NC0021407_Report_19970114

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNINO COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0021407
Highlands WWTP
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence
(eH)
Ins ream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
January 14, 1997
This document ios printed on reuse paper -ignore any
content on the reir-er+se'aide

Division of Water Quality
Biological Assessment Group
MEMORANDUM
To: Forrest Westall
Through:
From:
Jimmie Overton
Trish MacPhers
Neil Medlin tJ�
,,. Bryn H. Tracy`
January 14, 1997
Subject: Benthic Macroinvertebrate and Fish Community Assessments in the Cullasaja
River, Macon County, Little Tennessee River subbasin 040401
INTRODUCTION
The Asheville Regional Office requested that the Biological Assessment Group conduct benthic
macroinvertebrate and fisheries surveys on the Cullasaja River during October 1996. This request
emanated from local concerns involving the perceived impacts to the river by the Town of
Highlands new wastewater treatment facility's point of discharge. In December 1994, the
NPDES-permitted treatment plant began discharging treated effluent (0.5 MGD) below the Lake
Sequoyah dam. Since then, there have been local reports that impacts attributable to the facility are
now occurring in the river below the Cullasaja Falls (e.g. loss of fish species and year classes,
poor fish health, increased growths of periphyton, etc.). The purpose of Biological Assessment
Group's evaluation was to determine if the benthic macroinvertebrate and fish communities were
affected by the relocated effluent from the upstream WWTP. This memorandum summarizes the
two types of community assessments which were made on October 14-16, 1996.
Site Selection and Station Locations
Benthic macroinvertebrate, fish community, and habitat assessments were performed during
October 14-16, 1996 at six stations (Figure 1):
Stations
Location
B-1 US 64 above the town of Highlands
B-2 Approximately 0.6 mile below the Lake Sequoyah dam and the WWTP discharge
(near a power line and old USGS gaging station)
B-3 Peeks Creek Road (SR 1678), below the gorge, and —7.9 miles below the
discharge
F-1 SR 1677, —9.4 miles below the discharge
B-4 US 64 & SR 1524 (also an old USGS gaging station), —13.3 miles below the
discharge
F-2 SR 1653, —16.3 miles below the discharge
1 B= benthic community site and F = fish community site.
1

i
1
Figure 1. Sampling locations on the Cullasaja River, Macon County, October 14-16,1996.
FRANKLIN
Nickajack Creek
SR 1677
Crows Branch
Peeks Creek
Cullasaja River
El Fish Sampling Locations
QMacroinvertebrate Sampling Locations
Cullasaja Falls
)
Moss Branch
. Buck Creek
Brush Creek
Skitly Branch r Big Creek
Cullasaja River
Bridal Veil Falls
Mirror Lak
WWTP Discharge 4 Mill Creek
Lake Sequoyah
Turtle Pond Creek
Club Lake
HIGHLANDS
2

The benthic invertebrate sites were selected because data had been collected by the Biological
Assessment Group at these four sites, most recently in October 1991 (Appendices 1 and 2). The
October 1991 data could then be directly compared to the data that were collected in October 1996
without regard to seasonal complications. In addition to the October 1991 data, macroinvertebrates
have been collected at all four sampling locations at least once during other months.
Dr. William O. McLarney (under contract by the Tennessee Valley Authority and the Western
North Carolina Alliance) has been sampling the fish community of the middle Cullasaja River
annually since 1991 at a bridge crossing known as "Peaceful Cove" (SR 1677). He has also
sampled the lower portion of the river since 1990 at the SR 1653 bridge crossing. Through his
sampling efforts and applications of a modified Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI), he has concluded
there have been declines in the abundance of the Northern hogsucker Hypentilium nigricans and
the Wounded darter Etheostoma vulneratum, and a reduction and absence of certain year classes in
the Gilt darter Percina evides.
