Geological Survey.
Hartfield, Paul. 2002. Special Report: Mussels of the Cahaba River, Species Assessment and Sources of
Information. Prepared for Jefferson County Environmental Authority. May 23, 2002.
Harrelson, C.C., C.L. Rawlins and J.P. Potyondy. 1994. Stream channel reference sites: An
illustrated guide to field technique. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky
Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO. General Technical Report RM-245.
Howell, W.M., R.A. Stiles, and J.S. Brown. 1982. Status Survey of the Cahaba shiner (Notropis sp.)
and goldline darter (Percina aurolineata) in the Cahaba River from Trussville to Booth Ford,
Alabama. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Huston, M. 1979. A general hypothesis of species diversity. American Midland Naturalist 113:81-100.
Jacoby, J.M. 1985. Grazing effects on periphyton by Theodoxis fluviatillis (Gastropoda) in a lowland
stream. Freshwater Ecol. 3: 265-274.
Jacoby, J.M. 1987. Alterations in periphyton characteristics due to grazing in a Cascade foothills stream.
Freshwater Biol. 18: 495-508.
40
-------
Kilham, S. S. and P. Kilham. 1978. Natural community bioassays: Prediction of results based on nutrients
and physiology and competition. Verhandlungen der Vereingung Internationalen fur Theoretische und
Angewandte Limnologie 20:68-74.
Klein, L. 1962. River Pollution, Two: Causes and Effects. Butterworths, London.
Lamberti, G.A. and V.H. Resh. 1983. Stream periphyton and insect herbivores: an experimental study of
grazing by a caddisfly population. Ecology 64:1124-1135.
Lenat, DR., D.L. Penrose, and K.W. Eagleson. 1979. Biological evaluation of non-point source
pollutants in North Carolina streams and rivers. North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development, Biological Series 102, Raleigh, NC.
Leopold, L.B. 1994. A View of the River. Harvard University Press.
McCormick, P. V. and R. J. Stevenson. 1991. Grazer control of nutrient availability in the periphyton.
Oceologia 80:287-291.
Melgaard, D., Pruitt, B., Howard, H, Flexner, M., Able, T., Neihardt, C., Davis, G., Jensen, D.,
Hansen, B., Kidd, J., Jones, C., Stribling, J., Leppo, E., Malone, D., Bower, S., Greis, J., Anderson, M.,
Greenfield, J., Martin, D., and F. Green. 1999. Assessment of Water Quality Conditions, Chattooga
River Watershed, Rabun County, GA, Macon County, NC and Oconee County, SC. U.S. EPA Region
4, Water Management Division, Atlanta, GA.
Miller, W.E, J.C. Green, and T. Shiroyama. 1978. The Selenastrum Capricornutum Printz Alva I
Assay Bottle Test: Experimental Design, Application, and Data Interpretation Protocol. EPA-
600/9-78-18. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Lab, Corvallis, OR.
Minshall, G.W. 1984. Aquatic insect-substratum relationships. Pages 358-400 in Resh and Rosenberg
(1984).
Nordin, R.N. 1985. Water Quality Criteria for Nutrients and Algae (Technical Appendix). Ministry of
the Environment Province of British Columbia. Victoria, British Columbia.
O'Neil, Patrick. 2001. Personal Communication. Geological Survey of Alabama.
O'Neil, Patrick. 2002. A Biological Assessment of Selected Sites in the Cahaba River System,
Alabama. Geological Survey of Alabama. Contract No. 2R-0117-NAGF.
Onorato, D., K.R Marion, and R.A. Angus. 1998. Longitudinal variations in the ichthyofaunal
assemblages of the upper Cahaba River: Possible effects of urbanization in a watershed. Jour. Freshwater
Ecol. 13 (2): 139-154.
41
-------
Onorato, D., R.A. Angus, and K.R. Marion. 2000. Historical changes in the ichthyofaunal assemblages of
the upper Cahaba River in Alabama associated with extensive urban development in the watershed. Jour.
Freshwater Ecol. 15(1): 47-63.
Permit Compliance System. 10/15/2002. Database retrieval file of all major NPDES facilities in the
Cahaba River Watershed (HUC 03150202): permit violations.
Pierson, J.M., W.M. Howell, RA. Stiles, M.F. Mettee, P.E. O'Neil, RD. Suttkus, and J.S. Ramsey.
1989. Fishes of the Cahaba River System in Alabama. Geological Survey of Alabama, Tuscaloosa,
Alabama.
Porter, S.D., T.F. Cuffney, M.E. Gurtz, andM.R. Meador. 1993. Methods for Collecting Algal
Samples as Part of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program. U. S. Geological Survey, Report
93-409. Raleigh, NC.
Raschke, R. L. 1993. Diatom (Bacillariophyta) community response to phosphorus in the Everglades
National Park. Phycologia 32(l):48-58.
Rosgen, D.L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22: pp. 169-199.
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied river morphology. Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO.
SAS. 1994. Basic Statistics Using SAS/STAT Software. SAS Institute, Inc. Cary, N.C.
Simon, A. 1989. A model of channel response in disturbed alluvial channels. Earth Surface Processes
and Landforms, 14(1): 11-26.
StatSoft. 2002. STATISTICA Version 6. Tulsa, OK.
Stevenson, R. Jan. 2001. Short Report: correlation between Cladophora and TP Concentrations in
Streams of Kentucky and Michigan. Report provided in Fall 2001 to Ed Decker, EPA, Region 4, Atlanta,
Georgia.
Stevenson, R.J., and L.L. Bahls. 1999. "Periphyton Protocols". Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use
in Wadeable Streams and Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates, and Fish. Second
Edition. EPA 841-B-99-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C.
Tilman, D. 1977. Resource competition between planktonic algae: An experimental and theoretical
approach. Ecology 58:333-348.
U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. 1973. Biological Field and Laboratory Methods for Measuring
the Quality of Surface Waters and Effluents. EPA-670/4-73-001. Office of Research and
Development, EPA, Cincinnati, OH.
42
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1995. Cahaba River: Study Results and Water Quality Data.
USEPA Region 4, Science and Ecosystem Support Division, Ecological Assessment Branch. Athens,
Georgia.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Wadeable
Streams and Rivers. Second Edition. USEPA, Office of Water, Washington, D.C. EPA 841-B-99-002.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1997. Water Quality Study, Cahaba River. USEPA Region 4,
Science and Ecosystem Support Division, Ecological Assessment Branch. Athens, Georgia.
U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. 2000. Nutrient Criteria Technical Guidance Manual: Rivers
and Streams. U. S. EPA, Office of Water 4304, EPA-822-B-00-002.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Ecological Assessment Laboratory Operations and
Quality Assurance Manual. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Science and Ecosystem
Support Division, Ecological Assessment Branch, Athens, GA.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Ecological Assessment Standard Operating Procedures
and Quality Assurance Manual. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Science and
Ecosystem Support Division, Ecological Assessment Branch, Athens, GA.
Walton, S.P. 1990. Effects of grazing by Dicosmoecus gilvipes larvae and phosphorus enrichment on
periphyton. MS thesis. University of Washington.
Wang, L., J. Lyons, P. Kanehl and R. Gatti. 1996. Influences of watershed land use on habitat quality and
biotic integrity in Wisconsin streams. Fisheries, Vol. 22, No. 6, pp 6-12.
Washington, H. G. 1984. Diversity, biotic and similarity indices. Water Research 18:653-694.
Waters, T.F. 1995. Sediment in Streams. Sources, Biological Effects, and Control. American Fisheries
Society Monograph 7, Bethesda, Maryland.
Weitzel, R. L., Sanocki, S. L. and Holecek, H. 1979. "Sample Replication of Periphyton Collected from
Artificial Substrates," Methods and Measurements of Periphyton Communities: A Review. ASTM
STP 690. R. L. Weitzel, Ed., American Society for Testing and Materials. Philadelphia, PA.
Welch, E.B., J.M. Jacoby, R.R. Horner, and M.R. Seeley. 1988. Nuisance biomass levels of periphytic
algae in streams. Hydrobiologia 157:161-168.
Welch, E.B. 1992. Ecological Effects of Wastewater: Applied limnology and pollutant effects.
Second Edition. Chapman and Hall, London.
43
-------
Wharton, C.H. 1978. The natural environments of Georgia. Georgia Department of Natural Resources,
Atlanta, GA.
Wolman, M.G. 1954. A method of sampling coarse river-bed material. Transactions of American
Geophysical Union 35: 951-956.
44
-------
APPENDIX A :
Photos of selected sampling locations
45
-------
Figure 1
Station LCC-1: Upstream
Figure 2
Station UT-1: Upstream
46
-------
Figure 3
Station UT-1: Downstream
Figure 4
Station CR-1: Upstream
47
-------
Figure 5
¦¦g
:p.:
¦A".';
—mm
"S
Station CR-1: Downstream
¦^MEj
Figure 6
:• .: i .
"jr
Station CR-AT: Upstream
48
-------
Figure 7
Station CR-AT: Downstream
Figure 8
Station CR-BT: Upstream
-------
Figure 9
Station CR-BT: Downstream
Figure 10
Station LCR-2: Upstream
50
-------
Figure 11
Station LCR-2: Downstream
Figure 12
Station CR-AFI: Upstream
51
-------
Figure 13
Station CR-BH: Upstream
Figure 14
Station BC-2: Upstream
-------
Figure 15
i.
4
Station BC-2: Downstream
Figure 16
Station CR-6: Upstream
-------
Figure 17
Station CR-6: Downstream
Figure 18
Station CR-7: Upstream
54
-------
Figure 19
1111
gli
Station CR-7: Downstream
Figure 20
Station CR-9: Upstream
-------
Figure 21
Station CR-9: Downstream
Figure 22
Station CR-11: Upstream
56
-------
Figure 23
Station CR-11: Downstream
-------
APPENDIX B:
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Collections
58
-------
organism
LCC-
1
UT-
1
CR-AT
CR-ATa*
CR-BT
LCR-2
CR-AH
CR-BH
CR-6
CR-7
SC-1
BC-2
BC-3
BC-4
Chironomidae
Ablabesmyia
3
1
Brillia
1
1
2
1
Bryophaeocladius
1
Cardiocladius
1
2
4
1
8
1
Chironomidae
1
1
Chironomus
1
5
Conchapelopia
1
Corynoneura
1
3
1
Cricotopus
22
7
6
3
1
2
6
1
17
Cryptochironomus
2
7
Diamesa
1
3
Dicrotendipes
Eukielferiella
13
1
6
2
1
4
Hayesomyia
1
1
Hydrobaenus
1
Meropelopia
2
1
1
2
1
Nanocladius
2
Orthocladius
3
1
2
2
26
Parakiefferiella
1
Parametriocnemus
1
3
6
1
1
Paratanytarsus
2
1
Paratendipes
1
5<
-------
organism
LCC-
1
UT-
1
CR-AT
CR-ATa*
CR-BT
LCR-2
CR-AH
CR-BH
CR-6
CR-7
SC-1
BC-2
BC-3
BC-4
Polypedilum
2
3
6
11
15
3
27
36
1
6
8
1
Potthastia
1
1
Procladius
Rheocricotopus
2
4
4
4
8
Rheotanytarsus
5
5
24
40
5
8
4
5
8
Stempellinella
1
Stenochironomus
2
1
Stictochironomus
2
Synorthocladius
1
Tanytarsus
1
1
1
1
1
Thienemanniella
1
1
1
1
1
1
Tvetenia
4
2
2
3
Xenochironomus
1
Trichoptera
1
Ceraclea
2
1
Cheumatopsyche
15
54
7
16
21
2
3
61
49
48
10
6
4
18
Chimarra
1
3
6
5
2
1
1
Dolophiloides
Hydropsyche
13
5
7
8
7
2
1
1
5
4
6
Hydropsy chidae
17
1
3
4
5
2
Hydroptila
1
1
Micrasema
3
Polycentropus
2
1
60
-------
organism
LCC-
1
UT-
1
CR-AT
CR-
ATa*
CR-BT
LCR-2
CR-AH
CR-BH
CR-6
CR-7
SC-1
BC-2
BC-3
BC-4
Triaenodes
2
1
2
Trichoptera unid.
2
Plecoptera
Acroneuria
1
Amphinemura
1
Eccoptura
1
Isoperla
Perlesta
16
3
3
2
1
6
Perlidae
Taeniopteryx
1
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae
1
4
23
13
12
1
17
6
40
19
24
3
44
Caenis
1
Ephemerella
7
2
1
Eurylophella
20
12
3
4
7
Heptageniidae
2
2
Isonychia
2
15
15
19
4
2
1
39
4
4
Serratella
1
12
Stenacron
1
11
1
9
1
3
15
1
1
4
Stenonema
82
8
5
24
1
11
3
6
6
23
26
4
Timpanoga
1
Odonata
Argia
6
6
4
2
8
6
5
1
2
3
61
-------
organism
LCC-
1
UT-
1
CR-AT
CR-
ATa*
CR-BT
LCR-2
CR-AH
CR-BH
CR-6
CR-7
SC-1
BC-2
BC-3
BC-4
Basiaeschna
1
Boyeria
2
2
3
1
Calopteryx
1
1
1
Enallagma
15
12
17
11
1
2
Erpetogomphus
1
Gomphidae
5
2
1
1
Gomphus
1
Libellula
1
Libellulidae
3
Macromia
1
Peri them is
1
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
1
1
Megaloptera
Corydalus
3
2
1
1
Hemiptera
Dasycorixa
2
Rhagovelia
1
2
Coleoptera
Ancyronyx
2
4
1
Cyphon
2
Dubiraphia
1
2
1
Elmidae
2
1
4
62
-------
organism
LCC-
1
UT-
1
CR-AT
CR-
ATa*
CR-BT
LCR-2
CR-AH
CR-BH
CR-6
CR-7
SC-1
BC-2
BC-3
BC-4
Helichus
Macronychus
2
1
9
1
2
1
Microcylloepus
1
Optioservus
1
Peltodytes
1
Psephenus
1
1
1
Stenelmis
5
2
10
7
6
5
3
1
2
3
Crustacea
Asellus
4
16
Astacidae
55
8
6
1
7
1
5
1
1
Crangonyx
4
1
3
1
1
1
Hyallela
8
1
3
Lirceus
2
16
7
1
Oligochaeta
Dero
1
Limnodrilus
2
2
1
Lumbriculidae
1
2
3
1
4
1
5
2
Naididae
84
Tubificidae
4
4
6
2
3
4
1
1
Pelecypoda
Corbicula
1
3
3
8
2
1
Musculium
1
1
63
-------
organism
LCC-
1
UT-
1
CR-AT
CR-
ATa*
CR-BT
LCR-2
CR-AH
CR-BH
CR-6
CR-7
SC-1
BC-2
BC-3
BC-4
Gastropoda
Amnicola
1
1
Campeloma
1
18
Elimia
7
9
19
1
2
Leptoxis
3
26
2
Phy sella
2
Planorbula
1
Pleurocera
9
1
13
88
7
10
60
41
49
26
124
45
Diptera
Antocha
1
1
Chelifera
1
Limonia
1
Muscidae
2
Palpomyia
1
Parydra
1
Simuliidae
1
Simulium
107
4
9
7
1
88
4
3
15
Tipula
1
1
1
1
Tot Organisms
281
193
222
197
211
198
194
210
231
199
211
188
201
216
Tot Taxa
26
24
35
37
31
28
29
32
31
26
26
24
28
30
duplicate QA sample
64
-------
APPENDIX C:
Water Quality Sampling
65
-------
TABLE CI. CAHABA RIVER STUDY
ANALYTICAL REQUIREMENTS
l'ARAMI. 11.R
STATION'S
TOTAL
SAMPLES 0('
LABORATORY
METHOD
1 >1.1 LCI ION
LIMIT
BOTTLE
PRESERVATIVE
HOLDING
TIME
CHLOROPHYLL A
18
20
EAB
EPA 445.0
0.1 ug/L
500 mL/ Filter&Freeze
24d
CHLOROPHYLL A (periphyton)
18
20
EAB
EPA 446.0
0.2 mg/m2
Glass Slide 4oz Amber
/Freeze
28d
NUTRIENTS (TP,TKN, NH3,
N02+N03)
18
20
ASB
TP 365.1
TKN 351.2
NH3 350.1
NOX 353.2
0.025 mg/L
0.1 mg/L
0.05 mg/L
0.05 mg/L
1 Liter
/H2S04
Cool 4°C
28d
AGPT
10
10
EAB
EPA-600/9-78-
018
2L Nalgene/
Cool 4°C
AGPT-NUTRIENTS
10
10
ASB
TP 365.1
TKN 351.2
NH3 350.1
NOX 353.2
0.02 mg/L
0.1 mg/L
0.05 mg/L
0.05 mg/L
500 mL
/H2S04
Cool 4°C
28d
PERIPHYTON ID
18
20
EAB/
CONTRACT
Glass Slide/
Glutaraldehyde
* Nutrient methods in Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes (EPA-600/4-79-020)
66
-------
Table C2. Nutrients and Chlorophyll Results
Cababa River - April, 2002
Station
NII,-N
\(> \(>.-\
TKN
IN
I'Phos
corrChla
11)
Site/I .ocalion
(m«/I.)
(nm/I.)
(nm/I,)
(m»/L)
(nm/I.)
(llii/L)
CR1
CR at Jefferson Co Rd 132
0.05U
0.23
0.07
0.30
0.025U
0.57
CR-AT
CR at Trussville (US 11)
0.05U
0.25
0.07
0.32
0.025U
0.65
UT1
Unnamed Tributary off Camp Coleman
0.14
26
1.10
27.10
0.93
2.5
LCC1
Little Cahaba Creek off Camp Coleman
0.05U
0.55
0.24
0.79
0.025U
8.4
CR-BT
CR below Truss ville (CR 10)
0.05U
3.8
0.33
4.13
0.20
1.0
LCR2
Little Cahaba River at US411
0.056
1.0
0.26
1.26
0.30
0.43
CR-AH
CR at Caldwell Mill RD
0.05U
0.66
0.26
0.92
0.23
4.6
CR-BH
CR at Riverford Drive
0.05U
0.46
0.25
0.71
0.11
2.1
CR6
CR at Bains Bridge
0.05U
1.2
0.33
1.53
0.24
1.0
BC1
Buck Creek at CR52
0.05U
2.4
0.36
2.76
0.34
0.74
BC2
BC at CR261 (Helena)
3.4
0.88
3.80
4.68
0.63
1.3
BC3
BC at CR44/1 st Ave
0.05U
0.88
0.09
0.97
0.025U
0.74
BC3D
0.05U
0.88
0.11
0.99
0.025U
BC4
BC at Keystone Rd
0.05U
4.4
0.30
4.70
0.65
0.51
BC5
BC at Rolling Mill (Helena)
0.05U
1.0
0.31
1.31
0.14
0.94
CR7
CR at Shelby Co Rd 52
0.086
1.3
0.34
1.64
0.22
0.58
SCI
Shades Creek at CR12/Grey Hill Rd
0.05U
0.18
0.15
0.33
0.025U
0.30
CR9
Bibb Co Hwv 7.4
0 05TT
0 57
0 15
0 7?.
0 05
1 4
U - Material was analyzed for but not detected. The number is the minimum quantitation limit.
67
-------
Table C3. Nutrients and Chlorophyll Results
Cahaba River - July, 2002
Station
II)
Site/Location
NI 1,-N
(nm/I.)
\o \o.-\
(nm/I.)
I'KN
(nm/I.)
IN
(nm/I.)
TPhos
(nm/I.)
corrChla
(WI.)
CR1
CR at Jefferson Co Rd 132
0.05U
0.23
0.12
0.35
0.025U
0.28
CR-AT
CR at Trussville (US11)
0.068
0.076
0.16
0.236
0.030
0.87
UT1
Unnamed Tributary off Camp Coleman Rd
0.05U
27
0.92
27.92
0.55
11.4
LCC1
Little Cahaba Creek off Camp Coleman
0.05U
0.05U
0.18
0.230
0.025U
1.8
CR-BT
CR below Trussville (CR 10)
0.05U
5.9
0.39
6.29
0.26
0.82
LCR2
Little Cahaba River at US411
0.05U
4.2
0.37
4.6
1.1
0.38
CR-AH
CR at Caldwell Mill RD
0.05U
0.80
0.27
1.07
0.31
10.8
CR-BH
CR at Riverford Drive
0.05U
0.31
0.26
0.57
0.12
2.5
CR6
CR at Bains Bridge
0.058
6.0
0.48
6.48
0.96
1.3
BC1
Buck Creek at CR52
0.088
3.7
0.43
4.13
0.57
0.42
BC2
BC atCR261 (Helena)
0.88
1.7
1.10
2.80
0.51
1.7
BC3
BC at CR44/1 st Ave
0.05U
0.66
0.097
0.757
0.026
0.62
BC3D
BC at CR44/1 st Ave
0.05U
0.65
0.085
0.735
0.025U
0.58
BC4
BC at Keystone Rd
0.098
6.0
0.47
6.47
0.93
0.60
BC5
BC at Rolling Mill (Helena)
0.05U
1.7
0.22
1.92
0.40
0.49
CR7
CR at Shelby Co Rd 52
0.087
2.6
0.35
2.95
0.44
1.3
SCI
Shades Creek at CR12/Easter Valley Rd
0.05U
0.16
0.19
0.350
0.027
0.88
CR9
Bibb Co Hwy 24
0.05U
0.66
0.54
1.20
0.12
13.8
run
TTS 8? ripar Ontrpvillp
nnsn
f)4S
n?s
n7^n
nn7n
11 f,
U - Material was analyzed for but not detected. The number is the minimum quantitation limit.