Dr. McLarney has provided descriptions of his sampling methods, data, and conclusions for our
review (pers. comm.). To corroborate Dr. McLarney's results, two sites on the Cullasaja River, at
SR 1677 and SR 1653, were sampled on October 15-16, 1996, using standard operating
procedures and methods developed by the Biological Assessment Group for the application of the
North Carolina Index of Biotic Integrity (NCIBI) (NCDEHNR 1995). SR 1677 is located
approximately 9.4 miles below the WWTP's discharge and 8.4 miles above the confluence with
the Little Tennessee River. Evaluating the fish community closer to the discharge was not practical
due to a naturally limited fauna above and immediately below the Cullasaja Falls. SR 1653 is
located approximately 16.3 miles below the discharge and approximately 1.1 miles above its
confluence with the Little Tennessee River. This site was chosen to reflect the cumulative impacts
from the entire upstream watershed.
METHODS
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
To duplicate the sampling protocols used during the October 1991 collections, macroinvertebrates
were sampled in October 1996 using the Biological Assessment Group's standard qualitative
collection method at Station 3 and the EPT (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera)
collection method at Stations 1, 2 and 4.
The standard qualitative sampling procedure includes 10 composite samples: two kick -net samples,
three bank sweeps, two rock or log washes, one sand sample, one leafpack sample, and visual
collections from large rocks and logs. The purpose of these collections are to inventory the aquatic
fauna and produce an indication of relative abundance for each taxon. Organisms were classified
as Rare (1-2 specimens), Common (3-9 specimens), or Abundant (>10 specimens).
Several data -analysis summaries (metrics) can be produced from standard qualitative samples to
detect water quality problems. These metrics are based on the idea that unstressed streams and
rivers have many invertebrate taxa and are dominated by intolerant species. Conversely, polluted
streams have fewer numbers of invertebrate taxa and are dominated by tolerant species. The
diversity of the invertebrate fauna is evaluated using taxa richness counts; the tolerance of the
stream community is evaluated using a biotic index.
EPT taxa richness (EPT S) is used with DWQ criteria to assign water quality ratings
(bioclassifications). "EPT" is an abbreviation for Ephemeroptera + Plecoptera + Trichoptera,
insect groups that are generally intolerant of many kinds of pollution. Higher EPT taxa richness
values usually indicate better water quality. Water quality ratings also are based on the relative
tolerance of the macroinvertebrate community as summarized by the North Carolina Biotic Index
(NCBI). Both tolerance values for individual species and the final biotic index values have a range
of 0-10, with higher numbers indicating more tolerant species or more polluted conditions. Water
quality ratings assigned with the biotic index numbers were combined with EPT taxa richness
3

ratings to produce a final bioclassification, using criteria for Mountain ecoregion streams. EPT
abundance (EPT N) and total taxa richness calculations also are used to help examine between -site
differences in water quality. When the EPT taxa richness rating and the biotic index differ by one
bioclassification, the EPT abundance value was used to produce the final site rating.
Benthic macroinvertebrates were collected at Stations 1, 2, and 4 using EPT sampling procedure.
This type of collection is intended to quickly assess between -station differences in water quality.
Four composite samples were taken at each site: 1 kick, 1 sweep, 1 leafpack and visual collections.
Only intolerant "EPT" groups (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera) were collected and
identified. For this collection technique, bioclassifications were assigned based solely on EPT taxa
richness using criteria for Mountain ecoregion streams. EPT abundance and EPT biotic index
values were used to compare sites, but cannot be used with these limited collections to produce site
ratings.
Both EPT taxa richness and biotic index values also can be affected by seasonal changes. DWQ
criteria for assigning bioclassification are based on summer sampling: June -September. For
samples collected in other months, EPT taxa richness was adjusted by subtracting out
winter/spring Plecoptera. The biotic index values also were seasonally adjusted by adding 0.4 for
samples collected in October and 0.5 for samples collected in December.