68
-------
Table C4. Algal Growth Potential Test - Limiting Nutrient Results
Cahaba River, AL 2002
CR-l
Cahaba River at Jefferson Co Rd 132
P
9.9
P
14.0
UT-1
Unnamed Tributary off Camp Coleman Rd
P
29.1
50.8
CR-BT
CR below Trussville (CR10)
P
20.7
24.2
CR-AH
CR at Caldwell Mill Rd
N
4.0
N
3.5
CR-BH
CR at Riverford Dr
6.5
N
4.8
CR-6
CR at Bains Bridge
N
6.4
6.8
BC-2
Buck Creek at CR2 61 (Helena)
7.4
5.5
BC-3
BC at CR44/lst Ave
P
38.9
29.2
BC-5
BC at Rolling Mill (Helena)
P
9.4
4.8
CR-7
CR at Shelby Co Rd 52
N
7.5
6.7
SC-1
Shades Creek at CR12/Easter Valley Rd
11.0
P
13.0
CR-9
CR at Bibb Co Hwy 24
N+P
14.4
10.0
CR-11
US 82 near Centreville
P
10.4
P - Phosphorus limited
N - Nitrogen Limited
N+P - Nitrogen and Phosphorus Co-limited
69
-------
Figure 4. Diftrit'ijLion of TP Cus/L), Caih&bi River, AL., 2002
1 II I
-------
Figure 5. Distribution, of Square Root Transformed TP (Jig/L) Data,
Cahsbi River, AL,, 2002
71
-------
Figure 6. Distribution of TN (ug/L), Cahaba River, AL., 2002
30C00
:8C00
24C00
22C00
ZuCuu
18C00
16C00
14C00
|2C00
I0C00
DUJO
TN in
0 Median = 1280
I | 25%
= (580, 4140)
1 Min-Mtsx
= (230,27094)
72
-------
Figure 7. Distribution of Natural Log TN (ug/L), Cahaba River, AL., 2002
11
10
9
'
8
7
~
6
I
~ Median = 7.1389
I 125%-75%
= (6.363,8.3285)
T Min-Max
= (5.4381,10.2071)
5
TN in uglL
73
-------
APPENDIX D:
Periphyton
74
-------
Table Dl. Periphyton Chlorophyll a Results
Cahaba River - Spring 2002
Station
Days
corr CHLA
ID
Site/Location
in place
(mg/m2)
Remarks
CR-1
CR at Jefferson Co Rd 132
41
20.8
CR-AT
CR at Trussville (US11)
41
47.8
UT-1
Unnamed Tributary off Camp Coleman Rd
Periphytometer grounded
LCC-1
Little Cahaba Creek off Camp Coleman
41
15.7
CR-BT
CR below Trussville (CR 10)
41
59.0
LCR-2
Little Cahaba River at US411
41
33.4
CR-AH
CR at Caldwell Mill RD
41
26.2
CR-BH
CR at Riverford Drive
70
11.6
CR-6
CR at Bains Bridge
28
36.4
BC-1
Buck Creek at CR52
29
28.1
BC-2
BC atCR261 (Helena)
43
65.9
BC-3
BC at CR44/1 st Ave
29
42.9
BC-4
BC at Keystone Rd
29
53.4
BC-5
BC at Rolling Mill (Helena)
29
67.9
CR-7
CR at Shelby Co Rd 52
70
20.7
SC-1
Shades Creek at CR12/Grey Hill Rd
27
5.0
75
-------
Table D2. Periphyton Chlorophyll a Results
Cahaba River - Summer 2002
Station
Days
corr CHLA
ID
Site/Location
in place
(mg/m2)
Remarks
CR-1
Cahaba River at Jefferson Co Rd 132
21
37
CR-AT
CR at Trussville (US11)
21
21
UT-1
Unnamed Tributary off Camp Coleman Rd
21
95
CR-BT
CR below Trussville (CR 10)
Periphytometer missing
CR-AH
CR at Caldwell Mill RD
20
37
CR-BH
CR at Riverford Drive
21
13
CR-6
CR at Bains Bridge
21
20
BC-2
Buck Creek at CR261 (Helena)
21
66
CR-7
CR at Shelby Co Rd 52
20
31
CR-7
CR at Shelby Co Rd 52
20
75
2nd periphytometer
SC-1
Shades Creek at CR12/Grev Hill Rd
20
45
76
-------
Table D3. Periphyton Chlorophyll - Natural Substrate
Cahaba River - Summer 2002
Station
ID
Site/Location
corr CHLA
(mg/m2)
CR-1A
Cahaba River at Jefferson Co Rd 132
41
CR-1B
Cahaba River at Jefferson Co Rd 132
27
CR-1C
Cahaba River at Jefferson Co Rd 132
11
CR-6A
CR at Bains Bridge
17
CR-6B
CR at Bains Bridge
170
CR-6C
CR at Bains Bridge
110
CR-7A
CR at Shelbv Co Rd 52
210
CR-7B
CR at Shelby Co Rd 52
230
CR-7C
CR at Shelbv Co Rd 52
160
Table D4. Periphyton Chlorophyll a (mg/m2)
Natural Substrate
Station
Natural Substrate
Avg
Max
Range
CR-1
26.3
41
11-41
CR-6
99
170
17-170
CR-7
200
230
160-230
-------
Table D5. Periphyton Percent Coverage
Cahaba River - Spring 2002
Count / Percent Coverage
Date
Station
1
2
3
4
5
6
Sum
Average
Abundance
Apr 24
CR-1
Run
24
52
0
40
0
116
23
Common
Apr 24
CR-AT
Run
0
24
42
0
8
36
110
18
Common
Apr 24
UT-1
Run
1.5
1.8
28
57
27
100
215.3
36
Abundant
Apr 24
LCC-1
Run
0
0
0
0
0
4
4
1
Rare
Apr 24
CR-BT
Run
0
24
0
0
16
12
52
9
Common
Apr 24
CR-
AH
Run
36
56
36
33
42
52
255
43
Abundant
Apr 23
CR-
BH
Run
0
0
0
54
4
0
58
10
Common
Mar 11
CR-6
Run
88
84
2
70
96
92
432
72
Dominant
Apr 25
BC-2
Run
100
100
100
100
100
100
600
100
Dominant
Apr 25
BC-3
Run
70
32
40
35
30
207
41
Abundant
Apr 24
CR-7
Run
18
28
14
60
20
Common
Apr 25
CR-4
Run
20
10
43
72
0.5
145.5
29
Common
Mar 12
SC-1
Run
34
36
70
35
Abundant
Estimated Abundance: Rare (<5%), Common ( 5-30%), Abundant (30-70%), Dominant (>70%)
78
-------
Table D6. Periphyton Percent Coverage
Cahaba River - Summer 2002
Count / Percent Coverage
Date
Station
1
2
j
4
5
6
Sum
Average
Abundance
Jul 10
CR-1
Run
14
8
4
12
6
6
50
8
Common
Jul 10
CR-1
Riffle
40
8
15
8
24
36
131
22
Common
Jul 10
CR-AT
Run
8
26
34
17
Common
Jul 10
UT-1
Run
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
1
Rare
Jul 10
CR-BT
Run
10
15
30
24
22
101
20
Common
Jul 9
CR-
AH
Run
15
0
20
48
18
16
117
20
Common
Jul 9
CR-6
Run
1
0
0
1
0
Rare
Jul 9
CR-6
Riffle
32
16
12
3
22
22
107
18
Common
Jul 9
BC-2
Run
68
60
5
42
175
44
Abundant
Jul 8
CR-7
Run
48
53
14
115
38
Abundant
Jul 8
CR-7
Riffle
94
10
100
30
5
92
331
55
Abundant
Jul 8
SC-1
Run
18
20
0
0
12
90
140
23
Common
Estimated Abundance: Rare (<5%), Common ( 5-30%), Abundant (30-70%), Dominant (>70%)
-------
Table D7. Cahaba River, AL., Soft Filamentous Algae Collected during Percent Cover Measurement, 2002
STATION
DATE
DIVISION
GENUS
SCI
3/12/02
GREEN
Cladophora
BC2
4/25/02
GREEN
Cladophora
BC3
4/25/02
NONE
Moss, Fontinalis
BC4
4/25/02
GREEN
Cladophora
CR7
4/24/02
GREEN
Cladophora
CR6
3/11/02
GREEN
Cladophora
CR6
4/24/02
GREEN
Cladophora
CRBH
4/23/02
GREEN
Cladophora
CRAH
4/23/02
GREEN
Cladophora
CRBT
4/24/02
GREEN
Cladophora & Ulothrix
CRAT
4/24/02
GREEN
Cladophora
CRAT
4/24/02
DIATOM
Cymbella
LCC1
4/24/02
GREEN
Cladophora
UT1
4/24/02
GREEN
Cladophora
CR1
4/24/02
GREEN
Mougeotia & Spirogyra
CR1
4/24/02
DIATOM
Melosira
SCI
7/8/02
GREEN
Cladophora
DIATOM
Biddulphia & Melosira
BLUE GREEN
Schizothrix
BC2
7/8/02
GREEN
Cladophora
DIATOM
Melosira &Frasilaria
BLUE GREEN
Schizothrix
CR7
7/9/02
GREEN
Cladophora
DIATOM
Biddulphia, Cymbella & Melosira
BLUE GREEN
Shizothrix & Rivularia
CR6
7/9/02
GREEN
Cladophora, Stiseoclonium & Ulothrix
DIATOM
Melosira, Biddulphia & Fragilaria
BLUE GREEN
Shizothrix & Anabaena
CRBH
7/9/02
GREEN
Cladophora, Chaetophora & Ulothrix
DIATOM
Melosira & Cymbella
BLUE GREEN
Schizothrix, Rivularia & Anabaena
CRAH
7/9/02
GREEN
Cladophora
DIATOM
Melosira
BLUE GREEN
Schizothrix
CRBT
7/10/02
GREEN
Spirogyra & Cladophora
DIATOM
Melosira
BLUE GREEN
Schizothrix & Anabaena
CRAT
7/10/02
GREEN
Pseudoparenchyma
BLUE GREEN
Cylindrosporum, Rivularia & Schizothrix
UT1
7/10/02
GREEN
Stiseoclonium, pseudoparenchyma, Cladophora & Ulothrix
DIATOM
Melosira
BLUE GREEN
Microcoleus, Rivularia & Shizothrix
CR1
7/10/02
GREEN
Cladophora & Spirogyra
DIATOM
Melosira & Cymbella
BLUE GREEN
Rivularia & Shizothrix
80
-------
Table D8. Summary Statistics, Percent Cover, Cahaba River AL., 2002
Station
Season
Habitat
N
Meai
Minimum
Maximum
(11
Spring
Run
5
23.2
0
52
CR1
Spring
Riffle
0
CR1
Summer
Run
6
8.3
4
14
CR1
Summer
Riffle
6
21.8
8
40
CRAT
Spring
Run
6
18.3
0
42
CRAT
Spring
Riffle
0
CRAT
Summer
Run
2
17.0
8
16
CMT
Summer
Riffle
0
DTI
Spring
Run
6
30
2
100
DTI
Spring
Riffle
0
DTI
Summer
Run
6
1.3
0
8
DTI
Summer
Riffle
0
LOCI
Spring
Run
5
0.8
0
4
LOCI
Spring
Riffle
0
LOCI
Summer
Run
0
LOCI
Summer
Riffle
0
CRBT
Spring
Run
5
10.4
0
24
CRBT
Spring
Riffle
0
CRBT
Summer
Run
5
20.2
10
30
CRBT
Summer
Riffle
0
CM
Spring
Run
6
42.5
33
56
CM
Spring
Riffle
0
CM
Summer
Run
6
19.5
0
48
CM
Summer
Riffle
0
can
Spring
Run
6
91
0
54
CRBH
Spring
Riffle
0
CRBH
Summer
Run
5
24.8
8
40
can
Summer
Riffle
0
CR6
Spring
Run
6
72.0
2
%
CR6
Spring
Riffle
0
CR6
Summer
Run
3
0.3
0
1
CR6
Summer
Riffle
6
17.8
3
32
BC2
Spring
Run
5
100.0
100
100
BC2
Spring
Riffle
0
BC2
Summer
Run
4
43.8
5
68
BC2
Summer
Riffle
0
BG
Spring
Run
5
41.4
30
70
bq
Spring
Riffle
0
bg
Summer
Run
0
bg
Summer
Riffle
0
Bra
Spring
Run
5
29.2
1
72
Bra
Spring
Riffle
0
Bra
Summer
Run
0
Bra
Summer
Riffle
0
CRT
Spring
Run
3
20.0
14
28
CRT
Spring
Riffle
0
CRT
Summer
Run
3
38.3
14
53
CRT
Summer
Riffle
6
55.2
5
100
SCI
Spring
Run
2
35.0
34
36
SCI
Spring
Riffle
0
SCI
Summer
Run
6
23.5
0
90
SCI
Summer
Riffle
0
81
-------
Table D9. Stations in the Lower 25th Percentile
Cahaba River, AL., 2002
Station
Season
Variable
Mean % Cover
LCC1
Spring
0.8
CRBH
Spring
9.7
CR1
Summer
8.3
UT1
Summer
1.3
CR6
Summer
0.3
d-bar
CR1
Spring
1.761
LCC1
Sping
1.5
LCR2
Spring
1.907
CR7
Spring
1.825
CR1
Summer
1.997
CR6
Summer
1.789
BC2
Summer
1.179
TP in ug/L
CR1
Spring
12.5
CRAT
Spring
12.5
LCC1
Sping
12.5
BC3
Spring
12.5
SCI
Spring
12.5
CR1
Summer
12
LCC1
Summer
12
BC3
Summer
19.2
SCI
Summer
27
TN in us/L
CR1
Sping
250
CRAT
Spring
260
LCC1
Spring
240
SCI
Spring
280
CR1
Summer
350
CRAT
Summer
260
LCC1
Summer
230
CRBH
Summer
580
SCI
Summer
350
82
-------
Table D10 . Percent Filamentous Cover at Stations
within the TP Lower 25th Percentile,
Cahaba, AL., 2002.
Season Station Mean % Cover
Spring CR1 23
Spring CRAT 18
Spring LCC1 0.8
Spring BC3 No Data
Spring SCI 38
Summer CR1 8
Summer LCC1 No Data
Summer BC3 No Data
Summer SCI 24
Summer CR11 No Data
Table Dll. Percent Filamentous Cover at Stations
within the TN Lower 25th Percentile,
Cahaba, AL., 2002.
Season Station Mean % Cover
Spring CR1 23
Spring CRAT 18
Spring LCC1 0.8
Spring BC3 No Data
Spring SCI 38
Summer CR1 8
Summer CRAT 17
Summer LCC1 No Data
Summer SCI 24
83
-------
Table D12. Cahaba River, AL Multivariate Data Set, 2002
Station
River
Mile
Season
Periphyto
n% Cover
Run
Periphyton
% Cover
Riffle
Periphyton
Corr Chi A
in mg/m2
Diatom
Mean
Diversity
Corr Chi A
in ug/L
AGPT
in mg/L
Limiting
Nutrient
N
in ug/L
NH3-N
in ug/L
N02+NO
3
in ug/L
TKN
in ug/L
^yp
in ug/L
MIHAB
EVAL
Snails
/m2
MI EPT
INDEX
MI
TAX A
% MI
EPT
CR-1
183.9
Spring
23
20.8
1.761
0.57
1.2
p*
250
25
230
70
12.5
CRAT
182.3
Spring
18
47.8
3.419
0.65
NP
260
25
250
70
12.5
152
15
36
55
UT-1
179.1
Spring
36
4.229
2.5
169
P
27006
140
26000
1100
930
149
4
24
41
LCC-1
179.1
Spring
1
15.7
1.5
8.4
N
240
25
55
240
12.5
155
9
26
42
CRBT
175.5
Spring
10
59
3.895
1
102
P
4140
25
3800
330
200
133
10
32
45
LCR-1
148
Spring
43.5
1.907
LCR-2
148
Spring
33.4
3.709
0.43
N
1260
56
1000
260
300
85
6
28
8
CRAH
144.9
Spring
42
26.2
3.023
4.6
57
N
920
25
660
260
230
100
9
29
13
CRBH
141.5
Spring
10
11.6
2.825
2.1
N
720
25
460
250
110
141
11
33
45
CR-6
136.8
Spring
72
36.4
3.93
1
92
N
1540
25
1200
330
240
136
7
31
30
BC-1
130.7
Soring
28.1
3.902
0.74
N
2750
25
2400
360
340
BC-2
130.7
Spring
100
65.9
3.654
1.3
N
4670
3400
880
3800
630
123
4
25
19
BC-3
130.7
Spring
42.9
2.396
0.74
0.4
P
980
25
880
9
12.5
118
10
29
24
BC-4
130.7
Spring
29
53.4
3.917
0.51
N
4680
25
4400
300
650
143
8
31
36
BC-5
130.7
Spring
67.9
4.009
0.94
51
p*
1320
25
1000
310
140
CR-7
127
Spring
20
20.7
1.825
0.58
89
N
1650
86
1300
340
220
150
9
27
59
SC-1
103.6
Spring
38
5
3.325
0.3
NP
280
25
180
150
12.5
169
13
27
58
CR-9
95.8
Spring
1.4
29
NP
720
CR-1
183.9
Summer
8
22
37
1.997
0.28
p*
350
25
230
120
12
CRAT
182.3
Summer
17
21
2.484
0.87
N
240
68
76
160
30
387
UT-1
179.1
Summer
1
95
3.66
11.4
P
27094
25
27000
920
550
LCC-1
179.1
Summer
1.75
N
230
25
25
180
12
CRBT
175.5
Summer
20
0.82
P
6290
25
5900
390
260
430
LCR-2
148
Summer
0.38
N
4620
25
4200
370
1100
CRAH
144.9
Summer
20
37
3.58
10.8
N
1080
25
800
270
310
1001
CRBH
141.5
Summer
25
13
3.57
2.46
N
580
25
310
260
120
581
CR-6
136.8
Summer
0
18
20
1.789
1.28
p*
6530
58
6000
480
960
721
BC-1
130.7
Summer
0.42
N
4110
88
3700
430
570
BC-2
130.7
Summer
44
18
1.179
1.65
N
2800
880
1700
1100
510
BC-3
130.7
Summer
0.62
P
750
25
660
90
19.2
BC-4
130.7
Summer
0.6
N
6510
98
6000
470
930
BC-5
130.7
Summer
0.49
N
1920
25
1700
220
400
CR-7
127
Summer
38
55
53
2.722
1.33
p*
2950
87
2600
350
440
291
SC-1
103.6
Summer
24
45
2.758
0.88
p*
350
25
160
190
27
CR-9
95.8
Summer
13.8
NP
1200
25
660
540
120
CR-11
Summer
11.6
p*
730
25
450
280
70
* Use of STATISTICA requires data entry value; it is recommended that rather than using the detection limit for TP of 0.025 mg/L that the median vcalue of 0.0125 be used
84
-------
120
Figure 1. Distribution of Periphyton Percent Cover, Cahaba River, AL., 2002
100
80
80
40
20
~
o ~
C-J
1
~ Median = 21.5
I 125%-75%
= (10,38)
I Min-Max
= (0,100)
Percent Cover: Habitat (Run)
85
-------
Figure 2. Distribution of Square Root TraLlormtd Percent Cover,
Cahabi River, AL., 2uuj
~
n
-------
Figure D3. Distribution of Diatom Mean Diversity, Cahaba River, AL., 2002
4.5
4.0
3.S
¦
~
3.0
'
2.5
¦
2.0
1.5
1.0
~ Median = 3.174
I 125%-75%
= (1.997,3.709)
Min-Max
= (1.179,4.229)
Periphyton Diatom Mean Diversity
87
-------
¦100
Figure D4. Distribution of Periphyton Chlorophyll
Cahaba River, AL., 2002
1
80
60
40
¦
~
20
0
~ Median = 36.4
I 12S%-75%
= (20.7,47.8)
[ Min-Max
= (5, 85)
Corr. Chi A in mgAn2
88
-------
APPENDIX E :
Hydraulic geometry graphs, photos of bed surface material,
& particle size distribution graphs
89
-------
40 60 80
Distance from Left Bank (ft)
120
b 300 -|
200 -
100 -
0 -
-100 -
-200 -
-300 -
o>
o
-300
-200
-100 0
Easting (ft)
100
200
¦ Cross-section
¦LEW
Cahaba River - Station CR-1
1000.20
1000.00
999.80
999.60
999.40
999.20
999.00
998.80
998.60
998.40
100 200
300 400
500 600
Distance from Upstream (ft)
¦Water Surf.
Figure 1. Hydraulic geometry at CahabaRiver Station CR-1, located at Happy Hollow Rd. near CR 132; Latitude: 33* 38' 39"; Longitude:
86*35' 45": a. cross-section; b.planform; and c. longitudinal water-surface profile; water surface slope = 0.25%; Surveyed
on 09/11/02.
90
-------
Figure 2. Photograph of the bed surface material at Cahaba River Station CR-1 where a Wolman pebble count was conducted on
09/11/02.
Stream bed Surface Particle Size Distribution -
Cahaba River Station CR-1 @ CR132 (Happy Hollow)
-100
- - 90
4- 80
D50 = 20 mm
O
C
o>
to
CV|
CO
CNJ
in
o
o
o
o
00
to
V
A
to
CNJ
io
CN|
00
/V
T~
CNJ
lO
CNJ
o
o
eg
c
a.
a>
>
rc
3
E
3
o
Particle Size Distribution (mm)
Figure 3. Graph showing the streambed surface particle size distribution at Cahaba River Station CR-1 at Happy Hollow Rd. near CR
132. The median particle size at this station or D50 was 20 mm or coarse gravel. The dominant size classes in this sample included the
16-32 mm coarse gravel (39.8%) and the 8-16 mm medium gravel (18.5%). The percentage of sands, silts and clays at this station
(particles < 2mm) was 13.89%.
91
-------
14
12
10
8
6
4
< >
2
0
0
50
100
150
Distance from Left Bank (ft)
b 300 -|
200 -
100 -
o>
£
-100 -
-200 -
-300 -
-400
-200
-100
100
200
300
-500 J
Easting (ft)
¦ Cross-section REW
Cahaba River - Station CR-AT
1001.00
1000.80
1000.60
= 1000.40
1 1000.20
1000.00
999.80
999.60
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Distance from Upstream (ft)
Water Surf.
Figure 4. Hydraulic geometry at Cahaba River Station CR-AT, located at Hwy 11 above the confluence with L. Cahaba Ck. & above
Trussville WWTP; Latitude: 33*37'25"; Longitude: 86*36'02": a. cross-section; b.planform; and c. longitudinal water-surface
profile; water surface slope = 0.13%; Surveyed on 09/11/02.
92
-------
Figure 5. Photograph of the bed surface material at Cahaba River Station CR-AT where a Wolman pebble count was conducted on
09/11/02.
Stream bed Surface Particle Size Distribution
Cahaba River Station CR-AT @ Hwy 11
-100
- ¦ 90
~so = 15 mm
- - 80
-- 60
- - 40
-- 30
iq
o
o
o
o
o
c\i
00
IO
o
io
o
o
o
csi
o
o
CO
00
CO
CN
"3-
00
CO
CO
CO
CN|
io
CN|
o>
o>
CVI
CO
CNJ
iq
o
o
o
o
00
CO
¦*7
CVI
A
to
CNJ
IO
CNJ
-4
00
/V
T~
CN4
io
CN|
o
o
CNJ
Particle Size Distribution (mm)
Figure 6. Graph showing the streambed surface particle size distribution at Cahaba River Station CR-AT located at Hwy 11 above the
confluence with L. Cahaba Ck. & above Trussville VWVTP. The median particle size at this station or was 15 mm or medium gravel.
The dominant size classes in this sample included the 16-32 mm coarse gravel (23.4%), the 8-16 mm medium gravel (16.2%), and the
<0.0625 mm silt/clays (18.9%). The percentage of sands, silts and clays at this station (particles < 2mm) was 29.73%.
93
-------
20 40 60
Distance from Left Bank (ft)
80
o>
o
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
-200
-250
-200
-100
100
Easting (ft)
200
300
400
a Cross-section
¦LEW
Little Cahaba Creek - Station LCC-1
1004.00
1003.00
1002.00
1001.00
in 1000.00
999.00
998.00
200 400 600
Distance from Upstream (ft)
800
¦Water Surf.
Figure 7. Hydraulic geometry at Little Cahaba Creek Station LCC-1, located at Camp Coleman Road Bridge; Latitude: 33* 37' 34";
Longitude: 86*33' 58": a. cross-section; b.planform; and c. longitudinal water-surface profile; water surface slope = 0.81 %; Surveyed
on 09/11/02.
94
-------
Figure 8. Photograph of the bed surface material at Little Cahaba Creek Station LCC-1 where a VVolman pebble count was conducted on
09/11/02.
Stream bed Surface Particle Size Distribution -
Cahaba River Station LCC-1 @ Camp Coleman Rd.
80
70
60
o 50
® 40
O"
(1)
S. 30
20
10
0
D50 = 5000 mm
w
-100
IO
IO
IO
IO
o
o
o
o
o
CM
00
CO
CM
00
(O
CM
CM
CO
o
CM
o
N
o
IO
CM
d
IO
d
if)
cm
o
o
00
o
CO
o
00
CO
CO
CO
CM
CO
CM
tJ-
IO
CM
00
IO
CO
CM
O
o
CM
o>
o
o>
00
o
V
CM
to
o
*-
CM
CO
CM
IO
CM
CM
¦4
CM
00
CO
o>
IO
O
o
o
o
o
T-
CM
Particle Size Distribution (mm)
Figure 9. Graph showing the streambed surface particle size distribution at Little Cahaba Creek Station LCC-1 located at Hwy 11 at the
Camp Coleman Road Bridge. The median particle size at this station or Dso was 5000 mm (bedrock). The dominant size classes in this
sample included >4096 mm or bedrock (66.7%), the 64-128 mm small cobble (8.7%), and the <0.0625-0.125 mm very fine sands (7.9%).
The percentage of sands, silts and clays at this station (particles < 2mm) was 17.54%.
95
-------
5 12
C
O)
400
300
200
100
0
t -100
o
2 -200
-300
-400
-500 "a°
80
100
Distance from Left Bank (ft)
-1—
-40
-20 0 20
Easting (ft)
40
60
a Cross-section
¦LEW
1000.20
1000.00
999.80
999.60
999.40
999.20
999.00
998.80
998.60
998.40
998.20
998.00
Cahaba River - Station CR-BT
200
400
600
800
Distance from Upstream (ft)
¦Water Surf.
Figure 10. Hydraulic geometry at Cahaba River Station CR-BT, located at CR 10 below Trussville WWTP; Latitude: 33* 36' 16.5";
Longitude: 86*32' 56.5": cl. cross-section ; b.planform; and c. longitudinal water-surface profile; water surface slope = 0.24%;
Surveyed on 09/11/02.
96
-------
Figure 11. Photograph of the bed surface material at Cahaba River Station CR-BT where a Wolman pebble count was
conducted on 09/11/02.
Stream bed Surface Particle Size Distribution -
Cahaba River Station CR-BT (5) CR10
25
D50 = 12 mm
£ 10
7
i 1 i
00 co
^ o>
o o
^ ^ 00
¦4 CO CO
N ^ O)
o o o
ID
o
o
o
o
o
CNJ
CO
CO
CN|
O
lO
C\|
lO
cvj
o
o
00
o
CO
CO
CO
CO
CV|
CO
CNJ
lO
eg
CO
CO
CN|
o
o
^-1
c\i
"d-
o
CO
CNJ
lO
di
O
CO
CVJ
lO
CN|
o>
100
-- 90
- 80
- 70
- 60
- 50
¦ 40
130
20
10
0
c
Q.
a>
>
as
3
E
D
o
Particle Size Distribution (mm)
Figure 12. Graph showing the streambed surface particle size distribution at Cahaba River Station CR-BT located at CR10 below
Trussville VWVTP. The median particle size at this station or Dgj was 12 mm (medium gravel). The dominant size classes in this sample
included <0.0625-0.125 mm or very fine sand (18.0%), >4096 mm bedrock (17.1 %), and the 16-32 mm coarse gravel (14.4%). The
percentage of sands, silts and clays at this station (particles < 2mm) was 39.64%.
97
-------
0 +¦
11 • •
50
100
150
Distance from Left Bank (ft)
C
o>
o
120 -
100 -
-800
-600
-400 -200
Easting (ft)
200
400
a Cross-section
¦LEW
Cahaba River - Station CR-AH
999.50 -
999.40
999.30
999.20
999.10
999.00
998.90
998.80
200 400 600 800
Distance from Upstream (ft)
1000
¦Water Surf.
Figure 13. Hydraulic geometry at Cahaba River Station CR-AH, located at CR 29 above Hoover WWTP at Caldwell Mill Rd. Bridge;
Latitude: 33* 24'55"; Longitude: 86*44'28": a. cross-section; b.planform; and c. longitudinal water-surface profile; water surface
slope = 0.07%; Surveyed on 09/10/02.
-------
Figure 14. Photograph from the Caldwell Mill Rd. Bridge showing the low-head dam upstream of Cahaba River Station CR-AH taken
9/10/02.
Figure 15. Photograph of the bed surface material at Cahaba River Station CR-AH where a Wolman pebble count was conducted on
09/10/02.
-------
Streambed Surface Particle Size Distribution -
Cahaba River Station CR-AH @CR29 (Caldwell Mill)
- 100
-- 90
D™ = 20 mm
-- 80
-- 60
-- 40
-- 30
io io m m
CNJ CNJ CNJ
g d
O
V
CNJ CNJ
CO T-
O
iq
o
o
o
o
o
d
c\i
00
o>
«?
ir>
o
o
CNJ
o
Particle Size Distribution (mm)
Figure 16. Graph showing the streambed surface particle size distribution at Cahaba River Station CR-AH located at CR 29 above Hoover
WWTP at Caldwell Mill Rd. Bridge. The median particle size at this station or D50 was 20 mm (coarse gravel). The dominant size classes
in this sample included <0.0625-0.125 mm or very fine sand (14.3%), 128-256 mm large cobble (13.3%), and the 16-32 mm coarse gravel
(10.2%). The percentage of sands, silts and clays at this station (particles < 2mm) was 37.76%.
100
-------
20
— 18
a) 16
>
j> 14
i— 12
g 10
o
.D
TO
O
O
c
TO
¦*—I
Q
\
v
"v f
N* i
\ t
\
50 100
Distance from Left Bank (ft)
150
500 -
400 -
300 -
200 -
100 -
-100 -
-200 -
-300 -
-600 -
700
Easting (ft)
¦ Cross-section
¦LEW
Cahaba River - Station CR-BH
999.80
999.78
999.76
999.74
999.72
999.70
999.68
999.66
500 1000
Distance from Upstream (ft)
1500
¦Water Surf.
Figure 17. Hydraulic geometry at Cahaba River Station CR-BH, located off of Old Rocky Ridge Rd., in Riverford Subdivision, below the
Hoover WWTP; Latitude: 33* 23' 12"; Longitude: 86*46' 41": a. cross-section; b.pianform; and c. longitudinal water-surface profile;
water surface slope = 0.01%; Surveyed on 09/12/02.
101
-------
Figure 18. Photograph of the bed surface material at Cahaba River Station CR-BH where a Wolrrian pebble count was conducted on
09/12/02.
Stream bed Surface Particle Size Distribution -
Cahaba River Station CR-BH @ Old Rocky Ridge Rd.
~so = 1 mm
100
IO IO IO
CM CM CM
8 - p
o
v
°
di
to T-
O o
o
IO
o
o
o
o
o
CM
00
CO
CM
00
CO
CM
o
c\i
00
CO
f?
CD
CO
CM
CO
CM
IO
CM
IO
CM
o
o
o>
o
o>
IO
w
IO
o
o
o
o
tJ-
00
CO
CM
00
o
CM
Ti-
CO
CM
IO
CM
-4
00
IO
O
o
CM
o
*3-
-- 90
-- 80
-- 70
-- 60
-- 50
-- 40
-- 30
-- 20
-- 10
-- 0
Particle Size Distribution (mm)
c
«
o
Ql
3
E
3
o
Figure 19. Graph showing the streambed surface particle size distribution at Cahaba River Station CR-BH off Old Rocky Ridge Rd. The
median particle size at this station or D50 was 1 mm or very coarse sand. The dominant size classes in this sample included the <0.0625-
0.125 very fine sand (20.9%) and the 32-64 mm very coarse gravel (14.2%). The percentage of sands, silts and clays at this station
(particles < 2mm) was 58.96%.
102
-------
0
20 40 60
Distance from Left Bank (ft)
80
C
o>
o
i Am
-600 -400
-200 0 200
Easting (ft)
400
-I
600
Cross-section
¦LEW
999.26
999.24
999.22
999.20
999.18
999.16
999.14
999.12
999.10
999.08
999.06
999.04
Cahaba River - Station CR-6
200
400
600
800
1000
Distance from Upstream (ft)
¦Water Surf.
Figure 20. Hydraulic geometry at Cahaba River Station CR-6, located at the intersection of old Montgomery Hwy (Bains Bridge) above
the confluence with Buck Creek; Latitude: 33* 21' 47.8"; Longitude: 86*48'48.8": a. cross-section; b.planform; and c. longitudinal
water-surface profile; water surface slope = 0.02%; Surveyed on 09/09/02.
-------
Figure 21. Photograph of the bed surface material at Cahaba River Station CR-6 where a Wolman pebble count was conducted on
09/09/02.
Stream bed Surface Particle Size Distribution
Cahaba River Station CR-6 @ Bains Bridge
30
25 -
> 20
o
c
a>
CO
CM
CO
CM
lO
o
o
o
o
00
CO
CM
tj-
^1-
A
CO
CM
lO
CM
00
/V
T—
CM
IO
CM
O
o
CM
100
90
80
70
60
¦50
40
30
20
10
0
Particle Size Distribution (mm)
c
a>
o
a>
Q.
a>
>
as
3
E
3
o
Figure 22. Graph showing the streambed surface particle size distribution at Cahaba River Station CR-6 at Bains Bridge. The median
particle size at this station or D50 was 4 mm or very fine gravel. The dominant size classes in this sample included the <0.0625 mm silt-
clays (21.0%) and the 32-64 mm very coarse gravel (22.6%).
104
-------
50 100 150
Distance from Left Bank (ft)
200
b 600 -|
500 -
400 -
_ 300 -
£
200 H
o>
¦i 100 H
¦c
o
0 -
-100 -
-200 -
-300 -
-400
-100
-50
0 50
Easting (ft)
100
—i
150
Cross-section
•LEW
Cahaba River - Station CR-7
1002.00
1001.50
1001.00
1000.50
1000.00
999.50
999.00
998.50 -
200 400 600 800
Distance from Upstream (ft)
1000
¦Water Surf.
Figure 23. Hydraulic geometry at Cahaba River Station CR-7, located at Hwy 52 near Helena, AL below the confluence with Buck Creek;
Latitude: 33* 17' 02.2"; Longitude: 86*52' 53.5": a. cross-section; b.planform; and c. longitudinal water-surface profile; water surface
slope = 0.28%; Surveyed on 09/10/02.
105
-------
Figure 24. Photograph of the bed surface material at Cahaba River Station CR-7 where a Wolman pebble count was conducted on
09/10/02.
Stream bed Surface Particle Size Distribution -
Cahaba River Station CR-7 @ Hwy 52
Dsn = 2 mm
!M M M
2 ^ o
O r-> ¦
O
V
CM CM
(O T-
© ~
lO
o
o
o
o
o
o
c\i
00
o>
CO
di
CO
Cf
00
«?
CO
o
o
CVI
o
o
A
CO
CNJ
IO
CV|
00
/V
T~
CNJ
IO
CN|
o
o
CNJ
100
so
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
C
03
D
¦ ,
0)
Q.
03
>
¦w
re
3
E
3
o
Particle Size Distribution (mm)
Figure 25. Graph showing the streambed surface particle size distribution at Cahaba River Station CR-7 at Hwy 52 near Helena, AL. The
median particle size at this station or D50 was 2 mm or very coarse sand. The dominant size classes in this sample included the <0.0625 mm
silt-clays (17.8%), the <0.125 mm very fine sands (16.1%) and the 16-32 mm coarse gravel (30.5%).
106
-------
I
50
100 150 200
Distance from Left Bank (ft)
250
b 400
300
200
100
o>
E
t -100
o
2 -200
-300
-400
-50
50
100
150
Easting (ft)
B Cross-section LEW
Shades Creek - Station SC-1
1002.00 -i
1001.50
~ 1001.00
o
¦*->
| 1000.50
m
1000.00
999.50
0 200 400 600 800
Distance from Upstream (ft)
Water Surf.
Figure 26. Hydraulic geometry at Shades Creek Station SC-1, located at CR 12/Easter Valley Rd.approx. 290 ft. downstream of the
bridge; Latitude: 33* 13' 10.3"; Longitude: 87*01' 58.9": a. cross-section; b.planform; and c. longitudinal water-surface profile; water
surface slope = 0.27%; Surveyed on 09/10/02.
-------
Figure 27. Photograph of the bed surface material at Shades Creek Station SC-1 where a Wolffian pebble count was conducted on
09/10/02.
Stream bed Surface Particle Size Distribution
Shades Creek Station SC-1 (5) CR 12
D™ = 37 mm
lf>
o
o
o
o
o
CNJ
00
CO
CNJ
00
CO
CO
o
T™
csi
00
CD
CO
CO
CO
CV|
CO
CNJ
lO
eg
up
CN|
o
o
o>
o
<7>
o
lO
w
lO
o
o
o
O
Tt
CO
CO
¦*7
CNJ
o
csi
tj-
CO
CNJ
lO
CN|
-4
00
A
o
CO
CNJ
CN|
^1-
lO
o
o
CNJ
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
C
Q.
a>
>
as
3
E
3
a
Particle Size Distribution (mm)
Figure 28. Graph showing the streambed surface particle size distribution at Shades Creek Station SC-1 at CR 12/Easter Valley Road. The
median particle size at this station or D50 was 37 mm or very coarse gravel. The dominant size classes in this sample included the <64mm
very coarse gravel (19.4%), the <128 mm small cobble (13.2%) and the <512 mm small boulders (10.1%).
108
-------
Species
Wading samples
Boat electrofishing samples
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
3
4
12
Centreville
River
Bend
Piper
Boothton
Helena
Bains
Bridge
Altadena
Caldwell
Mill
Grants
Mill
Camp
Coleman
I-59
Little
Cahaba
Centreville
Piper
Boothton
Little
Cahaba
M. salmoides
-
-
-
-
_
-
_
1
-
-
-
_
2
1
-
_
Pomoxis niqromaculatus
__
__
__
__
_
__
__
__
__
_
__
__
2
__
__
__
PERCIDAE
(darters)
Etheostoma jordani
9
19
5
9
5
-
-
1
18
-
-
33
-
-
-
-
E. ramseyi
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3
-
-
9
40
-
-
-
-
E. rupestre
84
90
59
159
246
8
_
94
5
-
-
30
-
-
-
-
E. stiqmaeum
6
2
1
3
3
3
_
1
1
-
-
1
-
-
-
—
E. whipplei
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
6
-
-
-
-
-
Percina aurolineata
17
8
8
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
-
P. brevicauda
-
-
-
4
1
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P. kathae
_
3
_
17
3
2
_
7
6
_
5
1
2
1
1
1
P. niqrofasciata
47
27
25
39
39
15
8
27
23
11
15
22
-
-
-
—
P. shumardi
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
SCIAENIDAE
(drums)
Aplodinotus qrunniens
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3
1
5
-
9
48
-------
APPENDIX F:
"A Biological Assessment of Selected Sites in the
Cahaba River System, Alabama"
109
-------
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF ALABAMA
Donald F. Oltz
State Geologist
A BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF SELECTED SITES IN THE
CAHABA RIVER SYSTEM, ALABAMA
by
Patrick E. O'Neil
This report is submitted in partial fulfillment of
Contract No. 2R-0117-NAGF
with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Tuscaloosa, Alabama
2002
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 1
Acknowledgments 1
Study objectives 2
Sampling sites and study area 2
Methods 5
Sampling gear 9
Analysis of fish community data 11
IBI metrics 12
IBI scoring criteria 14
Metric 1—Total number of indigenous fish species 16
Metric 2—Number of darter species 16
Metric 3—Number of minnow species 17
Metric 4—Number of sunfish species 17
Metric 5—Number of sucker species 17
Metric 6—Number of intolerant species 18
Metric 7—Proportion of sunfish species 19
Metric 8—Proportion as omnivores and herbivores 19
Metric 9—Proportion as insectivorous cyprinids 19
Metric 10—Proportion as top carnivores 20
Metric 11—Number of individuals collected per hour 20
Metric 12—Proportion with disease, deformities, lesions, and tumors 20
Procedure for calculating IBI 21
Results and Discussion 22
Species diversity and catch 22
Index of biotic integrity 30
Site descriptions 30
Site 1 - Cahaba River at Centreville 30
Site 2 - Cahaba River at River Bend 33
Site 3 - Cahaba River at Piper 33
Site 4 - Cahaba River at Boothton 34
Site 5 - Cahaba River at Helena 35
Site 6 - Cahaba River at Bains Bridge 35
Site 7 - Cahaba River near Altadena 36
Site 8 - Cahaba River at Caldwell Mill 37
Site 9 - Cahaba River at Grants Mill 38
Site 10 - Cahaba River at Camp Coleman 38
Site 11 - Cahaba River at Interstate Hwy. 59 39
Site 12 - Little Cahaba River 40
Summary 40
References cited 43
Appendix. Collection data for samples in the Cahaba River, 2002 45
iii
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Summary information on Cahaba River sampling stations, 2002 3
Table 2. Fish community sampling procedures used by the Geological Survey of Alabama 8
Table 3. Total IBI scores, integrity classes, and the attributes of those classes 13
Table 4. Preliminary IBI metric scoring criteria for the Cahaba River system upstream
of Centreville 15
Table 5. Collection information for fish samples taken in the Cahaba River system, 2002 23
Table 6. Species diversity comparisons between this study and historical fish samples
in the Cahaba River system 24
Table 7. Predictions of maximum species diversity for Cahaba River main channel sites 25
Table 8. IBI scores for 12 sites in the Cahaba River system, 2002 31
Table 9. Summary of fish community metrics for sites in the Cahaba River system, 2002 42
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Species-area relationship for the upper Cahaba River 27
Figure 2 Relationship between the S/Smax ratio and watershed area for sites in
the upper Cahaba River 27
Figure 3. Relationship between the catch index and watershed area for sites in the
upper Cahaba River 29
Figure 4. Conceptual model of biological condition in the upper Cahaba River system 42
iv
-------
INTRODUCTION
This report presents results of a biological assessment performed in the Cahaba River main
channel during the summer of 2000 by the Geological Survey of Alabama (GSA) The assessment was
undertaken to assist the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in characterizing present
biological conditions, fish biodiversity, and the status of protected fish species listed by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The USEPA has required the Alabama Department of Environmental
Management (ADEM) to list portions of the Cahaba River main channel as impaired for nutrients and
sediment under §303(d) of the Clean Water Act ultimately requiring development of a total maximum
daily load (TMDL) for these parameters. The section listed for nutrient impairment extends from U.S.
Hwy. 82 at Centreville upstream to U.S. Hwy. 280, and the section listed for sediment impairment
extends from U.S. Hwy. 82 at Centreville upstream to Interstate Hwy. 59 at Trussville. The USFWS
has listed two fish species and eight mollusk species whose historic ranges included the Cahaba River.
Populations are now either extirpated or thought to be seriously threatened by degraded habitat
conditions in the Cahaba River main channel due to excessive nutrients and sediment. Degradation of
listed critical habitat for these species by attached filamentous green algae, smothering of stream
substrates by excessive bedload sedimentation, and extreme variation of physical-chemical water
quality, such as dissolved oxygen, are considered contributing factors to the poor population status of
these species and one reason for listing these segments under §303(d) of the Clean Water Act.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Appreciation is extended to Ed Decker and Lonnie Dorn of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region 4 for assistance with many aspects of this study: initiation of the concept, subsequent
funding of field investigations, and as hard working field hands during a few hot days of sampling this
summer. Tom Shepard, Stuart McGregor, Phillip Henderson, and Brett Smith of the Geological Survey
of Alabama (GSA) provided expert fish sampling assistance, while Scott Mettee, also of GSA,
provided his usual steady hand at the controls of our electrofishing boat. Additional field assistance was
provided by personnel of the Alabama Department of Environmental Management including Fred
Leslie, Lee Davis, Chris Smith, Rick Dowling, Greg Vinson, Keith Gilliland. Ashley Dumas of the
University of Alabama provided expert note-taking services while sampling.
1
-------
STUDY OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this study were threefold. First was to determine biological condition of
stream fish communities at selected main channel sites using the Index of Biotic Integrity (TBI). The
second objective was to determine fish biodiversity and abundance at these sites. The third objective
was to determine current status of two fish species listed by the USFWS for protection: the Cahaba
shiner (Notropis cc/Ac/Ac/f—endangered) and the goldline darter (Percina aurolineata—threatened).
SAMPLING SITES AND STUDY AREA
Twelve sites were sampled during this study, 11 in the Cahaba River main channel and one in
the Little Cahaba River (table 1). The main channel sites extended from the U.S. Hwy. 82 bridge
crossing at Centreville upstream to the Interstate Hwy. 59 bridge crossing at Trussville.
The Cahaba River is the third largest tributary to the Alabama River in the Mobile River basin.
It extends for 191 miles from its headwaters in St. Clair County northeast of Birmingham to its
confluence with the Alabama River southwest of Selma. The drainage area lies entirely within the state
of Alabama, and encompasses approximately 1,825 square miles (mi2) including portions of St. Clair,
Jefferson, Shelby, Bibb, Tuscaloosa, Perry, Chilton, and Dallas Counties. Elevations in the watershed
range from 1,100 feet in Shelby County to 100 feet at the confluence with the Alabama River.
The portion of the drainage in our study area extends upstream from Centreville and
encompasses 1,027 mi2 in Bibb, Shelby, Jefferson, and St. Clair Counties. This portion of the drainage
lies within three physiographic districts in the Valley and Ridge Province (Fenneman, 1938; Sapp and
Emplaincourt, 1975): the Cahaba Valley District, the Cahaba Ridges District, and the Birmingham-Big
Canoe Valley District. These physiographic districts correspond to the level m ecoregion 67 (Ridge
and Valley) and include the Southern Limestone/Dolomite Valleys and Low Rolling Hills (67f),
Southern Sandstone Ridges (67h), and Southern Shale Valleys (67g) (Griffith and others, 2001).
2
-------
Table 1. Summary information on Cahaba River sampling stations, 2002.
Station
(EPA)
Description
Location
County
Drainage
Area (mi2)
Gradient
(ft/mile)
River
Mile
1
Cahaba River @ Alt. U.S.
Highway 82 (Centreville)
sec. 35.T.23 N..R.9 E.
Bibb
1,027
1.3
83.2
2
Cahaba River @ Bibb Co.
Hwy. 26 (River Bend)
sec. 33.T.24 N..R.10
E.
Bibb
919
3.3
90.0
3
Cahaba River @ Bibb Co.
Hwy. 24 (Piper)
sec. 3.T.24 N..R.10 E.
Bibb
593
5.6
95.8
4
Cahaba River @ Boothton
sec. 30.T.21 S..R.4 W.
Shelby
367
2.4
110
5
(CR-7)
Cahaba River @ Shelby
Co. Hwy. 52 (Helena)
sec. 20.T.20 S..R.3 W.
Shelby
335
2.2
127.1
6
(CR-6)
Cahaba River @ Jefferson
Co. Hwy. 275 (Bains
Bridge)
sec. 24.T.19 S..R.3 W.
Jefferson
230
2.5
136.8
7
Cahaba River near
Altadena
sec. 8.T.19 S..R.2 W.
Jefferson
207
2.5
142.2
8
Cahaba River @ Shelby
Co. Hwy. 29 (Caldwell Mill
Road)
sec. 3.T.19 S..R.2 W.
Shelby
200
5.6
144.9
9
Cahaba River @ Jefferson
Co. Hwy. 143 (Grants Mill
Road)
sec. 33.T.17 S..R.1 W.
Jefferson
129
5.8
161.3
10
Cahaba River @ Camp
Coleman
sec. 20.T.16 S..R.1 E.
Jefferson
31
23.3
179.3
11
Cahaba River @ Interstate
Hwy. 59
sec. 12.T.16 S..R.1 W.
Jefferson
18
29.4
185.1
12
Little Cahaba River @ Bibb
Co. Hwy. 65 (Bulldog
Bend)
sec. 13.T.24 N..R.10
E.