Fish Community Assessment
At each sample site, a 200 meter section of stream was selected and measured. The fish in the
stream were then collected using 2 or 3 backpack electrofishing units accompanied by 2 or 3 people
using dip nets and a seine. Where the riffle microhabitats were abundant, a seine was used to
increase collecting efficiency. On October 15, 1996, Mr. Forrest Westall and Dr. McLarney
assisted in the collection of fish at the SR 1677 site.
After collection, all readily identifiable fish (usually sculpins, river chubs, northern hogsuckers,
etc.) were examined for sores, lesions, fin damage, and skeletal anomalies, measured (total length
to the nearest 1 mm), and then released. Fish that could not be identified were preserved in 10%
formalin and returned to the laboratory for identification, examination, and total length
measurement. The resulting data were then analyzed with the NCIBI (Appendix 3).
The NCIBI is a modification of the Index of Biotic Integrity initially proposed by Karr (1981) and
Karr et al. (1986). The method was developed for assessing a stream's biological integrity by
examining the structure and health of its fish community. The scores derived from this index are a
measure of the ecological health of the waterbody and may not directly correlate to water quality.
For example, a stream with excellent water quality, but with poor or fair fish habitat, would not be
rated excellent with this index. However, a stream which rated excellent on the NCIBI should be
expected to have excellent water quality. Currently, the NCIBI is not applicable to high elevation
or small, coldwater trout streams.
The Index incorporates information about species richness and composition, trophic composition,
fish abundance, and fish condition. The NCIBI summarizes the effects of all classes of factors
influencing aquatic faunal communities (water quality, energy source, habitat quality, flow regime,
and biotic interactions). While any change in a fish community can be caused by many factors,
certain aspects of the community are generally more responsive to specific influences. Species
composition measurements reflect habitat quality effects. Information on trophic composition
reflects the effect of biotic interactions and energy supply. Fish abundance and condition
information indicates additional water quality effects. It should be noted, however, that these
responses may overlap. For example, a change in fish abundance may be due to decreased energy
supply or a decline in habitat quality, not necessarily a change in water quality.
The assessment of biological integrity using the NCIBI is provided by the cumulative assessment
of 12 parameters or metrics (Appendix 3). The values provided by the metrics are converted into
4

scores on a 1, 3, or 5 scale. A score of 5 represents conditions which would be expected for
undisturbed streams in the specific river basin or ecoregion, while a score of 1 indicates that the
conditions vary greatly from those expected in undisturbed streams of the region. Each metric is
designed to contribute unique information to the overall assessment. The scores for all metrics are
then summed to obtain the overall IB I score. Finally, the NCIBI score (an even number between
12 and 60) is then used to determine 1 of the 10 theoretical ecological integrity classes of the stream
from which the sample was collected:
NCIBI Scores Integrity Class CIass Attributes'
58 or 60 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 along with a full
array of size classes and a balanced trophic structure.
54 or 56 Good -Excellent
48, 50, or 52 Good Species richness somewhat below expectation, especially due to
the loss of the most intolerant species; some species are present
with less than optimal abundances or size distributions; and the
.trophic structure shows some signs of stress.
46 Fair -Good
40, 42, or 44 Fair Signs of additional deterioration include the loss of intolerant
species, fewer species, and a highly skewed trophic structure.
36 or 38 Poor -Fair
28, 30, 32, or 34 Poor Dominated by omnivores, tolerant species, and habitat
generalists; few top carnivores; growth rates and condition factors
commonly depressed; and diseased fish often present.
24 or 26 Very Poor -Poor
12, 14, 16, 18, 20, or 22 Very Poor Few fish present, mostly introduced or tolerant species; and
disease fin damage and other anomalies are regular.
No fish Repeated sampling finds no fish.