Bibb
175
11.7
3
-------
The Valley and Ridge Province consists of a series of parallel ridges and valleys that are
underlain by highly folded and faulted rocks of Cambrian to Pennsylvanian age. The Cahaba Valley
district is a topographic valley that lies between the Coosa and Cahaba Ridges. It is characterized as a
faulted monoclinal fold underlain predominantly by dolomite and limestone of early Paleozoic age. The
Cahaba Valley ranges in width from 2 to 3 miles in the northern end to almost 10 miles at the southern
end and its length is approximately 75 miles. Ridges occur locally in the valley and are due to
preferential weathering of soluble limestone and easily eroded shale, leaving the more resistant chert
beds as topographically high features.
The Cahaba Ridges district is a series of parallel southwest-northeast oriented ridges formed by
massive sandstone and conglomerate beds of the Pottsville and Parkwood Formations. The Cahaba
Ridges district is approximately 65 miles long ranging in width from about 5 miles at the northern end to
about 15 miles at the southern end. Ridges rise from 200 to 500 feet above the Cahaba Valley to the
southeast and Birmingham-Big Canoe Valley to the northwest. Most of the main channel of the Cahaba
River upstream of the Fall Line flows through the Cahaba Ridges district.
The northwestern and western portions of the Cahaba River system drain part of the
Birmingham-Big Canoe Valley district. This district is a broad anticlinal valley and is underlain by faulted
and asymmetrically folded rocks of Cambrian to Mississippian age. Downstream of the Fall Line near
the town of Centreville in Bibb County, the Cahaba River enters the Coastal Plain physiographic
province. Unlike the hard Paleozoic rocks of the Valley and Ridges province, the rocks of the Coastal
Plain province are largely unconsolidated and tend to form broad alluvial floodplains and terraces.
Stream deposits and substrates in this portion of the drainage include clay, sand, silt, and gravel.
An important feature of the upper Cahaba River is a water pumping station located about 1/4
mile upstream of a low level dam at U.S. Hwy. 280 near Cahaba Heights. The water intake draws an
average of 57 million gallons per day from the impoundment. This pool is fed by flow from the Cahaba
River and by water released from Lake Purdy, a water supply impoundment on the Little Cahaba
River. Water released from Lake Purdy flows downstream in the Little Cahaba River to the pooled
junction with the Cahaba River where it is drawn back upstream to the intake. During periods of low
flow, virtually all of the discharge of the river is removed at this point with a portion returned to the river
as treated wastewater near U. S. Hwy. 31. Some of the water removed at the pump station is
distributed outside the Cahaba River drainage, ultimately contributing flow to the Black Warrior River.
4
-------
METHODS
The use of biological assessment tools to evaluate stream water quality has proliferated during
the last 20 years since a practical definition of biological integrity was proposed by Karr and Dudley
(1981). They defined biological integrity as the ability of an aquatic ecosystem to support and maintain
a balanced, integrated, adaptive community of organisms having a species composition, diversity, and
functional organization comparable to that of the natural habitats within a region. This definition of
biological integrity is based on measurable characteristics of biological community structure and function
and has provided the underlying theory for development of biocriteria for specific ecoregions in some
states (Ohio EPA, 1987a).
The process of biological assessment is a systems approach for evaluating water resources
which focuses on the actual condition of the resource, assessing chemical and physical water quality,
biotic interactions, hydrology, energy and trophic interactions, and habitat structure. The extensively
used chemical/physical and whole-effluent toxicity water regulatory approach only measures certain
components of a water resource and as such are only surrogate measures for evaluating biological
community integrity. Ultimately, it is the measurable performance of the natural biological system relative
to a reference condition that is the goal for determining whether or not regulatory programs have
successfully maintained or improved water quality. Biological assessments are one of the few ways to
directly measure biological performance.
Biological assessments can now be used with some assurance for water resource evaluation for
several reasons. First, support for the use of standardized techniques and methods has increased during
the last decade (Karr and others, 1986; Plafkin and others, 1989; Barbour and others, 1999). Second,
field and laboratory techniques have been refined and modified for application regionally and within
states for use within a regulatory scheme. Third, a practical, working definition of biological integrity has
been developed (Karr and Dudley, 1981) around which the process of biological assessment can be
defended. And finally, the concept of using regional reference data has been incorporated into the
evaluation process compensating for the natural variation inherent in biological populations and systems.
Full integration of the chemical-specific, toxicity, and biological assessment approaches is essential for a
broad-based, technically sound, and cost-effective system for regulating and managing water resources.
Rapid biological assessment requires the time-efficient analysis of stream conditions at a
relatively low cost. Assessments must characterize the existence and severity of impairment to water-
5
-------
use classifications, help identify the sources and causes of water-use impairment, evaluate the
effectiveness of actions to control water pollution, support water-use attainability studies, and
characterize regional biotic components (Plafkin and others, 1989). In conjunction with
chemical/physical water-quality measurements and analysis of habitat quality and condition, the
biological assessment is an effective tool for assessing and managing water quality within the ecoregion.
The most widely used approach for biological assessment is sampling and analysis of the
macroinvertebrate community using the RBP-m methodology (Plafkin and others, 1989; Barbour and
others, 1999) or some variation thereof. Another, though less widely used, approach for conducting
bioassessments is through sampling and analysis of the fish community.
Assessing the biological condition of streams using the fish community has distinct advantages
over the use of other aquatic groups.
~ Fish occupy the full range of positions throughout the food chain such as
herbivores, carnivores, piscivores, omnivores, insectivores, and planktivores,
thereby integrating a variety of watershed functions and conditions into their
community trophic structure.
~ Fish are generally present in all but the most polluted waters.
~ Because fish are relatively long-lived compared to macroinvertebrates and
generally spawn for a confined period in a year, their population numbers and
fluctuations are more stable over longer periods of time.
~ Compared to diatoms and macroinvertebrates, fish are relatively easy to
identify. Species identification is possible for practically all individuals collected
and, if desired, individuals can be identified and released at the field site by a
trained fisheries biologist. If samples are returned to the laboratory they can be
sorted, identified, and data sheets prepared relatively quickly allowing several
samples to be processed in a day.
~ Technician training and is easier with fish than with macroinvertebrates because
fish are larger and easier to see and can be identified more easily compared to
macroinvertebrates. Alabama has around 300 freshwater fish species
compared to several thousand macroinvertebrate species.
~ Environmental requirements of fish are relatively well known for a majority of
species. Life history information is extensive for many species and detailed
distributional information is becoming more available with time.
6
-------
~ Water-quality standards, legislative mandates, and public opinion are more
directly related to the status of a lake or stream as a fishery resource. One goal
of the Clean Water Act is to make waters "fishable and swimmable," a directly
measurable and attainable concept. Public perception of streams, pollution, and
water quality monitoring is linked closely with fish because of their value as a
food source and as a recreational resource.
Various protocols have been proposed for sampling fish communities in wadeable and
nonwadeable streams (Ohio EPA, 1987b; Plafkin and others, 1989; and Barbour and others, 1999)
and many are accepted techniques for collecting data for use with the IBI. The Tennessee Valley
Authority (TVA) has developed a depletion sampling protocol where a sample is collected according to
a prescribed number of sampling units, the catch in each unit is identified and recorded on site, and
sampling is continued for a series of units until no new species are collected in the last unit, termed
species depletion. Depending on the size (watershed area) and biodiversity of a site, this technique may
take several hours, requires on-site identification of the catch, and may require a large field crew.
Another variation of the catch-depletion protocol consists of blocking a stream reach at the
upstream and downstream ends and making three depletion passes through the reach with a sampling
team that stretches from bank to bank. After each pass the catch is processed and held until sampling is
completed. This technique also requires on-site identification of the catch, a rather large field crew, and
only about two sites can be sampled per day if they are in close proximity.
The sampling method used in this study was modified from a protocol described by O'Neil and
Shepard (2000) to include more intensive sampling at each site in order to capture as many species as
possible (table 2). The most effective sampling combination was a backpack
7
-------
Table 2. Fish community sampling procedures used by the Geological Survey of Alabama
Habitat Selection
Four basic habitat types are sampled at each site: riffles, pools, runs, and
shorelines. All sampling is conducted in units called efforts. One effort is
equivalent to a riffle kick with the backpack, a pool drag, a run set with the
seine, or one shoreline effort. Area is determined for each effort, and the
species type and number collected are determined for each effort.
Habitats are sampled in relative proportion as they occur at a site.
Sampling time is determined by a combination of best professional
judgement and species depletion for the entire sample.
Sample Gear
Seine (10' wide x 6' deep or 15' wide x 6' deep; 3/16" mesh)
Battery- or generator-powered backpack shocker.
Dip nets with wood handles.
Hip chain (for measuring distance of shoreline samples)
Data recording sheet or digital data logger.
Plastic jar with preservative for voucher specimens.
Sampling Methods
Riffle kicks with and without backpack shocker.
Pool drags with and without backpack shocker.
Set downstream of and shock through runs.
Set below and shock through plunge pools.
Shoreline samples with backpack shocker and dipnets, usually 150 feet
long.
Taxonomic Level
All collected individuals identified to species in the field. Occasional
voucher specimens retained or individuals that can not be field identified.
QA Procedures
Field: All Dersonnel underao vearlv assessment of samDlina techniaues.
refine sampling method as needed for project or study.
Identifications: One expert fish taxonomist andforl identifier at a minimum
are present for all sampling.
Habitat Assessment
USEPA Physical Habitat Assessment Protocol (Barbour and others, 1999;
ADEM, 1999)
Metrics
Species richness, catch/effort, IBI (metrics and criteria are under continual
refinement until a statewide, consistent framework for scoring can be
established).
8
-------
shocker in combination with a seine. In riffles, the net was set in shallow, rocky areas or deeper, swifter
chutes and the backpacker walked upstream then proceeded to shock downstream through the riffle to
the seine while disturbing the bottom with boots and probes. Stunned fishes in the water column were
washed into the net while benthic fishes were dislodged from the bottom by kicking the substrate.
Another variation was to have another crew member behind the backpacker shuffling their feet from
side to side disturbing the bottom and dislodging stunned benthic fishes. Because riffles are quite often
very productive areas, all microhabitats were sampled: the head, foot, middle, and sides. The sides of
riffles along vegetated shoals were usually very productive areas as were head areas where riffles start
to break. Plunge pools at the foot of a riffle often yielded a diverse catch of cyprinid species.
Stream runs between riffles and pools were also productive habitats and were sampled by
either seining downstream or by moving from bank to bank across the stream in a downstream
direction either alone or following the backpacker. Pools were generally less productive than runs and
riffles but many times contained species not found in either of the other habitats. Lower velocity in pools
required more effort to pull the seine through the water column. Following the electroshocker was also
effective in pools and trapping fishes against the shore or in a slough at the end of a long pool was also
effective. Wider seines were more effective in pools and at the larger, downstream sites.
Banks along pools can have complex structure and yield game species and larger sucker
species not normally found in the basic riffle-run-pool habitats. These habitats were collected using a
technique known as shoreline sampling. The shoreline technique we use was developed by TVA
biologists and consisted of a crew member working the electroshocker upstream along a shoreline for a
length of approximately 150 feet sampling around all structures. One or two field crew members
followed closely with dip nets scooping and identifying the stunned individuals. Distance was measured
with a forestry-type hip chain.
SAMPLING GEAR
Of all available sampling equipment, the backpack electrofisher, dip net, and nylon minnow
seine are the most popular sampling gear used for bioassessment studies in wadeable streams. Ohio
EPA (1987b) exclusively uses electrofishing gear to collect their standardized wadeable stream
samples. They have concluded that seines are too selective and inefficient while sampling effort is too
variable between field crews. Because Ohio EPA has instituted biocriteria in their legal water quality
9
-------
regulations, collection of a sample using protocols that reduce sampling bias to a minimum and that
standardize sampling effort are mandatory. This is a strong argument for using electrofishing gear
exclusively when young and inexperienced field crews are dispatched to collect fish samples. On the
other hand, the knowledgeable use of seines in combination with electrofishing gear can yield
representative samples of the fish community for use in assessing stream water quality. As with most
sampling gear and techniques, there are advantages and disadvantages to each method.
Advantages of electrofishing:
© Electrofishing allows greater standardization of catch per unit effort.
© Electrofishing requires less time and a reduced level of effort than some
sampling methods.
© Electrofishing is less selective than seining.
© If properly used, electrofishing has minimal effects on fish.
© Electrofishing is appropriate in a variety of habitats.
Disadvantages of electrofishing:
© Sampling efficiency is affected by turbidity and specific conductance.
© Although less selective than seining, electrofishing is size and species selective.
Larger species are more vulnerable to electrofishing.
© Electrofishing is a hazardous operation that may result in injury if proper safety
procedures are not followed.
© Commercial electrofishing units are expensive (thousands of dollars).
Advantages of seining:
© Seines are inexpensive, lightweight, and easily transported to sampling sites.
© Repair and maintenance are easily completed.
© Use of seines is not restricted by water clarity or quality.
© Effects on fish populations are minimal because fish are collected alive and
generally unharmed.
© Seines can be effectively used as large dip nets to scoop small individuals.
10
-------
Disadvantages of seining:
© Previous experience, sampling skill, knowledge of fish habitats and behavior,
and sampling effort are more critical in seining than in the use of any other
sampling gear.
© Sample effort and results for seining are more variable than sampling with
electrofishing units or ichthyocides.
© Use of seines is most effective in small streams.
© Standardization of catch per unit effort to ensure data comparability can be
more difficult.
© Highly mobile fishes often elude seines and nets.
Three types of sampling gear were used to sample fishes in wadeable reaches of the Cahaba
River: minnow seines, dip nets, and a backpack electrofishing unit. Seines served as a complement to
the electroshocker and were used to catch, scoop, or dip stunned fishes and to trap fishes in eddies and
backwaters. At other times, seines were used as the primary gear for capturing fishes in pools, runs,
and along shoals. Standard nylon minnow seines used during this study were 10 feet or 15 feet wide, 6
feet in height, and with a delta weave of 3/16 inch. An electrofishing boat was used at selected sites to
enhance the capture of species.
The electrofishing boat was used to collect deeper pools at four sites. A holding net was tied to
a tree at the downstream end of the sampled reach and served to hold all individuals collected until after
the sample was completed. A 10-minute "pedal down" sample was taken along one of the shorelines
and all individuals kept in a live well inside the boat. All individuals were identified and put in the holding
net. This protocol was repeated midstream and again on the remaining shoreline. After three
electroboat efforts the protocol is repeated starting with the original shoreline until completing an effort
without collecting any new species.
ANALYSIS OF FISH COMMUNITY DATA
Analysis of fisheries data should be done with a clear definition of questions that are to be
answered by the collected information. Ecological field data involving the collection of samples which
represent populations and communities is multi-variable in nature and methods of analysis should reflect
this diversity and variation in both ecological and zoological characteristics. Karr and others (1986)
proposed the IBI as a multi-metric bioassessment tool that has proven to be a worthy and robust
11
-------
measurement of stream biological integrity in relation to water-quality impairment. The IBI has become
a standard analysis technique for fishery bioassessment data and some state agencies, such as Ohio
EPA, have incorporated the measure into enforceable water-quality standards. The accurate
assessment of biological integrity in streams requires a method that integrates biotic responses to water-
quality degradation through evaluating patterns and processes of ecological organization from individual
to ecosystem levels.
The IBI is considered a multi-metric analysis tool because it is an aggregation of 12 biological
measures based on fish community taxonomic and trophic composition and the abundance and health of
fish. The IBI approach is similar to that for evaluating economic systems where many economic
measures are combined to calculate the "index of leading economic indicators" for assessing economic
condition. The multi-metric approach incorporated in the IBI is useful for making objective evaluations
of complex ecological systems such as streams and rivers. Another useful feature of the IBI is that it
incorporates the fisheries biologists "best professional judgement" concerning the health and condition
of the fish community. All too often biologists have failed to accurately and quantitatively express their
valuable natural history observations about the condition of rivers and streams simply because there
was no prescribed protocol for doing so. The IBI incorporates best professional judgement when
creating the quantitative standards for discriminating the condition of fish communities, when selecting
which metrics to use in the IBI analysis based on regional faunal components, and in establishing the
scoring criteria for the metrics.
IBI METRICS
The IBI measures 12 attributes (metrics) of the fish community which are scored 1 (worst), 3,
or 5 (best) compared to values expected from an undisturbed fish community in similar streams of the
same ecoregion (Karr and others, 1986). The sum of the scores for the 12 metrics varies from 12 to
60. Fish communities are assigned to one of five classes based on the final IBI score: excellent, good,
fair, poor, and very poor (table 3). A "no fish" class is used when repeated sampling fails to produce
any fish. Samples falling between the various classes may be assigned to an appropriate class at the
discretion of a qualified fisheries biologist.
The 12 metrics are grouped into three categories: species richness and composition, trophic
composition, and fish abundance and condition. The basic metrics and scoring criteria
12
-------
Table 3. Total IBI scores, integrity classes, and the attributes of those classes
(from Karr and others, 1986).
Total IBI score
(sum of 12 metric ratings)
Biological
integrity
class
Attributes
Karr and others
(1986)
Geological Survey
of Alabama
(O'Neil and
Shepard, 2000)
58-60
>55
Excellent
Comparable to the best situations without human
disturbance; all regionally expected species for the
habitat and stream size, including the most
intolerant forms, are present with a full array of
age (size) classes; balanced trophic structure.
48-52
47-55
Good
Species richness somewhat below expectation,
especially due to the loss of the most intolerant
forms; some species are present with less than
optimal abundances or size distributions; trophic
structure shows some signs of stress.
40-44
38-46
Fair
Signs of additional deterioration include loss of
intolerant forms, fewer species, highly skewed
trophic structure (for example, increasing
frequency of omnivores and green sunfish or
other tolerant species); older age classes of top
carnivores may be rare.
28-34
26-37
Poor
Dominated by omnivores, tolerant forms, and
habitat generalists; few top carnivores; growth
rates and condition factors commonly depressed;
hybrids and diseased fish often present.
12-22
<25
Very poor
Few fish present, mostly introduced or tolerant
forms; hybrids common; disease, parasites, fin
damage, and other anomalies occur more
frequently.
No fish
Repeated sampling yields no fish.
13
-------
developed by Karr and others (1986) for streams in the Midwest were modified for two streams in
Alabama, the Black Warrior River (O'Neil and Shepard, 2000) and the Cahaba River (Shepard and
others, 1997). The Cahaba metrics and scoring criteria presented in Shepard and others (1997) were
the first ones derived for Alabama streams. Since that time, GSA biologists have acquired additional
knowledge about how the IBI functions and how to improve the original metrics and scoring criteria.
The IBI metrics for this study are consistent with those offered for the Black Warrior River by O'Neil
and Shepard (2000) but scoring criteria were slightly modified to account for the intensive sampling
regime (table 4).
IBI SCORING CRITERIA
Several modifications of original IBI metrics were instituted to account for ecological conditions
encountered in southeastern streams. Number of minnow species (Cyprinidae) was added as a species
richness metric since the cyprinids are diverse and abundant in the Mobile River basin. Proportion of
individuals as green sunfish was replaced with proportion of individuals as sunfish (Lepomis) based on
our observation that several species of sunfish (rarely just green sunfish) frequently dominate the fauna
at disturbed sites many times accounting for more than half of the total specimens collected. Scoring
criteria for the proportion of individuals as top carnivores was lowered from Karr and others (1986)
values based on our experience with the abundance of these fishes in unimpaired stream reaches in
Alabama. The proportion of individuals as omnivores was altered to include omnivores and herbivores
since both of these groups are typically dominant at disturbed sites. Proportion of individuals as hybrids
was dropped from our list of IBI metrics because hybrids are infrequently encountered in our sampling.
The criteria proposed by Karr and others (1986) for scoring IBI metrics must usually be
adjusted for stream size and regional variation in fish species diversity and community composition.
Several of the IBI metrics that measure species richness and composition are strongly related to stream
size with larger streams supporting more species. This relationship is in many cases drainage specific
and generally holds true up to a certain critical watershed size after which species richness remains
relatively constant, or declines. Regional differences in faunal composition are strongly apparent in
Alabama, with distributions of many species highly correlated with physiography and (or) specific
drainage basins (Mettee and others, 1996).
14
-------
Table 4. Preliminary IBI metric scoring criteria for the Cahaba River system
upstream of Centreville.
Category
Scoring Criteria
Metric
Watershed Size
5
3
1
<10 mi2
> 13
7-13
<7
10-250 mi2
> 18
9-18
< 9
1. Number of fish species
> 250 mi2
> 22
15-22
< 15
<10 mi2
> 2
1-2
0
10-250 mi2
> 3
2-3
<2
2. Number of darter species
> 250 mi2
> 5
3-5
< 3
<10 mi2
> 5
3-5
< 3
10-250 mi2
> 7
3-7
< 3
3. Number of minnow species
> 250 mi2
> 10
5-10
< 5
o
I/)
o
Q.
<10 mi2
> 2
1-2
0
E
o
O
-o
c
ro
4. Number of sunfish species
10-250 mi2
> 250 mi2
> 3
> 4
1-3
2-4
0
< 2
>.
I/)
2
1-2
0
Q
w
10-250 mi2
> 2
1-2
0
250 mi2
> 4
2-4
< 2
CO
6. Number of intolerant species
<500 mi2
> 2
1-2
0
>500 mi2
> 3
1-3
0
7. Proportion as sunfishes
all sizes
< 10%
10-30%
> 30%
C
o
8. Proportion as omnivores and herbivores
all sizes
< 5
5-20%
> 20%
Trophic
Composit
9. Proportion as insectivorous cyprinids
all sizes
> 45%
20-45%
< 20%
10. Proportion as top carnivores
all sizes
> 2%
0.5-2%
<.5%
<100 mi2
> 350
150-350
< 150
0
11. Number collected per hour
>100 mi2
>650
150-650
<150 300
c
ro
-o
c
3
-Q
<
12. Percent anomalies
all sizes
< 2%
2-5%
>5%
15
-------
METRIC 1—TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIGENOUS FISH SPECIES
Total number of fish species is one of the best-documented measures of biological condition used to
assess stream water quality. Karr and others (1986) indicated that number of species is a sensitive indicator of
biological condition over the range of stream quality from poor to exceptional with biodiversity generally
declining with increasing environmental disturbance throughout all types of aquatic habitats. The number of fish
species is directly related to drainage area at wadeable sites up to 250 mi2 but appears to level at sites with
drainage areas >250 mi2 in the Cahaba system.
METRIC 2—NUMBER OF DARTER SPECIES
The presence of darter species is indicative of fair to good water quality conditions because they live,
for the most part, in streams and rivers of good quality. Darters are habitat specialists, feed on benthic
invertebrates, and they have complex reproductive behaviors that make them particularly sensitive to
environmental degradation from siltation and those pollutants or activities that degrade stream habitat quality,
particularly benthic habitat quality. Over seventy-five species of darters have been recorded from Alabama
waters (Mettee and others, 1996) ranging from small intermittent headwaters, impounded rivers, swampy
backwaters and oxbows, to flowing streams and rivers. This wide array of preferred habitat types make darters
an excellent, regionally specific, group for assessing stream water-quality conditions.
Ohio EPA (1987b) recommends substituting the proportion of round-bodied suckers (Hypentelium,
Moxostoma, Minytrema, Erimyzon) for this metric when the sample is collected using a boat electrofishing
technique. These species comprise a substantial component of the large river fauna, much as darters do in
smaller streams, and are sensitive to environmental degradation caused by high levels of siltation and poor
chemical water quality. Round-bodied suckers are good indicators of acceptable to good biological condition in
nonwadeable waters and future development of a boat electrofishing IBI protocol should likely incorporate the
round-bodied sucker metric.