1 Over -lapping classes share attributes with classes greater than and less than the respective NCIBI score.
Young -of -Year Considerations and Adjustments
Young -of -year (YOY) fish may pose several challenges when applying NCIBI metrics to a fish
community sample. Assessments made during the spring and early summer tend to avoid these
challenges. However, samples collected later in the year (i.e., October) may have an abundance of
YOY fish. Angermeier and Karr (1986) and Angermeier and Schlosser (1987) found that IBI
scores were 2-10 units lower when YOY were excluded than when they were included. They also
believed that inclusion of YOY introduced a larger margin of error into the IBI interpretation than if
these fish were excluded from the computations. Dr. McLamey, who has traditionally sampled the
Cullasaja River during the spring or early summer, believes that YOY fish have not experienced
the full annual cycle of stress (including natural winter mortality), may or may not be permanent
residents of a site, pose errors in identification, and can experience significant mortality when
handled (pers. comm.). To reduce the complications associated with YOY fish in the October
1996 samples, data analyses were performed with and without YOY in the calculations.
Habitat Assessment
The North Carolina mountain habitat assessment draft protocol is a subjective analysis based on
best professional judgment of nine habitat metrics. These metrics include analyses of channel
modification, 4 instream habitat characteristics, 2 stream bank measurements, and 2 riparian zone
measurements. Scores are given for each of the metrics and are then totaled. However, because
5

the protocol is in draft form and the scoring may change with subsequent revisions, these scores
should only be used for comparative screening purposes. A narrative assessment may be more
appropriate for spatial comparisons.
Water Quality Measurements
Water quality variables were measured using standard operating procedures and laboratory
calibrated dissolved oxygen, temperature, specific conductance, and pH meters (NCDEHNR
1995).
RESULTS and DISCUSSION
Site Characterizations
The Cullasaja River during the sampling period was clear and at normal flow levels for mid -
October (Table 1). As the river traverses from the Lake Sequoyah dam through the gorge and
down towards its mouth, the river widens and the gradient decreases from 367 to 96 ft/mi.
Generally water temperatures and the extent of bank erosion increased in a downstream direction.
Dissolved oxygen and specific conductance measurements were fairly uniform throughout the
drainage.
Table 1. Water quality, hydrologic conditions, and site characterizations on the Cullasaja River,
October 14-16, 1996.
Variable Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 SR 1677 Station 4 SR 1653
Community Type Benthos Benthos Benthos Fish Benthos Fish
Distance below N/A -0.6 -7.9 -9.4 -13.3 -16.3
WWTP (mi.)
Gradient (from Lake N/A 367 185 162 117 96
Sequoyah dam,
ft/mi.))
Date sampled • 10/14/96 10/14/96 10/15/96 10/15/96 10/14/96 10/16/96
Time 1330-1415 1430-1530 0900-1100 1200-1600 1600-1700 0915-1115
Mean width 6 14 18 18 18 18
Mean depth 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.6
Maximum depth 1.0 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.5 1.5
Shading (%) 80 30 30 30 30 20
Aufwuchs Moderate Very abundant Slight _ Abundant Slight Slight
Bank erosion Slight None Slight Moderate Mod.- Severe Severe
Substrate (%)
Boulder 25 70 50 20 10 0
Rubble 30 15 30 40 25 Trace
Gravel 15 5 10 20 30 30
Sand 25 10 - 10 20 35 60
Silt 5 0 0 Trace 0 10
Water clarity Clear Clear Clear Clear Clear Clear
Specific conductance 25 28 22 29 25 30
(µS/cm)
Temperature (°C) 12.0 13.0 11.0 12.5 13.8 15.0
Dissolved oxygen 9.2 8.9 9.1 9.2 9.4 9.4
(mg/liter)
pH 6.9 7.5 7.5 6.9 7.7 7.3
Electrofishing N/A N/A N/A 9,514 N/A 7,135
duration (sec.)
Habitat Assessment
The assessments indicated good overall stream habitat quality at macroinvertebrate sampling
Stations 1 - 3, but progressively decreasing downstream towards the middle and lower reaches of
the watershed (Table 2). Although good habitat quality was documented at Station 1, upstream of
6

Table 2. North Carolina mountain habitat assessment draft protocol scores as applied to six sites
on the Cullasaja River, October 14-16, 1996.1
Station
Characteristic (range) Station Station Station S R Station S R
1 2 3 1677 4 1653
Community collection type Benthos Benthos Benthos Fish Benthos Fish
Channel modification (1-10) 10 10 9 6 9 6
Instream habitat (0-16) 16 13 14 16 16 14
Bottom substrate (1-10) 8 5 10 10 8 4
Pool variety (0-10) 10 10 4 6 4 4
Riffle Habitat (0-10) 3 6 10 10 5 3
Bank stability, left and right 5, 7 7, 7 7, 7 3, 5 2, 5 1, 2
shorelines (0-7)
Bank vegetation, left and right 5, 5 5, 5 3,-4 4, 4 2, 4 2, 2
shorelines (0-5)
Light penetration (8-10) 7 7 7 7 7 4
Riparian vegetation zone width, 3, 5 5, 5 4, 3 2, 3 0, 5 1, 1
left and right shorelines (0-5)
Total score (10-100)
85 85 82 76 67 44
1 Because the protocol is in draft form and the scores may change with subsequent revisions, the scores should only
be used for comparative screening purposes. Until the protocol is finalized, a narrative analysis may be more
appropriate (Appendix 6).
this area, golf courses and related developments have impacted the Cullasaja River's bank and
riparian zone. The most distinguishing habitat feature at Station 2, located in the gorge, was the
predominantly bedrock substrate. The substrate at Station 3, below the gorge at the Peeks Creek
Road bridge crossing, was a combination of boulder and rubble with very good riffle habitat.
At SR 1677, at the Pleasant Cove Road bridge crossing and the most upstream fish collection site,
the overall habitat rating was slightly lower than that at the Peeks Creek Road site. This was
primarily because of the encroachment into the river's riparian zone by the US 64 highway on the
north side and by fields on the south side. The Pleasant Cove Road site had less boulder in its
substrate than the Peeks Creek Road site, but it still had very good riffle habitat.
Further downstream at macroinvertebrate Station 4, the substrate had a greater percentage of sand
than the upstream sites. The north side of the stream had very little intact riparian zone and had an
unstable bank. Riffles at this site were much less frequent and not as extensive as those upstream.
The most downstream site at SR 1653 was rated as having the poorest overall habitat of the
survey. The substrate was mostly gravel and sand with small, infreuent riffle areas. The river's
riparian zone was reduced to narrow strips on each side and both banks were unstable.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
From December 1990 through October 1996, benthic macroinvertebrates have been collected from
all four stations on the Cullasaja River on three occasions (Tables 3 and 4; Appendices 1 and 2).
In addition to these three sampling events, macroinvertebrates were collected in July 1994, but
only at Stations 3 and 4. On each occasion, the data suggested the same pattern in water quality: 1)
the water quality at Station 1 above Highlands was low (Poor or Fair bioclassification), 2) it
improved at Station 2 below Lake Sequoyah (Good -Fair bioclassification), 3) increased more at
Station 3 below the Cullasaja River Gorge (Good or Excellent bioclassification), and 4) decreased
slightly (Good -Fair or Good bioclassification) at Station 4 towards the lower portion of the river.
7

Table 3. Taxonomic richness of macroinvertebrates and summary statistics at Stations 1 and 2 on
the Cullasaja River, Macon County, 1990-1996.