16
-------
METRIC 3—NUMBER OF MINNOW SPECIES
The Cyprinidae is a diverse group in the Southeast, particularly in Alabama where Mettee and others
(1996) reported 92 species from the state. As a measure of biodiversity, the family Cyprinidae is unmatched
and contains species from across the spectrum of tolerance to environmental disturbance. This measure is
particularly well suited for Coastal Plain streams that are typically poor in darter species yet rich in minnow
species. Coastal Plain habitats and areas of transition along the Fall Line harbor a complex mix of stream and
aquatic habitats highly influenced by local geologic constraints. Sand and gravel shoals, pools, glides, log snags,
and occasional hard-rock riffles are ideal habitats for supporting minnow populations. Like the percids, minnow
species richness increases with watershed area.
METRIC 4—NUMBER OF SUNFISH SPECIES
This metric is determined by counting the number of sunfish species in the family Centrarchidae, less
Enneacanthus, which are not common throughout the state, and less the black basses, Micropterus. Sunfish
hybrids are not included in this metric. Sunfishes thrive in structurally complex pool habitats and very often in
habitats highly disturbed by sediment deposition and eroded shorelines. This metric is a measure of degradation
which alters habitat complexity of pools, changes food web structure components, and physically compromises
habitat quality.
O'Neil and Shepard (2000) indicated the number of sunfish species was equally high in headwater
reaches and in larger streams of a river system. In contrast, the Ohio EPA (1987b) found that in headwater
reaches, usually <20 mi2 in area, the number of sunfish species was generally low, only one or two species.
They attributed this condition to poor pool habitat rather than poor stream quality overall. Ohio EPA replaces
the sunfish species metric with a number of headwater species metric, where headwater species are those
permanent residents of small creeks that indicate stable habitat quality and low environmental stress. The
headwater species metric may be applicable to other river systems in Alabama where sunfish diversity is poor.
METRIC 5—NUMBER OF SUCKER SPECIES
All species of the family Catostomidae are included in this metric. Sucker diversity is high in Alabama,
represented by 23 species, but only a few of these such as Erimyzon oblongus, Hypentelium etowanum,
Minytrema melanops, Moxostoma duquesnei, M. erythrurum, and M. poecilurum are found with regularity
in wadeable streams. Many sucker species enter streams to spawn and the young may linger in these areas until
17
-------
they reach a certain age or size before migrating back to larger waters. Suckers occur in all types of aquatic
habitats and are a major portion of the total catch and biomass in many boat electrofishing samples. Suckers
are generally intolerant of severe water-quality degradation and are a moderately sensitive measure of
environmental quality. Suckers also have much longer life spans, compared to minnows and darters, and
thereby provide a longer term assessment of past and current environmental conditions. Ohio EPA (1987b)
reported that sucker diversity declined dramatically in headwater reaches and they substituted the number of
minnow species for sucker species in this metric.
METRIC 6—NUMBER OF INTOLERANT SPECIES
The number of intolerant species is included as a metric in the IBI to distinguish those stream reaches of
the highest quality. Many Alabama species are intolerant of a wide range of environmental changes from habitat
disturbance to water quality degradation, but only those species that usually disappear first and are sensitive to
a wide spectrum of environmental stress should be considered intolerant for purposes of the IBI. Species
considered intolerant may be widespread in distribution, geographically restricted or infrequently captured,
rarely captured, or possibly extirpated. Although endangered or threatened species are generally included in the
list of intolerant species they should not automatically be considered so because their low numbers may be due
to zoogeographic factors, such as relict or isolated populations, and not necessarily due to environmental stress.
If many species are included as intolerants then the usefulness of this metric declines (Karr, 1981)
because intolerants are only found in good to excellent stream conditions. Karr recommended that the number
of intolerants be restricted to 5 to 10 percent of species that are most susceptible to major types of degradation
such as siltation, restricted flow, low dissolved oxygen, and toxic chemicals. Until a sufficient data base of
systematically collected samples has been assembled, determining intolerance for Alabama fish species will
remain a matter of best professional judgement supplemented by the literature and application of the IBI in
other areas. Species considered intolerant for the purposes of this investigation were Notropis chrosomus, N.
cahabae, Ambloplites ariommus, Ammocrypta spp., Crystallaria asprella, Etheostoma ramseyi, E.
jordani, Percina aurolineata, and P. brevicauda.
METRIC 7—PROPORTION OF SUNFISH SPECIES
This metric is a modification of Karr's original green sunfish proportion metric. It is designed to detect
fish community trophic changes in the lower ranges of the IBI from fair to poor quality. Green sunfish are
18
-------
dominant at only the most impaired, usually nutrient enriched, stream reaches in Alabama. It has been our
experience that several species of sunfishes can dominate the fauna in severely disturbed streams in Alabama,
sometimes exceeding 50 percent of the abundance, and that limiting this metric to green sunfish would limit the
value of this metric. Only species in the genus Lepomis are considered in the calculation.
METRIC 8—PROPORTION AS OMNIVORES AND HERBIVORES
Omnivores are defined as species that ingest substantial quantities of plant and animal matter, including
detritus, and have the ability to utilize both food sources as usually indicated by a long and convoluted gut
cavity. As the food base changes due to environmental degradation the predictability of specific food items
becomes less reliable and the opportunistic feeding habits of omnivores allow this group to compete more
successfully. We have also included herbivores in this metric to assess the presence of Campostoma and
Hybognathus which can become dominant in stressed streams. Species considered omnivores and herbivores
for this metric are stonerollers, Pimephales spp., Hybognathus spp., goldfish, carp, grass carp, Dorosoma
spp., Carpiodes spp., and mosquitofish.
METRIC 9—PROPORTION AS INSECTIVOROUS CYPRINIDS
Insectivorous cyprinids are a dominant trophic group in southeastern streams and their abundance
generally declines with increasing environmental stress. This is thought to be in response to an altered insect
food supply which is in turn altered by changes in water quality, energy sources, and habitat (Karr, 1981).
Thus, when the community becomes dominated by a few insect taxa, specialized insectivorous fishes will be
replaced by omnivores more suited to exploit the new food base.
19
-------
METRIC 10—PROPORTION AS TOP CARNIVORES
The top carnivore metric was designed to measure biological integrity in the upper functional levels of
the fish community. To be considered a top carnivore a species has to consume primarily other fish,
vertebrates, or crayfish, while species that consume other items as well as fish are excluded from the list. Top
carnivores include all black bass, temperate bass, crappie, rock bass, pickerel, walleye, bowfins, and gar
species. The presence of top carnivores indicates a healthy and trophically diverse fish community. The criteria
adopted for the Cahaba were lowered to about half of those proposed by Karr and others (1986).
METRIC 11—NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS COLLECTED PER HOUR
This metric evaluates population abundance and is expressed as catch per hour of sampling effort
(Karr, 1981). Sites in poor biological condition are expected to have fewer individuals than higher quality sites,
or in cases of enrichment more individuals than normally expected. The Cahaba River is a very productive
system for fish abundance and this metric has been modified to partition these differences by watershed size.
Ohio EPA (1987b) has modified this metric to individuals per unit of sampling effort less tolerant species. Their
rationale is that under some environmental changes, such as canopy removal along with excess nullification,
some fishes, particularly tolerant species such as Pimephales, will increase in abundance. They also presented
quantitative data illustrating reduced variability in the scoring of this metric when tolerant species were removed.
This modification has significant merit and should be evaluated as the IBI protocol is refined for Alabama.
METRIC 12—PROPORTION WITH DISEASE, DEFORMITIES,
LESIONS, AND TUMORS (PERCENT ANOMALIES)
Fish health is a direct concern of the public. Fish populations with excessive occurrence of disease and
skin anomalies generally indicates high environmental stress resulting in poor fish health. Skin anomalies are
caused by infections due to bacteria, viruses, fungus, and parasites, and exposure to toxic chemicals. Skin
anomalies are most common downstream of municipal and industrial discharges and areas subject to stress
from combined sewer overflows, urban runoff, and high temperature. Ohio EPA also reported this metric was a
good indicator of subacute toxic stress when the community structure metrics indicated improved or good
conditions.
20
-------
PROCEDURE FOR CALCULATING IBI
Calculation and interpretation of IBI values is a straightforward eight-step hierarchical process:
-Develop expectation criteria for each IBI metric
-Tabulate numbers and skin anomalies for each species
-Assign species to trophic guilds
-Assign tolerance categories to each species
-Calculate metric values and record on the IBI calculation form
-Rate each IBI metric according to the scoring criteria (table 4)
-Calculate total IBI score
-Convert IBI score to a biological integrity class (table 3)
The expectation criteria for each metric have been derived and presented in table 4. The second step is
conducted in either the laboratory or field and involves sorting and identifying individuals to species, counting
(and weighing) individuals, determining skin anomalies, and recording this data on an appropriate data form.
The third and fourth steps are accomplished by comparing regional species lists to information presented in
Mettee and others (1996) and O'Neil and Shepard (2000) which tabulates basic ecological and distributional
data for Alabama freshwater fishes. Step five requires that each IBI metric is correctly calculated and added to
the IBI calculation form. Step 6 involves rating the metric values according to criteria in table 4, while step
seven is simply adding the 12 metric scores to yield a total IBI score. The final step involves converting the total
IBI score to a biological condition class according to the criteria listed in table 3.
21
-------
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
SPECIES DIVERSITY AND CATCH
Fish sampling in the Cahaba River yielded a total of 9,020 individuals in 62 species and 11 families
(table 5, appendix). Wade samples yielded 53 species, while 28 species were collected with the boat
electrofishing unit. The most diverse wading site in the main river channel was River Bend (site 2) with 30
species followed by Centreville (site 1) with 28 species. Sites with the poorest species diversity were Camp
Coleman (site 10) with 13 species and Altadena (site 7) with 16 species. The intensive sampling effort
undertaken for this investigation resulted in a higher catch of species compared to collections made at the same
sites in years past (table 6).
It could possibly be inferred from table 6, although falsely, that fish species diversity in the Cahaba
River is actually increasing! This is not the case, however, and table 6 highlights the importance of applying a
thorough and rigorous sampling technique when conducting faunal surveys or bioassessments. Further, if the
boat electrofishing data are added to the results in table 6, this concept of adequate sampling becomes even
more apparent. Thirteen additional species were added to site 1 bringing the total to 41 species, 10 additional
species were added to site 3 for a total of 32 species, two species were added to site 4 for a total of 25
species, and five species were added to site 12 for a total of 35 species.
The maximum fish species diversity to be expected at each site was estimated using three sources and
(or) techniques (table 7). One technique was to compile collection records and develop species lists. Pierson
and others (1989) published a study of Cahaba River fishes and compiled records of 506 samples taken at 169
locations in the system through 1985. Data from that study was used to approximate the expected maximum
species diversity at sampling sites examined during this study.
Another estimate of maximum species diversity was made by combining the data in Pierson and others
(1989) with a series of fish biomonitoring samples taken at several sites in the Cahaba by Geological Survey of
Alabama biologists from 1989-94 (Shepard and others, 1997), and the inclusion of data collected during this
study. The repetitive and systematic sampling approach used in these investigations resulted in the addition of
several species to the total species list for a given site over that reported by Pierson and others (1989)(table 7).
22
-------
Table 5. Collection information for fish samples taken in the Cahaba River system, 2002.
Wading samples
Boat electrofishing samples
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
3
4
12
Centrevill
e
River
Bend
Piper
Boothton
Helena
Bains
Bridge
Altadena
Caldwell
Mill
Grants
Mill
Camp
Coleman
I-59
Little
Cahaba
Centreville
Piper
Boothton
Little
Cahaba
Date of collection
25 Jun 02
24 Jun
02
26 Jun
02
26 Jun
02
27 Jun
02
27 Jun
02
1 Aug 02
1 Aug 02
2 Aug 02
2 Aug 02
2 Aug 02
25 Jun
02
25Jun 02
26JunO
2
26 Jun
02
25Jun02
Sampling time (min)
250
240
135
130
110
90
95
110
95
55
70
125
50
60
30
50
Sampling
efforts
Pools
9
20
10
4
14
10
16
0
9
3
3
2
5
6
3
5
Riffles
22
19
15
6
24
5
0
6
12
1
6
1
-
-
-
-
Runs
37
16
14
35
29
17
2
16
17
17
10
31
-
-
-
-
Shorelines
2
2
3
2
2
6
4
3
2
2
2
2
-
-
-
—
Total
70
57
42
47
69
38
22
25
40
23
21
36
5
6
3
5
Area
sampled
(ft2)
Pools
1,800
4,020
1,600
160
2,240
1,520
8,145
0
3,170
480
560
320
-
-
-
-
Riffles
4,105
3,220
1,800
720
2,880
600
0
1,160
1,960
240
760
160
-
-
-
-
Runs
5,925
2,920
2,240
4,200
3,480
2,280
320
2,720
3,280
3,360
1,880
4,960
-
-
-
-
Shorelines
600
600
900
600
600
1,800
1,200
800
600
600
600
600
-
-
-
-
Total
12,430
10,760
6,540
5,680
9,200
6,200
9,665
4,680
9,010
4,680
3,800
5,440
-
-
-
-
Total species
28
30
22
23
25
21
16
26
25
13
20
30
20
18
9
14
Total individuals
1,288
1,255
709
792
991
235
297
812
357
497
643
725
185
99
26
109
Catch per hour
309
314
315
366
541
157
188
443
225
542
551
348
222
99
52
131
Catch per 1,000 sq ft
104
117
108
139
108
38
31
174
40
106
169
133
-
-
-
-
23
-------
Table 6. Species diversity comparisons between this study and historical fish samples
in the Cahaba River system.
Station
Number of species (sample size)
2002
1994"
1992-93"
1989-90"
1982-85"
wade
boat
total
1
Cahaba River-Centreville
28
20
41
20
-
15-21 (7)
16
2
Cahaba River-Riverbend
30
-
30
25
-
15-24 (7)
24
3
Cahaba River-Piper
22
18
32
16
-
-
17-27 (2)
4
Cahaba River-Boothton
23
9
25
16
-
-
-
5
Cahaba River-Helena
25
-
25
21
8-14 (5)
14-17 (4)
14
6
Cahaba River-Bains Bridge
21
-
21
14
8-12 (3)
-
17
7
Cahaba River- near Altadena
16
-
16
7
1-17 (4)
-
-
8
Cahaba River-Caldwell Mill Road
26
-
26
22
18-19 (2)
-
25
9
Cahaba River-Grants Mill Road
25
-
25
15
-
-
15-22 (2)
10
Cahaba River-Camp Coleman
13
-
13
11
9-13 (5)
-
-
11
Cahaba River-I 59
20
-
20
12
11-15 (3)
-
15
12
Little Cahaba River
30
14
35
24
16-22 (7)
10-22
(12)
-
Month(s) of collection(s)
Jun-Aug
May
Apr-Sep
Apr-Sep
Apr-Sep
a- data from Shepard and others (1997)
k- data courtesy of J. Malcolm Pierson
24
-------
Table 7. Predictions of maximum species diversity for Cahaba River main channel sites.
Station
Watershed
area ( mi2)
Maximum species diversity ( Srax)
Pierson and
others (1989)
All data
through 20021
Model
prediction2
1
Cahaba River-Centreville
1,027
74
82
63
2
Cahaba River-River Bend
919
76
82
61
3
Cahaba River-Piper
593
32
44
53
4
Cahaba River-Boothton
367
40
42
46
5
Cahaba River-Helena
335
41
47
45
6
Cahaba River-Bains Bridge
230
17
29
40
7
Cahaba River- near Altadena
207
29
35
39
8
Cahaba River-Caldwell Mill Road
200
25
39
39
9
Cahaba River-Grants Mill Road
129
22
30
34
10
Cahaba River-Camp Coleman
31
13
22
22
11
Cahaba River-I 59
18
15
25
19
1- includes all species records in Pierson and others (1989), Shepard and others (1997),
and species records from this study.
2-according to the model S = 8.06/4 0296 applicable only to main channel.
25
-------
Species diversity is complexly correlated with a variety of environmental factors such as geology,
climate, latitude, habitat, and environmental degradation. MacArthur and Wilson (1967) demonstrated that land
area was a predictor of species diversity using faunal survey data collected on Pacific islands. Their work
concerning island biogeography was used as a basis for a third method to predict maximum species diversity. A
species-area relationship for the Cahaba River main channel is presented in figure 1. Number of species was
taken from table 7 (all data through 2002) and area was equated to watershed area upstream of the sampling
site (table 1). The relationship between species diversity and area is described by the relationship:
S=CAZ
where S is species diversity, C is a fitted constant that varies among faunal groups, A is island area (watershed
area in mi2), and z is a constant which falls generally between 0.20 and 0.35 (MacArthur and Wilson, 1967).
The constants were estimated using least squares linear regression (fig. 1) to yield an equation used to model
maximum species diversity (Smax) for the Cahaba River main channel:
Smax = 8.1440'296
StmK was calculated for all main channel sites using the above formula and the results presented in table
7. Estimates of Smax can be a useful frame of reference for comparison with collection data, either single or
multiple samples. Species catch based on limited collection data (S) rarely approaches »Smax, but the proportion
of S to Smax can be used in a qualitative way to assess the biological integrity of a site relative to species
diversity only, with little consideration of ecological function. A plot of S Smax ratio versus watershed area (fig.
2) revealed a relationship between these two variables. In smaller streams it is much easier to collect most, if
not all, of the species occupying the stream in a single sample. Species catch in larger streams, on the other
hand, rarely approaches »Smax; in fact, it will be significantly below this number. In figure 2 a line was fitted by
hand to those sites in the main channel that had high species diversity (sites 1, 2, 8, 9, and 11), were considered
to have good biological condition, and that represented the maximum S / Srnax ratio to be expected in the main
channel of the Cahaba. Sites falling below this line were interpreted to be under-saturated with species. Sites 7
and 10 were considered substantially under-saturated while sites 3, 4, 5, and 6 were considered moderately
under-saturated relative to
26
-------
100
I
trt
S£
"o
g.
vs
£
£
=j
' —' ' ' ' I 1 ¦
10 100 1.000 10,000
Watershed area -A (mP)
Figure 1 Spectes-area relationship for (he upper Cahaba River,
11
s = s.06/io 200
-
V*11
^ S>t» riumbcf
-
/
/
/'
¦
*10 5* \
e ~ x 2
i 4 1>X
1Q0 1,000 10,000
Watershed area (mi2)
Figure 2. Relationship between the S/Sma* ratio and watershed area for sites In the
upper Cahaba River,
27
-------
species diversity. Results of this approach for discriminating sites with poor species diversity correspond with
known habitat and(or) water quality degradation in the system (Shepard and others, 1997).
It is important to note that species diversity should not be used as the only indicator of biological
integrity while conducting biological assessments. Species diversity is related to biological integrity, but diversity
numbers alone can sometimes be misleading when interpreted out of context, and other components of
biological integrity should always be considered together with species diversity.
Another useful parameter for analyzing collection data is catch, or yield per unit of sampling effort.
Samples collected during this study allowed catch to be calculated in two ways: catch per unit time (hour) and
catch per unit area (1,000 ft2) (fig. 3). Catch rates are highly specific to sampling technique, sampling gear, and
the effectiveness of the field crew in making the collection. Using the GSA sampling technique, "normal" catch
rates generally fall in the range of 250 to 350 individuals per hour. Rates below this may indicate fish
populations with less-than-normal productivity, as is the case at sites 6, 7, and 9, while rates over this range
may indicate over productivity, as observed at sites 5, 8, 10, and 11. Catch rates per unit area appeard to
confirm this observation with sites 6, 7, and 9 producing fewer fish while sites 8 and 11 appeared over
productive.
The two measures of catch were combined into a single catch index (CI) calculated as follows:
CI=N • (1,000 ft21 a) » (60 minutes / hr) • (1 / t)
CI=(N • 60,000) / (a • t)
CI = 60,000# / at
where N is the total number of individuals collected in the sample, a is the total area sampled in square feet, and
l is sample time measured in minutes. The factor 60,000 is for converting to a standard basis of 1,000 ft2 and a
unit time of one hour. The dimensions of this index are,
catch (numbers of individuals) / 1,000 ft2 • hr
When CI was plotted against watershed area (fig. 3), a useful relationship resulted for discriminating sites with a
low catch rate.
28
-------
200
150
100
50
~ Ct = 222 - 27.5
-------
INDEX OF BIOTIC INTEGRITY
IBI calculations (table 8) indicate good biotic condition at sites 1 (Centreville), 2 (River Bend), 8
(Caldwell Mill), 9 (Grants Mill), 11 (Interstate 59), and 12 (Little Cahaba); fair condition at sites 3 (Piper), 4
(Boothton), 5 (Helena) and 6 (Bains Bridge); and poor condition at sites 7 (Altadena) and 10 (Camp
Coleman). These results compare favorably with IBI data presented in Shepard and others (1997). Although
IBI scores for this study were generally higher than scores reported in that study due to a more intensive
sampling effort in 2002, a similar pattern of IBI variation in the Cahaba main channel was apparent for both
studies — fair to good scores at sites 1 and 2, poor to fair scores at sites 3 through 7, fair to good scores at
sites 8 and 9, poor to fair scores at site 10, and fair to good scores at site 11. Site 12 (Little Cahaba River) had
good scores for both studies.
SITE DESCRIPTIONS
SITE 1 - CAHABA RIVER AT CENTREVILLE
Site 1 was sampled at the new Alternate U.S. Hwy. 82 bridge approximately 1 mile upstream of the
old U.S. Hwy. 82 bridge in Centreville. The area sampled was a large riffle-run complex about 200 feet wide
immediately upstream of the bridge. Substrate in the riffles was predominatly cobble, large gravel, and boulders
while the runs were cobble, gravel, and some sand in lower velocity runs. Extensive beds of Justicia covered
most of the shoal area. Pools near the shoreline had a sand and gravel substrate often mixed with debris snags
and occasional boulders. Sampling time for the wading effort was 250 minutes, 70 efforts were made, and
12,430 ft2 of stream was sampled (table 5). The electroboat sample was taken downstream of the old U.S.
Hwy. 82 bridge approximately 500 feet. Five efforts were made with the electroboat before species were
depleted. Twenty-eight species were collected during the wade samples and 13 additional species were
collected with the electroboat for a total of 41 species at this site. More species were collected during the
wading effort compared to a 1994 sample and a series of samples collected inl989-90 (table 6). A wade
sample from the early 1980s yielded only 16 species.
The largescale stoneroller, Campostoma oligolepis, was the most common species at 27.5 percent
followed by the blacktail shiner, Cyprinella venusta, at 17.9 percent, the Alabama shiner
30
-------
Table 8. IBI scores for 12 sites in the Cahaba River system, 2002.