Station Station 1 Station 2
Variable/Date 10/91 10/96 12/90 10/91 10/96 12/90 7/94
Ephemeroptera 5 9 7 7 8 10 10
Plecoptera 0 1 4 2 3 7 . 4
Trichoptera 4 8 3 . 11 9 13 13
Coleoptera 2
Odonata 1
Megaloptera 2
Chironomidae 27
Misc. Diptera 5
Oligochaeta 2
Crustacea s 3
Mollusca 0
Other 1
Total Taxa Richness 70
EPT S 9 18 14 20 20 30 27
Adjusted EPT S1 9 17 12 19 19 25 27
EPT Abundance 38 66 72 82 111 134 101
Biotic Index 4.89
EPT Biotic Index 5.59 4.82 4.88 4.08 4.13 3.41 3.53
Bioclassifiication2 Poor Fair Fair G/F G/F G/F G/F
1 After seasonal adjustment (i.e., deletion of the winter and spring emerging Plecoptera).
2 G/F = Good -Fair.
At Station 1, EPT taxa richness and EPT abundance both increased between October 1991 and
October 1996. The increase in EPT richness was enough to change the bioclassification from Poor
in 1991 to Fair in 1996. Although the EPT count was less than that recorded in October 1996, a
Fair bioclassification also was assigned to this site in December 1990. The Cullasaja River at this
sampling location receives runoff from residential areas, several country club golf courses, and
small NPDES permitted discharges from these country clubs.
The EPT taxa richness below Lake Sequoyah (Station 2) in October 1991 was 20. In October
1996, almost two years following the relocation of the WWTP discharge to the Cullasaja River, the
EPT taxa richness also was 20. EPT abundance was higher (111) in 1996 than it was in 1991
(82). The two other macroinvertebrate samples collected from this location, in December 1990 and
July 1994, were collected in different seasons of the year and with a different collecting technique
(1994 sample), but also resulted in a Good -Fair bioclassification being assigned to the stream.
Heavy growths of algae have been noted at this site each time it has been sampled.
Comparison of the October 1991 and. October 1996 data at Station 3, below the Cullasaja River
Gorge, showed a slight decrease in EPT and total taxa richness from 1991 to 1996 that was offset
by an improvement in the BI. An Excellent bioclassification was assigned to the site for both of
the October sampling events. This site was also rated Excellent in July 1994. The only time
Station 3 had not been rated Excellent was in December 1990, when it received a Good
bioclassification.
8

Table 4. Taxonomic richness of macroinvertebrates and summary statistics at Stations 3 and 4 on
the Cullasaja River, Macon County, 1990-1996.
Station Station 3 Station 4
Variable/Date 10/91 10/96 12/90 7/94 10/91 10/96 12/90
Ephemeroptera 19 16 15 19 12 14 9
Plecoptera 10 8 8 7 8 6 7
Trichoptera 19 20 14 16 15 17 12
Coleoptera 5 5 5
Odonata 4 4 3
Megaloptera 3 2 2
Chironomidae 20 21 21
Misc. Diptera 7 5 5
Oligochaeta 2 1 2
Crustacea 1. • 0 2
Mollusca 4 2 2
Other 13 " 1 1
Total Taxa Richness 95 85
85
EPT S 48 44 37 42 35 37 28
Adjusted EPT S 1 43 . 41 34 42 30 33 23
EPT Abundance 241 216 174 157 120 105 118
Biotic Index 3.67 3.46 3.81
Adjusted Biotic 4.07 3.86 3.81
Index2
EPT Biotic Index 2.52 2.68 2.98 3.33 2.54 3.17
Bioclassification3 Ex Ex Good Ex Good Good G/F
1 After seasonal adjustment (i.e., deletion of the winter and spring emerging Plecoptera)
2 After seasonal adjustment (Le., addition of 0.4 units)
3 Ex = Excellent; G/F = Good -Fair
The macroinvertebrate community at the most downstream station, Station 4, also showed little
variation between October 1991 and October 1996 - 35 EPT taxa were collected in 1991 and 37
EPT taxa in 1996. The site was assigned a Good bioclassification for both years. Fewer EPT taxa
(28) were collected from this site in December 1990 when it received a Good -Fair bioclassification.