IBI metric
1-Centreville
2-River Bend
3-Piper
4-Boothton
5-Helena
6-Bains Bridge
value
score
value
score
value
score
value
score
value
score
value
score
1
Total native species
28
5
30
5
22
3
23
5
25
5
21
5
2
Total darter species
6
5
6
5
5
3
6
5
6
5
6
5
3
Total minnow species
11
5
11
5
7
3
6
3
6
3
5
3
4
Total sunfish species
3
3
4
3
2
3
4
3
4
3
5
5
5
Total sucker species
4
3
4
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
5
6
Intolerant species
4
5
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
7
Percent sunfish
2.5
5
4
5
0.8
5
4.7
5
2.6
5
48.1
1
8
Percent omnivores and
herbivo res
29.2
1
13.9
3
24.1
1
5.4
3
20.4
1
3
5
9
Percent insectivorous cyprinids
37.5
3
61.6
5
53.7
5
54.5
5
41
3
22.2
3
10
Percent top carnivores
2.1
5
2.8
5
3.1
5
1.6
3
1
3
1.7
3
11
Catch per hour
309
3
314
3
315
3
366
3
541
3
157
3
12
Percent anomalies
0
5
0
5
0
5
0
5
0
5
0
5
IBI score
-
48
-
50
-
42
-
46
-
42
-
46
Biological condition
good
good
fair
fair
fair
fair
31
-------
Table 8. IBI scores for 12 sites in the Cahaba River system, 2002 - Continued
IBI metric
7-Altadena
8-Caldwell Mill
9-Grants Mill
10-Camp Coleman
11-Interstate 59
12- Little Cahaba
value
score
value
score
value
score
value
score
value
score
value
score
1
Total native species
16
3
25
5
25
5
13
3
20
5
30
5
2
Total darter species
1
1
6
5
5
5
1
1
4
5
7
5
3
Total minnow species
2
1
6
3
6
3
5
3
6
3
9
5
4
Total sunfish species
5
5
7
5
5
5
3
3
4
5
4
5
5
Total sucker species
4
5
3
5
3
5
2
3
3
5
3
5
6
Intolerant species
0
1
2
3
1
3
0
1
2
3
4
5
7
Percent sunfish
59.9
1
21.6
3
15.4
3
3.8
5
18.8
3
6
5
8
Percent omnivores and
herbivo res
0
5
13.8
3
5.6
3
60.8
1
26.4
1
17.9
3
9
Percent insectivorous cyprinids
19.5
1
37.7
3
48.8
5
20.3
3
30.5
3
44
3
10
Percent top carnivores
2.7
5
4.6
5
2.5
5
1.2
3
3.6
5
2.9
5
11
Catch per hour
188
3
443
3
225
3
542
5
551
5
348
3
12
Percent anomalies
0
5
0
5
0
5
0
5
0
5
0
5
IBI score
-
36
-
48
-
50
-
36
-
48
-
54
Biological condition
poor
good
good
poor
good
good
32
-------
at 7.7 percent, the banded sculpin, Cottus carolinae, at 6.9 percent, and the rock darter, Etheostoma
rupestre, at 6.5 percent. Two individuals of the endangered Cahaba shiner, Notropis cahabae, and 17
individuals of the threatened goldline darter, Percina aurolineata, were found at this site. Several goldline
darters were young-of-year indicating a successful spawn in the spring. Two species considered intolerant, the
shadow bass, Ambloplites ariommus, and the greenbreast darter, Etheostoma jordani, were also found.
The IBI score (48) resulted in a good ranking relative to overall biological condition (table 8). Percent
omnivores and herbivores was high, and scored low, indicating that productivity may be an issue at this site.
Sunfish and sucker diversity were average along with percent insectivorous cyprinids and catch per hour, while
all other metrics scored 5.
SITE 2 - CAHABA RTVER AT RIVER BEND
Site 2 was sampled at a large shoal just downstream of the Bibb Co. Hwy. 26 bridge. Pools were a
more common feature at this site and substrate was generally a mixture of sand and silt with some gravel. Riffles
had a cobble and gravel substrate while runs had cobble, gravel, and sand. Sampling time for the wading effort
was 240 minutes, 57 efforts were made, and 10,760 ft2 of stream was sampled (table 5). An electroboat
sample was not collected at this site because of difficult boat launching access. Thirty species were collected in
2002 compared to 25 species in 1994 and 24 species from a wade sample in the early 1980s (table 6).
The most common species at site 2 was the blacktail shiner at 21.4 percent, followed by the silverstripe
shiner, Notropis stilbius, at 16.8 percent, the largescale stoneroller at 10.8 percent, the clear chub, Hybopsis
winchelli, at 7.3 percent, and the rock darter at 7.2 percent. Eight individuals of the goldline darter were found
while the Cahaba shiner was not collected at this site, and two intolerant species, the shadow bass and
greenbreast darter, were collected. The IBI score (50) ranked as good biological condition and was the highest
IBI score of all main channel sites sampled. All metrics scored either average (3) or exceptional (5).
SITE 3 - CAHABA RIVER AT PIPER
The Piper site was sampled approximately 1 mile downstream of the Bibb Co. Hwy. 24 bridge. Both a
33
-------
wading sample and electroboat sample were made at this site. The wading effort was made in a large shoal
dominated by bedrock outcrops. Cracked and eroded bedrock created runs throughout the shoal, whereas
cobble and rubble riffles were found along both shorelines and at the foot of the shoal. Cahaba Lilies were very
common throughout the sampled area. Time for the wading effort was 135 minutes, 42 efforts were made, and
6,540 ft2 of stream was sampled (table 5). Just upstream of the shoal area was a long pool in which the
electroboat sample was made. Six efforts were required in the pool to deplete species. Twenty-two species
were collected during the wading effort and 18 during the electroboat effort for a total of 32 species at this site.
Sixteen species were collected in 1994 and two wade samples made in the early 1980s yielded 17 and 27
species (table 6).
The silverstripe shiner was the most common species at 23.7 percent followed by the largescale
stoneroller at 23.3 percent, the Alabama shiner at 20 percent, the rock darter at 8.3 percent, and the blacktail
shiner at 7.2 percent. Eight individuals of the goldline darter were found in the riffle area on the left shoreline and
the greenbreast darter was collected at this site. The IBI score (42) ranked this site as only fair biological
condition. Percent omnivores and herbivores was high scoring this metric low while all of the diversity metrics
scored only average. Species diversity at site 3 was lower than expected resulting, in part, in a lower IBI
score. The Piper site is also in a zone of enhanced attached and planktonic algae growth and the habitat
differences between it and sites 1 and 2 are very distinct.
SITE 4 - CAHABA RIVER AT BOOTHTON
The Boothton site is located where a concrete slab was constructed years ago over the river for hauling
coal. The wading effort was made downstream of the slab in a run-riffle shoal complex. Runs were the
dominant habitat feature and were either cobble, bedrock, or a bedrock-cobble mix. Riffles, when found, were
typically cobble and rubble mixed with some gravel and sand. A few pools were found near the shoal head with
sand-covered bedrock and some small rubble. Time for the wading effort was 130 minutes, 47 efforts were
made, and 5,680 ft2 of stream was sampled (table 5). The electroboat sample was made upstream of the slab
and only three efforts were completed before sampling had to be stopped due to the presence of swimmers in
the sample area. Twenty-three species were collected during the wading effort and nine species during the
34
-------
electroboat effort for a total of 25 species. Sixteen species were collected during a wade sample in 1994 (table
6).
The silverstripe shiner was the most abundant species collected at 38.5 percent followed by the rock
darter at 20.1 percent, the Alabama shiner at 8.3 percent, the riffle minnow, Phenacobius catostomus, at 6.2
percent, and the largescale stoneroller at 5.4 percent. Two intolerant species were found at the Boothton site,
the greenbreast darter and the coal darter, Percina brevicauda. The IBI score (46) ranked this site as fair
biological condition. All metrics scored either average or exceptional and the reason for the fair score was the
average scores for minnow, sunfish, and sucker diversity, and average scores for catch and top carnivore
abundance. Interestingly, the percent omnivore and herbivore metric was low at 5.4 percent, scoring this metric
in the average range.
SITE 5 - CAHAB A RTVER AT HELENA
Site 5 was located just downstream of the Shelby Co. Hwy. 52 bridge about 300 feet in a large riffle-
run shoal complex. Riffles and runs were about equally proportioned throughout the shoal with riffles of
bedrock and cobble while runs had a substrate of gravel, cobble, and rubble. Justicia beds were common over
the exposed shoal areas. Several pool efforts were also made downstream of the shoal and the pools had a
substrate of sand mixed with silt and occasional detritus. Time for the wading effort was 110 minutes, 69 efforts
were made, and 9,200 ft2 of stream was sampled (table 5). Twenty-five species were collected in 2002
compared to 21 species in 1995, 8-14 species in 1992-93, 14-17 species in 1989-90, and 14 species in the
early 1980s (table 6).
Three species were common at this site: the silverstripe shiner at 35.7 percent, the rock darter at 24.8
percent, and the largescale stoneroller at 20.2 percent, followed by fewer numbers of the blackbanded darter
at 3.9 percent and the Alabama shiner at 3.2 percent. Three intolerant species were found: the shadow bass,
greenbreast darter, and coal darter. Biological condition was only fair at this site with a score of 42 (table 8).
Total species and darter species scored exceptional while the other diversity metrics scored only average. Total
omnivores and herbivores was high resulting in a poor score for this metric while catch scored average.
SITE 6 - CAHAB A RIVER AT BAINS BRIDGE
35
-------
This site was sampled about 300 feet upstream and about 500 feet downstream of the bridge. The only
riffle area was under the bridge and it had a substrate of limestone rip rap, sand, and gravel. Site 6 was
predominantly bedrock and sand pools upstream with sand pools and gravel-sand runs downstream. Banks
were heavily eroded but extensive trees and tree limb cover were present along both shorelines. Sampling time
was 90 minutes, 38 efforts were made, and 6,200 ft2 of stream was sampled (table 5). Twenty-one species
were collected in 2002 compared to 14 species in 1994, 8 to 12 species in 1992-93, and 17 species in one
wade collection from the early 1980s (table 6). Catch per hour (157) was the lowest, while catch per 1,000 ft2
(38) was among the lowest of all main channel sites sampled.
Habitat at this site was very productive of sunfishes with the longear sunfish, Lepomis megalotis, most
common at 31.5 percent followed by the silverstripe shiner at 16.2 percent, the bluegill at 14.9 percent, the
blackbanded darter at 6.4 percent, and the golden redhorse at 5.5 percent. Two species considered intolerant
were found: the shadow bass and the coal darter. The IBI score (46) ranked this site as fair biological
condition. All diversity metrics scored 5 with the exception of minnow species which was average. Percent
sunfish was high at 48.1 resulting in a poor score for this metric, while percent omnivores and herbivores was
low at 3 percent resulting in an exceptional score for this metric.
36
-------
SITE 7 - CAHABA RTVER NEAR ALTADENA
Site 7 was located adjacent to a commercial sod farm just over 2 miles downstream of site 8, Caldwell
Mill. Habitat was substantially impaired by bedload deposits of sand and silt mixed with some gravel and
detritus. Riffle zones were present but they were covered with bedload material. The sampled reach was
basically a long pool with varying depths. Banks were eroded and, like the Bains Bridge site, shorelines had
extensive tree snags and limbs as instream cover. Sampling time was 95 minutes, 22 efforts were completed,
and 9,665 ft2 of stream was sampled (table 5). Sixteen species were collected at this site in 2002 with only
seven taken in 1994. Species diversity of four wade samples made in 1992-93 ranged from 1 to 17 species
(table 6).
The sunfish family was the most commonly found group at this site, with the longear sunfish most
common at 30 percent, followed by the bluegill at 27 percent, the blacktail shiner at 17.9 percent, the
blackspotted topminnow, Fundulus olivaceus, at 7.1 percent, and the golden redhorse at 3.0 percent. No
species considered intolerant were collected at this site. The pooled nature of habitat and structurally complex
shorelines at this site were ideal for supporting sunfish and topminnows. The IBI score was low at 36 ranking
this site as poor in biological condition. Species diversity metric scores for sunfish and suckers were exceptional
while the other diversity scores were average or low. The high percentage of sunfish resulted in a poor score for
this metric while the absence of omnivores and herbivores resulted in an exceptional score for this metric.
SITE 8 - CAHAB A RTVER AT CALDWELL MILL
Site 8 was located between the Shelby Co. Hwy. 29 bridge and an old mill dam approximately 500
feet upstream. Habitat at this site was excellent with bedrock and rubble pools, gravel and cobble riffles, and
gravel runs with Justicia beds along the margins. Sampling time for this site was 110 minutes, 25 sampling
efforts were completed, and 4,680 ft2 of stream was sampled (table 5). Twenty-six species were collected in
2002 compared to 22 species in 1994, 18 and 19 species during two samples in 1992-93, and 25 species
during one wade collection in the early 1980s (table 6). Catch per hour was among the highest at 443 while
catch per 1,000 ft2 was the highest of all main channel sites at 174.
The Alabama shiner was the most common species collected at 26.1 percent followed by the largescale
37
-------
stoneroller at 13.7 percent, the rock darter and the bluegill at 11.6 percent each, and the blacktail shiner and
longear sunfish at 9.1 percent each. Three species considered intolerant were collected at Caldwell Mill: the
shadow bass, greenbreast darter, and Alabama darter, Etheostoma ramseyi. The IBI score (48) indicated
good biological conditions. All diversity metrics scored 5 with the exception of minnow species which scored 3.
Percent sunfish, percent omnivores and herbivores, percent insectivorous cyprinids, and catch all scored 3. The
Caldwell Mill site is an exception to typical biological conditions in this middle reach of the Cahaba. The small
mill dam acts as an upstream sediment trap holding bedload material. As such, the habitat structure and quality
downstream is good to excellent. Additionally, the dam is an upstream barrier to fish migrations resulting in a
region where fishes concentrate throughout the year. This is observed in the high catch rates, higher species
diversity compared to nearby downstream sites, occurrence of unusual species like grass carp, and the high
occurrence of predators (three Micropterus bass species) utilizing the high density of forage.
38
-------
SITE 9 - CAHABA RTVER AT GRANTS MILL
The stream reach sampled at Grants Mill extended from the Jefferson Co. Hwy. 143 bridge upstream
for 600 feet. The downstream half of the sampled reach was a riffle-run area while a pool-run area was located
in the upstream half. Habitat quality at this site was good to excellent with a complex riffle-run-pool structure
throughout the downstream sampled reach. Riffles varied from deep, swift areas of boulders to shallow, cobble
and bedrock areas. Runs were also found in the deeper parts of the stream with bedrock and boulder
substrate. Shallow runs generally consisted of bedrock covered with varying amounts of sand, gravel, and
cobble. Pool substrate consisted of a thin sand layer over bedrock, or sand mixed with gravel and(or) detritus.
Time of sampling was 95 minutes, 40 efforts were completed, and 9,010 ft2 of stream was sampled (table 5).
Twenty-five species were collected at this site in 2002 compared to 15 species in 1994, and 15 to 22 species
collected in two wade samples taken in the early 1980s (table 6). Catch rate per hour was comparatively low
at 225 while catch per 1,000 ft2 was very low at 40, similar to sites 6 and 7 downstream.
Species with the highest abundance at Grants Mill were the Alabama shiner at 23.5 percent, the
silverstripe shiner at 17.9 percent, the longear sunfish at 11.5 percent, the blackbanded darter at 6.4 percent,
and the blacktail shiner at 6.2 percent. Only one intolerant species was collected at this site, the greenbreast
darter. The IBI score was high at 50 ranking this site in the good biological condition range. All species
diversity metrics scored 5 except for one, minnow diversity, which scored 3. Percent sunfish, omnivores and
herbivores, and catch were all average, while percent insectivorous cyprinids and top carnivores both scored 5.
The low catch rate at this site may be an early indication that biological conditions are changing in response to
deteriorating water-quality conditions upstream of the site.
39
-------
SITE 10 - CAHABA RTVER AT CAMP COLEMAN
The Camp Coleman site was sampled from the Little Cahaba Creek mouth to about 400 feet upstream.
Habitat was limited to bedrock covered with a sediment-algae layer of varying thickness. Shorelines had root
mats, heavy riparian cover in places, and some dead trees. The entire sampled reach was essentially a long
bedrock run, but a few riffle areas were found. Sampling time at this site was 55 minutes, 23 efforts were
completed, and 4,680 ft2 of stream was sampled (table 5). Only 13 species were collected in 2002 compared
to 11 in 1994, and from 9 to 13 species in five samples made in 1992-93 (table 6). Catch rate per hour (542)
was among the highest of all main channel sites, while catch per 1,000 ft2 was also high at 106.
Five species accounted for over 90 percent of the catch at Camp Coleman: the largescale stoneroller at
60.8 percent, silverstripe shiner at 11.5 percent, Alabama hogsucker at 10.1 percent, Alabama shiner at 5.2
percent, and blacktail shiner at 3.2 percent. No intolerant species were found at this site. The IBI scored a 36,
in the poor biological condition range. Poor to average species diversity scores, a low score for percent
omnivores and herbivores, and low numbers of insectivorous cyprinids contribute to the poor biological
condition. This site is downstream of the Trussville wastewater plant and the community of Trussville.
SITE 11 - CAHABA RTVER AT INTERSTATE HWY. 59
The most upstream site sampled on the Cahaba River main channel had good habitat quality with a
predominantly cobble and gravel substrate throughout. Water at this site was very clear due to spring flows in
the area. The channel was narrow, up to 25 feet wide in places, with depths varying from a few inches up to
2.5 feet in some pools below riffles. Distinct riffles and runs were formed throughout the sampled reach
connected by shallow, gravel-cobble pools. Sampling time was 70 minutes, 21 efforts were completed, and
3,800 ft2 of stream was sampled (table 5). Twenty species were collected in 2002 compared to 12 species in
1994, 11 to 15 species in 1992-93, and 15 species in one wade sample in the early 1980s. Catch rate per hour
was the highest of all sites at 551 while catch rate per 1,000 ft2 was near the highest at 169, just slightly less
than the Caldwell Mil site.
The most common species was the largescale stoneroller at 26.4 percent, followed by the silverstripe
shiner at 13.1 percent, the rainbow shiner, Notropis chrosomus, at 10.4 percent, the longear sunfish at 9.3
40
-------
percent, and the Alabama hogsucker at 7.9 percent. Two intolerant species were found at this site, the rainbow
shiner and the Alabama darter. The rainbow shiner is generally only found in abundance in clear streams with
good water quality. The IBI score was 48, ranking this site in the good biological condition range. High
diversity metric scores, high catch rates, and high carnivore percentages contribute to the good score at this
site. Percent omnivores and herbivores was high at this site resulting in a low score for this metric.
41
-------
SITE 12 - LITTLE CAHABA RIVER
The wading sample reach for this site extended downstream of the Bibb Co. Hwy. 65 bridge for
approximately 200 feet and upstream of the bridge for 500 feet. A large island split the stream channel into two
long riffle-run complexes. Riffles in the left channel were deeper with cobble, bedrock, and gravel substrate
while riffles in the right channel were shallower of cobble, rubble, sand, and gravel. Pools were found at the
upstream end of the island and intermittently through the right channel. The Little Cahaba site was sampled for
125 minutes, 36 efforts were completed, and 5,440 ft2 of stream was sampled (table 5). The electrofishing
boat-sampled reach extended from just upstream of the island to about 600 feet upstream. Five efforts were
completed before species catch was depleted. Thirty species were collected in the wade sample and 14
species in the electroboat sample for a site total of 35 species. The wade sample total is compared to 24
species collected in 1994, 16 to 22 species in 1992-93, and 10 to 22 species in 1989-90 (table 6). Total
species diversity was second only to the Centreville site and wading sample species diversity (30) equalled that
for site 2, River Bend.
The silverstripe shiner was most commonly found at 19.2 percent followed by the largescale stoneroller
at 17.8 percent, the tricolor shiner, Cyprinella trichroistia, at 11.0 percent, the Alabama hogsucker at 6.5
percent, and the Alabama darter at 5.5 percent. Two individuals of the goldline darter were collected at this site
along with three species considered intolerant: the shadow bass, the greenbreast darter, and the Alabama
darter. The IBI score (54) was in the good biological condition range and was the highest of all sites sampled.
All metrics scored 5 except the metrics percent omnivores and herbivores, percent insectivorous cyprinids, and
catch which scored 3. The Little Cahaba River site historically has had a diverse fish fauna and this collection
confirms that its biological status is still good to excellent.
42
-------
SUMMARY
Shepard and others (1997) presented a model for biological condition in the Cahaba River main
channel and related observed biological patterns and processes to pollution mechanisms operating in the river at
that time. Data collected during the current investigation of fish communities confirms many of their conclusions
relative to causes of biological variation in the Cahaba and also sheds additional light on patterns of fish species
diversity, population variation, and the overall status of fishes in the Cahaba River main channel.
Species diversity at the sampled sites was greater than expected compared to information developed in
past investigations. Intensive sampling techniques no doubt played a role in the greater diversity and catch
observed during this study.
A summary of study results is presented in table 9 and figure 4 based on the three community metrics of
species diversity, catch, and biological condition. Several sites in the main channel Cahaba River meet
expectations relative to diversity, catch, and biological condition (sites 1, 2, 8, 11, 12). Other sites were good
relative to catch but only fair relative to species diversity and biological condition (sites 3, 4, 5). We interpret
these results as biological effects due to nutrient loading upstream in the watershed and from major tributaries
such as Buck Creek. Nutrients in this reach of the Cahaba originate from multiple sources including wastewater
treatment plants, nonpoint runoff from urban areas, and possibly nitrogen deposition originating from the high
density of automobiles in the immediate airshed. Two sites (6 and 7) were poor relative to both species
diversity and catch, and poor (site 7) to fair (site 6) in biological condition. We interpret these results as
biological effects of sediment bedload and perhaps runoff of toxics and other associated nonpoint sources. Site
8 had good biological and habitat quality and is an example of the potential that this reach of the Cahaba River
has for recovery if sedimentation and other nonpoint pollution sources were better understood and managed.
Site 9 was good relative to diversity and biological condition but poor in catch. This may be an early indicator
that this reach of the Cahaba is in decline. Site 10 was poor in both diversity and biological condition but good
in catch. Biological conditions in this reach were interpreted as affected by a combination of pollutants from
both discharged wastewaters and urban runoff from the community of Trussville. Site 11 represents the
upstream reference condition and is a model for what the reach downstream of Trussville could become if
43
-------
pollution sources in and around Trussville were more intensively managed.
44
-------
Table 9. Summary offish community metrics for sites in the Cahaba River system, 2002.
Station
Community metric1
Species
diversity
Catch
Biological
condition
1
Cahaba River-Centreville
G
G
G
2
Cahaba River-Riverbend
G
G
G
3
Cahaba River-Piper
F
G
F
4
Cahaba River-Boothton
F
G
F
5
Cahaba River-Helena
F
G
F
6
Cahaba River-Bains Bridge
P
P
F
7
Cahaba River- near Altadena
P
P
P
8
Cahaba River-Caldwell Mill Road
G
G
G
9
Cahaba River-Grants Mill Road
G
P
G
10
Cahaba River-Camp Coleman
P
G
P
11
Cahaba River-I 59
G
G
G
12
Little Cahaba River
G
G
G
G-good; F-fair; P-poor
Figure 4.
biological
Cahaba River main
i
i
kST>
fflo
O tl
—d
UV
G
H F
•B
—i 1 1 1 1 r
rflO tW ttT) rtO
Conceptual model of
condition in the upper
channel.
42
-------
REFERENCES CITED
Alabama Department of Environmental Management, 1999, Standard operating procedures and quality control
assurance manual, Volume n, Freshwater macroinvertebrate biological assessment: Alabama
Department of Environmental Management, Field Operations Division, Ecological Studies Section,
unpublished report.
Barbour, M.T., Gerritsen, J., Snyder, B.D., and Stribling, J.B., 1999, Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in
streams and wadeable rivers: periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrates and fish, second edition: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, D.C., EPA 841-B-99-002.
Fenneman, N.M., 1938, Physiography of the eastern United States: New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company,
714 p.
Griffith, G.E., Omernik, J.M., Comstock, J.A., Lawrence, S., Martin, G., Goddard, A., Hulcher, V.J., and
Foster, T., 2001, Ecoregions of Alabama and Georgia, (color poster with map, descriptive text,
summary tables, and photographs): Reston, Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey (map scale 1:1,700,000).
Karr, J.R, 1981, Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities: Fisheries, v. 6, no. 6, p. 21-26.
Karr, J.R., and Dudley, D.R., 1981, Ecological perspectives on water-quality goals: Environmental
Management, v. 5, p. 55-68.
Karr, J.R, Fausch, K.D., Angermeier, P.L., Yant, P.R, and Schlosser, I.J., 1986, Assessing biological
integrity in running waters: a method and its rationale: Illinois Natural History Survey Special Publication
5, 28 p.
MacArthur, R.H., and Wilson, E.O., 1967, The theory of island biogeography: Princeton University Press,
Monographs in Population Biology 1, 203 p.
Mettee, M.F., O'Neil, P.E., and Pierson, J.M., 1996, Fishes of Alabama and the Mobile basin: Oxmoor
House, Birmingham, Alabama, 820 p.
Miller, D.L., Leonard, P.M., Hughes, R.M., Karr, J.R., Moyle, P.B., Schrader, L.H., Thompson, B.A.,
Daniels, R.A., Fausch, K.D., Fitzhugh, G.A., Gammon, J.R, Halliwell, D.B., Angermeier, P.L., and
Orth, D.J., 1988, Regional applications of an index of biotic integrity for use in water resource
management: Fisheries, v. 13, p. 12-20.
Ohio EPA, 1987a, Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life: volume I: The role of biological data in
water quality assessment: State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality
Planning and Assessment, Columbus, Ohio.
Ohio EPA, 1987b, Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life: volume II: Users manual for biological
field assessment of Ohio surface waters: State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division of
43
-------
Water Quality Planning and Assessment, Columbus, Ohio.
Ohio EPA, 1987c, Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life: volume HI: standardized biological field
sampling and laboratory methods for assessing fish and macroinvertebrate communities: State of Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality Planning and Assessment, Columbus,
Ohio.
O'Neil, P.E., and Shepard, T.E., 2000, Application of the index of biotic integrity for assessing biological
condition of wadeable streams in the Black Warrior River system, Alabama: Alabama Geological
Survey Bulletin 169, 71
Pierson, J.M., Howell, W.M., Stiles, R.A., Mettee, M.F., O'Neil, P.E., Suttkus, R.D., and Ramsey, J.S.,
1989, Fishes of the Cahaba River system in Alabama: Alabama Geological Survey Bulletin 134, 183 p.
Plafkin, J.L., Barbour, M.T., Porter, K.D., Gross, S.K., and Hughes, R.M., 1989, Rapid bioassessment
protocols for use in streams and rivers: benthic macroinvertebrates and fish: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water Regulations and Standards, Washington, D.C., EPA 440-4-89-
001.
Sapp, C.D., and Emplaincourt, J., 1975, Physiographic regions of Alabama: Geological Survey of Alabama
Special Map 168.
Shepard, T.E., O'Neil, P.E., McGregor, S.W., Mettee, M.F., and Harris, S.C., 1997, Biomonitoring and
water-quality studies in the upper Cahaba River drainage of Alabama, 1989-94: Alabama Geological
Survey Bulletin 165, 255 p.
44
-------
Appendix
Collection data for samples in the Cahaba River, 2002
45
-------
Species
Wading samples
Boat electrofishing samples
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
3
4
12
Centreville
River
Bend
Piper
Boothton
Helena
Bains
Bridge
Altadena
Caldwell
Mill
Grants
Mill
Camp
Coleman
I-59
Little
Cahaba
Centreville
Piper
Boothton
Little
Cahaba
LEPISOSTEIDAE
(gars)
Lepisosteus oculatus
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
L. osseus
1
1
2
1
2
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
3
-
-
CLUPEIDAE
(herrings and shads)
Dorosoma cepedianum
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
1
47
15
-
42
CYPRINIDAE
(minnows and carps)
Campostoma oiiqoiepis
354
135
165
43
200
7
__
111
20
302
170
129
2
__
__
__
Ctenopharyngodon idella
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Cyprinella callistia
99
68
142
66
32
8
-
212
84
26
20
-
-
-
-
-
C. trichroistia
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
2
24
80
-
-
-
-
C. venusta
230
268
51
7
3
4
53
74
22
16
1
25
15
29
-
—
Hybopsis winchelli
3
91
__
__
__
__
__
_
2
__
_
7
__
__
__
__
Lythrurus bellus
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10
-
-
-
-
Macrhybopsis aestivalis
-
26
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Notropis ammophilus
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
1
-
-
-
N. atherinoides
1
-
_
—
—
-
-
—
—
-
-
—
-
-
-
—
N. cahabae
2
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
N. chrosomus
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
67
-
-
-
-
-
N. stilbius
69
211
168
305
354
38
5
7
64
57
84
139
-
-
-
-
N. uranoscopus
45
72
-
_
-
-
_
-
-
-
_
24
-
-
-
-
N. voiuceiius
29
27
19
5
4
-
-
—
—
-
_
14
-
-
-
—
Phenacobius catostomus
2
9
_
49
14
2
_
13
2
__
_
20
__
__
__
__
Pimephales notatus
-
7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P. vigilax
22
32
6
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
CATOSTOMIDAE
(suckers)
Carpiodes cyprinus
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
_
1
-
-
-
C. veiifer
-
-
-
—
—
-
-
—
—
-
-
—
22
3
-
1
Hypentelium etowanum
46
9
6
16
21
3
-
34
21
50
51
47
-
-
-
-
Ictiobus bubalus
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
5
-
-
Minytrema melanops
-
-
-
--
--
-
1
--
--
-
-
--
-
-
-
--
46
-------
Species
Wading samples
Boat electrofishing samples
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
3
4
12
Centreville
River
Bend
Piper
Boothton
Helena
Bains
Bridge
Altadena
Caldwell
Mill
Grants
Mill
Camp
Coleman
I-59
Little
Cahaba
Centreville
Piper
Boothton
Little
Cahaba
Moxostoma carinatum
2
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
_
12
8
3
M. duquesnei
29
18
5
13
__
_
2
1
_
__
_
6
1
_
5
16
M. erythrurum
39
22
-
-
21
13
9
-
6
8
5
16
-
-
-
18
M. poecilurum
-
1
-
-
3
7
11
6
1
-
1
-
17
1
5
6
ICTALURIDAE
(bullheads and catfishes)
Ameiurus natalis
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
-
_
-
1
-
-
-
-
_
Ictalurus furcatus
-
-
-
—
_
-
-
—
_
-
-
—
-
_
-
1
1. punctatus
-
-
2
5
2
-
1
-
12
-
-
1
5
2
4
7
Noturus leptacanthus
6
4
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pylodictis olivaris
-
-
17
-
1
-
-
-
4
-
-
-
-
12
2
-
ATHERINIDAE
(silversides)
Labidesthes sicculus
-
-
-
—
—
_
-
—
—
-
_
—
1
-
-
—
POECILIIDAE
(live bearers)
Gambusia affinis
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FUNDULIDAE
(topminnows)
Fundulus olivaceus
-
2
1
-
-
5
21
4
2
-
-
4
-
-
-
-
COTTIDAE
(sculpins)
Cottus carolinae
89
18
__
__
1
__
__
__
__
_
40
5
__
__
__
__
CENTRARCHIDAE
(sunfishes)
Ambloplites ariommus
1
1
-
5
2
1
-
2
-
-
-
3
-
-
1
-
Lepomis cyanellus
-
-
-
-
1
1
4
2
1
1
29
-
-
1
-
-
L. gulosus
-
-
-
-
_
-
_
1
1
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
L. macrochirus
2
8
1
4
6
35
80
94
8
4
31
3
8
2
3
1
L. megalotis
29
42
5
31
19
74
89
74
41
14
60
30
29
3
4
-
L. microlophus
-
1
-
-
-
3
3
1
-
-
1
-
-
1
-
1
L. miniatus
-
-
-
2
-
-
2
4
4
-
-
11
-
-
-
-
Micropterus coosae
-
_
3
1
-
_
1
5
5
4
23
15
_
2
-
1
M. ounctulatus
24
33
17
6
6
3
7
32
3
2
_
3
14
5
1
2
47
-------
Species
Wading samples
Boat electrofishing samples
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
3
4
12
Centreville
River
Bend
Piper
Boothton
Helena
Bains
Bridge
Altadena
Caldwell
Mill
Grants
Mill
Camp
Coleman
I-59
Little
Cahaba
Centreville
Piper
Boothton
Little
Cahaba
M. salmoides
-
-
-
-
_
-
_
1
-
-
-
_
2
1
-
_
Pomoxis niqromaculatus
__
__
__
__
_
__
__
__
__
_
__
__
2
__
__
__
PERCIDAE
(darters)
Etheostoma jordani
9
19
5
9
5
-
-
1
18
-
-
33
-
-
-
-
E. ramseyi
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3
-
-
9
40
-
-
-
-
E. rupestre
84
90
59
159
246
8
_
94
5
-
-
30
-
-
-
-
E. stiqmaeum
6
2
1
3
3
3
_
1
1
-
-
1
-
-
-
—
E. whipplei
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
6
-
-
-
-
-
Percina aurolineata
17
8
8
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
-
P. brevicauda
-
-
-
4
1
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
P. kathae
_
3
_
17
3
2
_
7
6
_
5
1
2
1
1
1
P. niqrofasciata
47
27
25
39
39
15
8
27
23
11
15
22
-
-
-
—
P. shumardi
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
SCIAENIDAE
(drums)
Aplodinotus qrunniens
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3
1
5
-
9
48
-------
APPENDIX G:
GIS Land Use Analysis
110
-------
Fig. G-l
"Cahaba River Watershed Study:
Disturbed vs. Undisturbed"
This figure portrays the land use changes in the watershed using GIS land change analysis for the years
1983, 1990, and 1998. GIS land change analysis focused on the "disturbed" land use class as
opposed to the "undisturbed" land use class. The "disturbed" land use class includes
residential, commercial, industrial, transportation, and bare ground. The "undisturbed" land use class is
basically forested lands and grasslands. This figure is available in hard copy upon request; contact
Hoke Howard at (706)355-8721 or email at howard.hoke@epa.gov
111
-------
Disturbed
Undisturbed
IJn
Disturbed 1L45.6400
Urraiijlirbcjc 26:44800
' V-7 .
jp-
3 WilCS
Oisiurjed = same cata as 1908 ififl, G-1)
-------
APPENDIX H:
NPDES Violations, Retrieval file, Majors in Cahaba Basin
113
-------
10/15/02
1
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
AL0003395 GOLD KIST POULTRY TRUSSVILLE M
001Q 2 A
10/01/94 3
P/F STATRE 7DAY CHR CERIODAPHNIA
TGP3B 1
0 0
12/20/01 12/31/06 ER
01/28/95 3
03/31/98
06/30/98
03/31/00
12/31/00
03/31/01
P/F STATRE 7DAY CHR PIMEPHALES PROMELAS
E90
E90
E90
E90
E90
TGP6C 1
0 0
03/31/98
12/31/00
001Q 9 A
TOXICITY,
61426 1
E90
E90
10/01/94 3 0 01/28/95 3
CERIODAPHNIA CHRONIC 9A DELMON
9A DELMON 0
1
1
1
1
1
9A DELMON 0
0 0
SINGSAMP
06/30/02
09/01/94 08/31/99
01/01/02 12/31/06
114
-------
0011 2 A 09/01/89 1 0 10/28/89 1
F BOD, 5-DAY (20 DEG. C) 26 270 19
00310 10 0 MO AVG DAILY MX
12/31/00 E90 170 851.7
01/31/01 E90 380.6 1375.0
02/28/01 E90 403.2 1107.1
10/31/01 E90 154.3 506.1
F SOLIDS, TOTAL
00530 1 0
0
SUSPENDED
19
09/01/94 08/31/99
20.0 30.0
MO AVG DAILY MX
27 96.6 V 03/31/01 2
30.2 92.0 T 03/31/01 2
32.95 90.3 T 03/31/01 2
11.9 37
DELMON 30.0 45.0
MO AVG DAILY MX
115
-------
10/15/02
2
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
LQUC
LQAV
LQMX LCUC
LCMN
LCAV
LCMX
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
MVIO
LQAS
LQXS
LCMS
LCAS
LCXS
MVDT
MQAV
MQMX NODI
MCMN
MCAV
MCMX
12/31/99
E90
57
36
12/31/01
E90
34 . 5
78
F NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS
N)
19
1.21
1.82
00610 10 0
MO AVG
DAILY MX
01/31/99
E90
.86
6.11
03/31/01
E90
. 85
3. 65
12/31/01
E90
0.48
2 . 54
F NITROGEN, KJELDAHL TOTAL (AS
N)
26
43.4
19
3.21
4 .82
00625 10 0
MO AVG
DAILY MX
MO AVG
DAILY MX
01/31/98
E90
22.14
65 .06
2.4
5.83
02/28/98
E90
35.07
51 .18
4 .25
4 .75
03/31/98
E90
39.5
55 .76
3.36
4 .71
01/31/99
E90
34 .84
82 . 67
3.40
8 .40
12/31/00
E90
33.5
73 . 3
4 .48
11 .1
12/31/01
E90
19.5
30 . 6
1.86
6.33
F COLIFORM, FECAL GENERAL
13
1000
2000
74055 10 0
MO AVG
DAILY MX
01/31/99
E90
1240
>6000
SNCE SNDE
06/30/01
116
-------
11/30/01
E90
0011 9 A 09/01/89 1 0 10/28/89 1
F NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 19
00610 10 0
01/31/02 E90
08/31/02 E90
F NITROGEN, KJELDAHL TOTAL (AS N) 26 35.89 19
00625 ISO MO AVG DAILY MX
08/31/02
E90
34 . 61
188 . 80
>101 . 75
>200
01/01/02 12/31/06
1.21 1.82
MO AVG DAILY MX
0.09 8.0
1.083 8.16
3.21 4.82
MO AVG DAILY MX
117
-------
10/15/02
3
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
SUB-TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES:
118
-------
10/15/02
4
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
AL0022 934 JEFFERSON CO TRUSSVILLE WWTP M
11/01/90 1
01/10/01 01/31/06 SSSS SSSN NNNN NNN
12/28/90 1
TOXICITY,
61426 1 0
08/31/98
11/30/98
TOXICITY,
61428 1 0
08/31/98
11/30/98
F BOD, 5-DAY
00310 1 2
03/31/95
F SOLIDS, TOTAL
00530 1 2
CERIODAPHNIA CHRONIC 9A DELMON 0
E90
E90
10
10
PIMEPHALES CHRONIC 9A DELMON 0
E90
E90
08/01/82 1
(20 DEG. C)
1
SUSPENDED
09/28/82 1
26 150
19 DELMON 15
01/01/96 12/31/00
11/01/90 12/31/95
MO AVG WKLY AVG
MO AVG WKLY AVG
E90 195
26 300
525
8.5
19 . 9
03/31/95 5
DELMON 30
MO AVG WKLY AVG
MO AVG WKLY AVG
119
-------
02/28/94
03/31/95
E90 7 69
E90 1023
1923
3585
31
39
74
136
A
A
02/28/94 5
03/31/95 5
NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N)
00610 111
26 10
20
19 DELMON 1.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
1. 5
MO AVG WKLY AVG
06/30/95
E90 2.2
06/30/95 5
NITROGEN, KJELDAHL TOTAL (AS N)
00625 12 1
26 40
80
19 DELMON 4.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
6.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
02/28/94
E90 65
147
2.7
5.7
02/28/94 5
120
-------
10/15/02
5
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
03/31/94
03/31/95
E90
E90
6 6
99
122
315
2.8
3 . 9
4 . 9
11 . 9
A 03/31/94
A 03/31/95
0011 2
08/01/82 1
09/28/82 1
01/01/96 12/31/00
OXYGEN, DISSOLVED
00300 10 0
(DO)
19 6.0 DELMON DELMON
DAILY MN
01/31/98
E90
5 . 5
02/28/98
E90
5 .1
03/31/98
E90
5 . 7
BOD, 5-DAY
(20
DEG.
C)
26
70
140
19
DELMON
5.0
7 . 5
00310 1 S
1
MO AVG
WKLY AVG
MO AVG
WKLY
AVG
07/31/97
E90
71
120
3.7
5.7
A
07/31/97
4
10/31/97
E90
75
61
5.0
4 . 6
A
10/31/97
4
11/30/97
E90
80
157
5.0
9.2
A
11/30/97
4
05/31/98
E90
104
154
6.4
9.0
A
05/31/98
4
BOD, 5-DAY
(20
DEG.
C)
26
150
300
19
DELMON
15
22 . 5
00310 1 W
1
MO AVG
WKLY AVG
MO AVG
WKLY
AVG
01/31/97
E90
198 . 5
359 . 0
8.7
14 . 5
A
01/31/97
4
03/31/97
E90
199
408
9.0
15 . 3
A
03/31/97
4
121
-------
12/31/97 E90
01/31/98 E90
02/28/98 E90
03/31/98 E90
04/30/98 E90
SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED 26
00530 1 S 1
97
E90
97
E90
97
E90
98
E90
227 435
774 1072
937 1445
826 1614
498 960
300 500
MO AVG WKLY
87
1400
369
564
199
530
335
565
11. 9
26 . 2
A
12/31/97
4
30. 6
40 . 7
A
01/31/98
4
38 . 6
54 .1
A
02/28/98
4
37 . 8
76 . 6
A
03/31/98
4
19.6
36 . 3
A
04/30/98
4
30
45
MO AVG
WKLY
AVG
5
60
P
05/31/97
5
17
27
A
06/30/97
5
10
25
P
07/31/97
5
21
33
A
05/31/98
5
-------
10/15/02
6
QL
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
*****
*****
¦ ^ ^ -ic -k
-ic ^ ^ -ic ^
**********
-ic ^ ^ -ic ^ -k
*
*** QL
NPID FNMS
MAD I
RDF9 PERD PERE PYQS CYQS
PYMS
GYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
STRP
NRPU
STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD ILED
MLSD
MLED
FLSD
FLED
LTYP PRAM
LQUC
LQAV
LQMX LCUC
LCMN
LCAV
LCMX
PRAM MLOC SEAN
MODN
LQAS
LQXS
LCMS
LCAS
LCXS
MVDT
MVIO
MQAV
MQMX NODI
MCMN
MCAV
MCMX
SNCE
SNDE
SRCE
F SOLIDS, TOTAL
SUSPENDED
26
300
600 19
30
45
00530 1 W
1
MO AVG
WKLY AVG
MO AVG
WKLY
AVG
03/31/96
E90
420
462
17
18
A
03/31/96
5
01/31/97
E90
1041
1417
45.3
59 . 4
A
01/31/97
5
02/28/97
E90
667
1218
29.0
52 . 8
A
02/28/97
5
03/31/97
E90
462
2320
22 . 8
CO
O
A
03/31/97
5
04/30/97
E90
358
71
16.3
4 . 8
A
04/30/97
5
12/31/97
E90
276
631
15
38
P
12/31/97
5
01/31/98
E90
1666
2457
6 6
96
A
01/31/98
5
02/28/98
E90
2275
2957
91
116
A
02/28/98
5
03/31/98
E90
1389
3182
64
150
A
03/31/98
5
04/30/98
E90
793
1783
31
67
A
04/30/98
5
F NITROGEN, AMMONIA
TOTAL (AS
N)
26
10
20 19
1.0
1. 5
00610 1 S
1
MO AVG
WKLY AVG
MO AVG
WKLY
AVG
05/31/97
E90
17
45
1.1
2 . 4
A
05/31/97
5
06/30/97
E90
41
56
1 . 9
2 . 6
A
06/30/97
5
07/31/97
E90
21
60
1.1
2 . 9
A
07/31/97
5
08/31/97
E90
12
28
0 . 9
2 . 2
A
08/31/97
5
F NITROGEN, AMMONIA
TOTAL (AS
N)
26
20.0
30.0 19
DELMON
2.0
3.0
00610 1 W
0
MO AVG
WKLY AVG
MO AVG
WKLY
AVG
123
-------
01/31/98
E90
45
64
02/28/98
E90
55.
. 7
63 . 2
03/31/98
E90
36.
. 9
74 . 8
NITROGEN, KJELDAHL TOTAL (AS N)
26
30
60
00625 1 S 1
MO
AVG
WKLY
05/31/97
E90
24
160
06/30/97
E90
70
107
07/31/97
E90
35
80
NITROGEN, KJELDAHL TOTAL (AS N)
00625 1 W 1
26 40 80 19
MO AVG WKLY AVG
1.9 2.5 T 02/28/98 2
2.3 2.4 T 02/28/98 2
1.7 3.5 T 03/31/98 2
2.0 4.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
1.5 6.9 P 05/31/97 5
3.1 4.9 A 06/30/97 5
1.8 3.8 A 07/31/97 5
4.0 6.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
124
-------
10/15/02
7
QL
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
ID FNMS MADI RDF9 PERD PERE PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT STRP NRPU STSU NSUN STSS NSUS ILSD ILED MLSD MLED FLSD FLED
LQUC LQAV LQMX LCUC LCMN LCAV LCMX
LQAS LQXS LCMS LCAS LCXS
MVDT MVIO MQAV MQMX NODI MCMN MCAV MCMX SNCE SNDE
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
01/31/97
E90
89.0
126 . 0
3 . 9
5.1
A
01/31/97
5
02/28/97
E90
56.0
92 . 0
2.5
4 .1
A
02/28/97
5
03/31/97
E90
84 . 0
154 . 0
4 .1
7 . 0
A
03/31/97
5
04/30/97
E90
47 . 0
23 . 0
2.3
1. 4
A
04/30/97
5
12/31/97
E90
58
125
3.1
7 . 6
A
12/31/97
5
01/31/98
E90
157
231
6.3
9.0
A
01/31/98
5
02/28/98
E90
210
311
8.4
11 . 7
A
02/28/98
5
03/31/98
E90
127
282
5.8
13 . 3
A
03/31/98
5
04/30/98
E90
54
99
2.2
3.7
A
04/30/98
5
CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL
50060 X 0 0
19 0.5 DELMON DELMON
DAILY MN
01/31/98
02/28/98
03/31/98
E90
E90
E90
0 . 3
0 . 3
0 . 01
CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL
50060 10 0
19 DELMON DELMON 0.01
DAILY MX
01/31/98
E90
0.20
COLIFORM, FECAL GENERAL
74055 ISO
13 DELMON 200 2000
MO AVG DAILY MX
125
-------
05/31/98
E90
F COLIFORM, FECAL GENERAL
74055 1 W 0
01/31/98 E90
02/28/98 E90
03/31/98 E90
F BOD, 5-DAY PERCENT REMOVAL
81010 K 0 0
01/31/98
E90
83
2400
13 DELMON 1000
2000
MO AVG DAILY MX
237
595
298
34000
36000
43000
23 85
MO AVG
DELMON DELMON
02/28/98 2
126
-------
10/15/02
8
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
02/28/98
03/31/98
E90
E90
54
63
02/28/98 2
03/31/98 2
SOLIDS, SUSPENDED
81011 K 0 0
PERCENT REMOVAL
2 3 8 5 DELMON DELMON
MO AVG
01/31/98
E90
67
T
02/28/98 2
02/28/98
E90
33
T
02/28/98 2
03/31/98
E90
55
T
03/31/98 2
04/30/98
E90
84
V
04/30/98 2
SUB-TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES:
119
127
-------
10/15/02
9
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
AL002 302 7 JEFFERSON CO CAHABA RIVER WWTP M
07/01/93 3
LF P/F STATRE 7DAY CHR CERIODAPHNIA
TEP3B 1
0
0
09/30/00 10/31/02 PPPN NNDD C
0 10/28/93 3
9A DELMON 0
08/01/93 10/31/00
02/28/98
03/31/98
08/31/98
11/30/98
E90
E90
E90
E90
1
1
10
10
05/28/98 2
LF P/F STATRE 7DAY CHR PIMEPHALES
TEP6C 1
0
0
9A DELMON 0
08/31/98
11/30/98
E90
E90
M BOD, 5-DAY
00310 1 S
03/01/85 1
(20 DEG. C)
0
0 04/28/85 1
26 167 250 19
30DA AVG 7 DA AVG
03/01/85 10/31/00
5 7.5
30DA AVG 7 DA AVG
08/31/92
09/30/92
E90 213 301
E90 357 868
2.60 3.50 V
2 .90 4.6 T
08/31/92 3
11/30/92 3
128
-------
11/30/92
E90
03/31/93
E90
05/31/93
E90
06/30/93
E90
07/31/93
E90
07/31/99
E90
03/31/00
E90
04/30/00
E90
BOD, 5-DAY (20 DEG. C) 26
00310 1 W 0
12/31/92 E9C
532
1006
620
1304
397
582
291
381
186
282
86
321
228
270
276
719
267
30DA
AVG
7 DA
910
1687
3.30
5.40
T
11/30/92
3
4
6.1
T
03/31/93
3
4
4 . 0
T
05/31/93
3
4
5.3
T
06/30/93
3
3
4 .1
V
07/31/93
3
1
2
2
3
2
4
8
12
30DA
AVG 7 DA
AVG
5.40
8 . 50
T
12/31/92
3
129
-------
10/15/02
10
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
01/31/98
02/28/99
SOLIDS, TOTAL
00530 1 0
01/31/98
SUSPENDED
E90 319
E90 158
1083
482
26
1001 1501 19
30DA AVG 7 DA AVG
E90 911 3045
SUB-TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES:
30
45
30DA AVG 7 DA AVG
11
130
-------
10/15/02
11
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
AL0023116 HELENA CITY OF UTIL BD WWTP
001T 9 A
01/01/93 1
10/06/00 10/31/05 NNPP PPPP
02/28/93 1
11/01/00 10/31/05
F TOXICITY,
61426 1 0
CERIODAPHNIA CHRONIC 94 DELMON 0
SINGSAMP
11/30/00
05/31/01
E90
E90
03/01/90 1
02/28/93 1
03/01/95 02/28/00
SOLIDS, TOTAL
00530 1 0
SUSPENDED
26 312
469
19 DELMON 30.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
45 . 0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
05/31/99
03/31/00
E90 8.52
E90 918
16 . 2
3429
69
81
1.14
312
SOLIDS, SUSPENDED PERCENT REMOVAL
81011 K 0 0
8 5 DELMON
MO AV MN
03/31/00
E90
03/01/90 1
02/28/93 1
11/01/00 10/31/05
131
-------
F OXYGEN, DISSOLVED
00300 10 0
(DO)
19
09/30/01
01/31/02
E90
E90
SOLIDS, TOTAL
00530 1 0
SUSPENDED
26 312
MO AVG WKLY AVG
01/31/01
E90 486
929
NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N)
00610 1
S
0
26 20.8
31 . 2
19
MO AVG WKLY AVG
6.0 DELMON
DAILY MN
DELMON
4 .76
5 .89
DELMON 30.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
32 . 0
61 . 7
DELMON 2.0
3.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
132
-------
10/15/02
12
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
08/31/01
09/30/01
E90 12.38 47.27
E90 15.45 65.43
0.71 2.14
0.73 2.55
NITROGEN, KJELDAHL TOTAL (AS N)
00625 ISO
2 6 52.1 78.1 19 DELMON 5.0 7.5
MO AVG WKLY AVG MO AVG WKLY AVG
08/31/01
09/30/01
E90 31.57 79.51
E90 35.48 110.91
2.21 3.80
2.05 4.30
COLIFORM, FECAL
74055 ISO
13 DELMON 200 2000
MO AVG DAILY MX
11/30/00
06/30/01
09/30/01
E90
E90
E90
267
231
253
585
434
625
BOD, CARBONACEOUS 05 DAY, 20C
80082 ISO
26 72.9 109 19 DELMON 7.0 10.5
MO AVG WKLY AVG MO AVG WKLY AVG
06/30/01
09/30/01
E90 76.5
E90 57.91
100 .1
139 . 21
5.84 7.00
3.76 5.60
SOLIDS, SUSPENDED PERCENT REMOVAL
81011 K 0 0
2 3 8 5 DELMON
MO AV MN
133
-------
01/31/01 E90 75.3
SUB-TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES: 4 2
134
-------
10/15/02
13
QL
*** QL
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
PAGE :
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9
PERD PERE PYQS CYQS PYMS
CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT STRP NRPU
STSU NSUN STSS NSUS ILSD ILED
MLSD
MLED FLSD FLED
LTYP PRAM
LQUC LQAV LQMX LCUC LCMN
LCAV
LCMX
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQAS LQXS LCMS
LCAS
LCXS
MVDT
SRCE
MVIO MQAV MQMX NODI MCMN
MCAV
MCMX SNCE SNDE
AL0024 252 LAFARGE BUILDING MATERIALS INC
M
04/30/01 04/30/06 E D
C
0011 3 A 07/01/85 1
0
10/28/85 3
05/01/96 04/30/01
F SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED
00530 10 0
19 DELMON
25.0
DAILY
AV
45 . 0
DAILY MX
10/31/98
E90
31. 9
36 . 5
F COLIFORM, FECAL GENERAL
74055 10 0
13 DELMON
DAILY
200
AV
400
DAILY MX
07/31/98
04/30/01
E90
E90
501
625
2000
1248
0011 9 A 07/01/85 1
0
10/28/85 3
05/01/01 04/30/06
F SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED
00530 10 0
19 DELMON
25.0
DAILY
AV
45 . 0
DAILY MX
05/31/01
07/31/01
08/31/01
E90
E90
E90
25.3
35.2
75.5
55.0 V 09/30/01 2
41.5 T 09/30/01 2
132 T 09/30/01 2
F COLIFORM, FECAL GENERAL
13 DELMON
200
400
135
-------
74055 10 0
05/31/01 E90
06/30/01 E90
07/31/01 E90
09/30/01 E90
0021 3 A 07/01/85 1 0 10/28/85 3
F PH
00400 10 0
06/30/98
E90
DAILY AV DAILY MX
145
1328
97
1016
61
524
39
406
05/01/96 04/30/01
6.0 DELMON 9.0
DAILY MN DAILY MX
136
-------
10/15/02
14
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
SUB-TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES:
137
-------
10/15/02
15
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
AL002 582 8 ALABASTER CITY OF WTP
02/01/90 1
10/06/00 10/31/05 ENN N
03/28/90 1
06/01/95 05/31/00
COLIFORM, FECAL
74055 ISO
13 DELMON 2 00
2000
MO AVG DAILY MX
05/31/98
06/30/98
E90
E90
301
238
1136
912
02/01/90 1
03/28/90 1
11/01/00 10/31/05
NITROGEN, KJELDAHL TOTAL (AS N)
00625 1 W 0
26
125 187
MO AVG WKLY AVG
19 DELMON 5.0
7 . 5
MO AVG WKLY AVG
12/31/00
03/31/01
E90 124
E90 202
132
627
8.41
3 . 91
9.44
11 . 97
03/31/01 2
03/31/01 2
SUB-TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES:
138
-------
10/15/02
16
QL
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
*** QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9
PERD PERE
PYQS CYQS PYMS
CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT STRP NRPU
STSU NSUN STSS NSUS ILSD ILED
MLSD
MLED FLSD FLED
LTYP PRAM
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LCUC LCMN
LCAV
LCMX
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQAS LQXS
LCMS
LCAS
LCXS
MVDT
SRCE
MVIO MQAV MQMX
NODI MCMN
MCAV
MCMX SNCE SNDE
AL002 5852 HOOVER INVERNESS WWTP
M
10/25/01 10/31/06
SSSS SSSS
0011 1 A 02/01/87 1
0
03/28/87 1
09/01/96 08/31/01
F CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL
50060 X 0 0
19 0.5
DAILY
DELMON
MN
DELMON
02/28/98
E90
0 . 30
F COLIFORM, FECAL GENERAL
74055 10 0
13 DELMON
200
MO AVG
2000
DAILY MX
02/28/98
E90
2592
10200
0021 1 A 09/01/96 1
0
10/28/96 1
09/01/96 08/31/01
F NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS
00610 10 0
N)
26
MO AVG WKLY
19 DELMON
AVG
3.0
MO AVG
4 . 5
WKLY AVG
07/31/01
08/31/01
09/30/01
10/31/01
E90 23 54
E90 42 60
E90 34 45
E90 45 56
5.3
7.8
8.7
9.4
9.8
11.1 T 09/30/01 2
12.1 T 09/30/01 2
11.8 T 02/28/02 2
F NITROGEN, KJELDAHL TOTAL (AS
N)
26
19 DELMON
10
15
139
-------
00625 10 0 MO AVG WKLY AVG
10/31/01 E90 51 84
0021 9 A 09/01/96 1 0 10/28/96 1
F NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 26 19
00610 10 0 MO AVG WKLY AVG
03/31/02 E90 49.8 111.1
003T 1 A 01/01/97 12 0 01/28/98 12
F LF P/F STATRE 7DAY CHR PIMEPHALES 9A
MO AVG WKLY AVG
10.5
11 . 4
DELMON 3.0
11/01/01 10/31/06
MO AVG WKLY AVG
6.0 11.0 T 03/31/02 2
09/01/96 08/31/01
DELMON 0
DELMON
140
-------
10/15/02
17
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
TEP6C 10 0
12/31/98
SUB-TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES:
26
N 02/27/99 2
141
-------
10/15/02
18
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
AL0041653 HOOVER CITY OF RIVERCHASE WWTP M
08/01/93 1
LF P/F STATRE 7DAY CHR PIMEPHALES
TEP6C 1
0 0
09/30/00 10/31/02 NR X R
0 09/28/93 3
9A DELMON 0
08/01/93 07/31/98
0011 0
02/28/98
11/30/98
02/28/99
BOD, 5-DAY
00310 1 0
06/01/83 1
(20 DEG. C)
0
E90
E90
E90
07/28/83 1
26 50 75 19
30DA AVG 7 DA AVG
07/01/83 06/30/95
30DA AVG 7 DA AVG
03/31/00
05/31/00
E90 64.5
E90 47
122
68
4 .7
4 . 6
6
6.0
SOLIDS, TOTAL
00530 1 0
SUSPENDED
26 375 563 19 DELMON
30DA AVG 7 DA AVG
30
45
30DA AVG 7 DA AVG
03/31/00
CHLORINE, TOTAL
RESIDUAL
E90 289
936
12 . 7
24 . 9
DELMON DELMON
142
-------
50060 X 0 1
04/30/98 E90
11 9 A 06/01/83 1 0 07/28/83 1
F NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 26 12.5 18.7
00610 ISO MO AVG WKLY AVG
08/31/01 E90 14.1 27.12
09/30/01 E90 13.9 39.57
F NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 26 25.0 37.5
DAILY MN
0 . 0
11/01/00 12/31/02
DELMON 1.0 1.5
MO AVG WKLY AVG
0.8
0 . 6
2 .1
1. 2
09/30/01 2
09/30/01 2
DELMON 2.0
143
-------
10/15/02
19
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
MO AVG WKLY AVG
MO AVG WKLY AVG
01/31/02
E90 17.8
NITROGEN, KJELDAHL TOTAL (AS N)
00625 ISO
26 25.0
37 . 5
19 DELMON 2.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
3.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
08/31/01
09/30/01
E90 27.1
E90 14.4
23 . 9
41 . 2
1.4
0.7
1. 8
1. 6
NITROGEN, KJELDAHL TOTAL (AS N)
00625 1 W 0
26 50.0
19 DELMON 4.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
MO AVG WKLY AVG
01/31/02
E90 58.74
116.84
3 . 67
4 . 90
BOD, CARBONACEOUS 05 DAY, 20C
80082 ISO
26 50.0
19 DELMON 4.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
MO AVG WKLY AVG
09/30/01
E90 41.2
SUB-TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES:
36
144
-------
10/15/02
20
QL
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
*******
*****
-ic ^ ^ -ic ^
**********
-ic ^ ^ -ic ^ -k
*
*** QL
NPID FNMS
MAD I
RDF9 PERE
) PERE PYQS
CYQS
PYMS
GYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
STRP
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
ILED
MLSD
MLED
FLSD
FLED
LTYP PRAM
LQUC
LQAV
LQMX
LCUC
LCMN
LCAV
LCMX
PRAM MLOC SEAN
MODN
LQAS
LQXS
LCMS
LCAS
LCXS
MVDT
MVIO
MQAV
MQMX
NODI
MCMN
MCAV
MCMX
SNCE
SNDE
SRCE
AL0044857 CENTREVILLE BRENT
1 LAGOON
M
10/16/98 10/31/03 DEEE
EDXD
C
0011 9 A
08/01/99
1
0 09/28/99
1
11/01/98 10/31/
03
F BOD, 5-DAY
(20 DEG. C)
26
200
300
19
DELMON
15.0
22 . 5
00310 1 0
0
MO AVG
WKLY AVG
MO AVG
WKLY
AVG
02/29/00
E90
279
698
41. 4
98 . 5
R
06/30/00
2
04/30/00
E90
117
243
12 . 3
26 . 5
05/31/00
E90
66.7
150
12 . 8
24 . 3
06/30/00
E90
115
390
17 . 2
56 . 4
R
06/30/00
2
09/30/00
E90
82 .1
144
24 . 3
49 . 0
T
01/31/01
2
11/30/00
E90
75.0
125
16.6
25 .1
C
03/31/01
2
12/31/00
E90
99.3
161
17 . 2
24 . 6
C
03/31/01
2
01/31/01
E90
151
281
23.7
35 .1
T
01/31/01
2
02/28/01
E90
151
189
18 . 4
24 . 4
V
06/30/01
2
03/31/01
E90
119
246
13.2
27 . 4
04/30/01
E90
96.2
180
12 . 2
23 . 8
05/31/01
E90
80.6
112
16.0
23 . 5
V
06/30/01
2
06/30/01
E90
198
344
23.6
33 . 6
T
06/30/01
2
07/31/01
E90
105
143
25.1
38 . 4
T
07/31/01
2
08/31/01
E90
120
183
20.3
26 . 2
C
12/31/01
2
09/30/01
E90
142
172
17 . 5
22 .1
C
12/31/01
2
11/30/01
E90
73.0
95 . 9
16.6
22 . 5
C
12/31/01
2
01/31/02
E90
121
258
17 . 4
38 . 7
R
05/31/02
2
145
-------
05/31/02
E90
152
281
20.0
39 . 8
R
05/31/02
2
06/30/02
E90
81. 4
97 . 2
22 . 5
25 . 2
U
06/30/02
2
07/31/02
E90
51. 5
74 . 3
19.8
23 . 5
08/31/02
E90
71. 0
140
16.4
28 .1
F
PH
12
6 . 0
DELMON
9.0
00400 10 0
DAILY MN
DAILY MX
12/31/00
E90
5 . 9
8 .21
12/31/01
E90
5 . 90
8 . 04
F
NITROGEN, AMMONIA
TOTAL (AS N)
26
40.0
60 . 0
19
DELMON
3.0
4 . 5
00610 10 0
MO AVG
WKLY AVG
MO AVG
WKLY AVG
146
-------
10/15/02
21
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT STRP NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS
I LSD
ILED
MLSD
MLED
FLSD
FLED
LTYP PRAM
LQUC LQAV
LQMX
LCUC LCMN
LCAV
LCMX
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQAS
LQXS
LCMS
LCAS
LCXS
MVDT
MVIO MQAV
MQMX
NODI MCMN
MCAV
MCMX
SNCE
SNDE
SRCE
10/31/00
E90 13.5
45 .
. 2
3.21
10 . 9
F BOD, 5-DAY PERCENT REMOVAL
23 65
DELMON
DELMON
81010 K 0 0
MO AV
MN
08/31/99
E90
0
R
09/30/99
2
09/30/99
E90
0
R
09/30/99
2
10/31/99
E90
0
11/30/99
E90
0
12/31/99
E90
0
01/31/00
E90
0
R
06/30/00
2
02/29/00
E90
28.4
R
06/30/00
2
03/31/00
E90
0
R
06/30/00
2
05/31/00
E90
0
R
06/30/00
2
06/30/00
E90
0
R
06/30/00
2
07/31/00
E90
62 .8
U
07/31/00
2
05/31/01
E90
9 . 51
F SOLIDS, SUSPENDED PERCENT REMOVAL
23 65
DELMON
DELMON
81011 K 0 0
MO AV
MN
08/31/99
E90
0
R
09/30/99 2
09/30/99
E90
0
R
09/30/99 2
10/31/99
E90
0
11/30/99
E90
0
147
-------
12/31/99
E90
01/31/00
E90
02/29/00
E90
03/31/00
E90
05/31/00
E90
06/30/00
E90
07/31/00
E90
SUB-TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES
0
0
R
06/30/00
2
3 . 7
R
06/30/00
2
0
R
06/30/00
2
0
R
06/30/00
2
0
R
06/30/00
2
0
R
07/31/00
2
148
-------
10/15/02
22
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
AL004 5969 BIRMINGHAM WWB RIVERVIEW WWTP M
001T 0 A
07/01/93 3
LF P/F STATRE 7DAY CHR CERIODAPHNIA
TEP3B 10 1
03/31/98
LF P/F STATRE 7DAY CHR PIMEPHALES
TEP6C 1
0
03/31/98
03/31/99
001T 9 A
F TOXICITY,
61426 1 0
05/31/02
07/01/93 3
09/30/00 10/31/02 PNDD DNNN CC C
10/28/93 3
9A DELMON 0
9A DELMON 0
E90
E90
10/28/93 3
0011 9 A
09/01/82 1
F NITROGEN, KJELDAHL TOTAL (AS N)
CERIODAPHNIA CHRONIC 94 DELMON 0
E90 1
0 10/28/82 1
26 50.0
DELMON 4.0
08/01/93 07/31/98
11/01/00 10/31/02
11/01/00 10/31/02
149
-------
00625 1 W 0 MO AVG WKLY AVG MO AVG WKLY AVG
12/31/00 E90 48.13 48.13 5.95 5.95
SUB-TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES: 17
150
-------
10/15/02
23
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
AL0054 66 6 PELHAM CITY OF WASTEWATER PLT M CTG 11/19/96 11/30/01 NENN NNNN
001T 9 A 12/01/91 1 0 04/28/92 1
F TOXICITY, CERIODAPHNIA CHRONIC 94 DELMON 0
61426 10 1
12/01/96 11/30/01
05/31/01
11/30/01
E90
E90
10/01/99 12/01/91 1
01/28/92 1
12/01/96 11/30/01
SOLIDS, TOTAL SUSPENDED
00530 10 0
26 250.0 375.0 19
MO AVG WKLY AVG
30.0
45 . 0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
01/31/98
02/28/98
E90 239.6
E90 245
404 . 2
458
12 . 0
11. 6
18 . 9
20 . 8
NITROGEN, KJELDAHL TOTAL (AS N)
00625 ISO
26 16.7 25.0 19
MO AVG WKLY AVG
MO AVG WKLY AVG
05/31/98
E90 19.2
21 . 0
1 .33
1. 38
COLIFORM, FECAL GENERAL
74055 10 0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
151
-------
05/31/98 E90
06/30/98 E90
F BOD, CARBONACEOUS 05 DAY, 20C 26 33.4 50.0 19
80082 ISO MO AVG WKLY AVG
05/31/98 E90 36.8 48.9
0012 9 A 10/01/94 1 0 11/28/94 1
F NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N) 26 12.5 18.7 19
00610 ISO MO AVG WKLY AVG
<30 >40
<30 >50
4.0 6.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
2.5 3.2
12/01/96 11/30/01
0.5 0.7
MO AVG WKLY AVG
152
-------
10/15/02
24
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
08/31/00
NITRITE PLUS NITRATE TOTAL 1 DET. (AS N) 26 78.0
00630 1
0
19 DELMON 2.4
MO AVG WKLY AVG
MO AVG WKLY AVG
01/31/01
02/28/01
03/31/02
E90 67.2
E90 58.5
E90 57.1
85 . 5
68 . 7
81 . 8
4 .0
3.4
2 . 6
4 .45
4 . 7
3.9
02/28/01 2
02/28/01 2
PHOSPHORUS, TOTAL
00665 10 1
(AS P)
26 71.7
MO AVG WKLY AVG
DELMON 2.2
MO AVG WKLY AVG
10/31/01
E90 45.7
47 . 35
2.7
2 . 9
SUB-TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES:
33
153
-------
10/15/02
25
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
AL005 6251 SHELBY COUNTY COMM NORTH WWTP M
0011 0 A
10/01/94 1
10/06/00 10/31/05 NNN NNNN
11/28/94 1
03/01/94 02/28/99
OXYGEN, DISSOLVED
00300 10 0
(DO)
19 6.0
DELMON DELMON
MO AVG WKLY AVG
04/30/00
05/31/00
E90
E90
5 . 4
5 . 4
NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N)
00610 10 0
26 25 37.5 19
MO AVG WKLY AVG
MO AVG WKLY AVG
10/31/98
E90 5.80
21 . 3
0 . 60
2 .15
COLIFORM, FECAL
74055 10 0
13 DELMON 2 00
MO AVG DAILY MX
03/31/98
05/31/98
03/31/99
E90
E90
E90
232
240
660
328
2000
240
SUB-TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES:
14
154
-------
10/15/02
26
MAJORS IN CAHABA BASIN
TOM MCGILL
QL
QL
NPID FNMS
MADI RDF9 PERD
PYQS CYQS PYMS CYMS
DSDG PIPQ PIAC PIDT
NRPU STSU
NSUN STSS
NSUS ILSD
MLSD MLED
LTYP PRAM
PRAM MLOC SEAN MODN
LQUC LQAV LQMX
LQAS LQXS
MVIO MQAV MQMX
LCUC LCMN
NODI MCMN
SNCE SNDE
ALOO67067 JEFFERSON CO COMM LEEDS WWTP M
001T 0 A
06/01/95 1
09/20/00 10/31/05
07/28/95 1
P/F STATRE 7DAY CHR CERIODAPHNIA
TGP3B 10 0
10/31/98
P/F STATRE 7DAY CHR PIMEPHALES PROMELAS
TGP6C 10 0
10/31/98
0011 9 A 06/01/95 1
F NITROGEN, AMMONIA TOTAL (AS N)
00610 1 W 0
01/31/01
9A
E90
0 07/28/95 1
26 50.0 75.0
MO AVG WKLY AVG
06/01/95 05/31/99
11/01/00 10/31/05
19 DELMON 3.0 4.5
MO AVG WKLY AVG
E90 14.4
34 . 4
2.1
5.6
SUB-TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES:
TOTAL QUICK LOOK PRINT LINES:
12
155
------- |