Fish Community Assessment
October 1996 Data
On October 15-16, 1996, 21 species of fish were collected from the Cullasaja River at SR 1677
and SR 1653 (Table 5 and Appendix 5). The fish community included 8 species of minnows, 5
species of sunfish (also sportfish), 4 species of darters, 2 species of suckers, and one species each
of lamprey and sculpin.
At SR 1677 (-9.4 miles below the discharge), the fish community was rated as Excellent, scoring
58 out of a possible 60 points (Table 6). All but one of the 12 metrics were scored as a "5" or
what would be expected at an unimpacted site in the Little Tennessee River basin. The dominant
species were the mottled sculpin and the stoneroller (Table 5). Four of the 19 species collected
were classified as intolerant species --Tennessee shiner Notropis leuciodes, Greenside darter
Etheostoma chlorobranchium, Wounded darter E. vulneratum, and Gilt darter Percina evides.
9

Table 5. Total, young -of -year, and juvenile and adult abundances of species collected at two sites
on the Cullasaja River, Macon County, October 15-16, 1996.
Family/Species
Common Name
SR SR
1677 1653
Total yoyl Juvenile Total yoyl Juvenile
& Adult & Adult
Petromyzontidae
Ichthyomyzon greeleyi
Cyprinidae
Campostoma anomalum
Cyprinella galactura
Luxilus coccogenis
Nocomis micropogon
Notropis leuciodes
N. spectrunculus
Phenacobius crassilabrum
Rhinichthys cataractae
Catostomidae
Hypentelium nigricans
Moxostoma duquesnei
Centrarchidae
Ambloplites rupestris
Lepomis auritus
L. gulosus
L. macrochirus
Micropterus dolomieu
Percidae
Etheostoma blennioides
E. chlorobranchium'
E. vulneratum
Percina evides
Cottidae
Cottus bairdi
Total
No. fish/100 sec.
1 YOY = young -of -year
At SR 1653 (-16.3 miles below the discharge), the fish community was rated as Good, scoring 50
out of a possible 60 points (Table 6). Eight of the 12 metrics were scored as a "5" or what would
be expected at an unimpacted site in the Little Tennessee River basin. Four metrics, number of
individuals, number of species of darters, number of intolerant species, and percentage of
insectivores, were scored as a 1 or a 3 and reflected a decline in overall habitat quality. A score of
1 (for the number of individuals collected) indicated that the metric deviated greatly from what was
to be expected at an undisturbed stream in this region. The Cullasaja River at this site was
characterized as having a sand and gravel substrate, high, eroded banks, and only a very narrow
riparian zone. Five species of sunfish were collected at this site which was reflected by a wanner
and more open canopy -type environment, a closer proximity to the Little Tennessee River and Lake
Emory, and a gradient that was approximately 60% of that at SR 1677. The dominant species
were the Tennessee shiner and the River chub Nocomis micropogon (Table 5). Only two of the
18 species were classified as intolerant species —the Tennessee shiner and the Gilt darter.
Lampreys
Mountain Brook Lamprey 2 0 2 7 0 7
Minnows
Stoneroller
Whitetail Shiner
Warpaint Shiner
River Chub
Tennessee Shiner
Mirror Shiner
Fatlips Minnow
Longnose Dace
S uckers
Northern Hogsucker
Black Redhorse
Sunfish and Bass
Rock Bass
Redbreast Sunfish
Warmouth
Bluegill
Smallmouth Bass
Darters
Greenside Darter
Greenfm Darter
Wounded Darter
Gilt Darter
Sculpins
Mottled Sculpin
142 53 89 9 6 3
3 0 3 16 1 15
69 42 27 29 29 0
70 13 . 57 38 18 20
49 9 ._ 40 ' 38 34 4
1 0 .0'1 8 8 0
6 1 5 2 2 .0
1 0 s'1
5 0 5 5 3 2
1 0 1 4 '1 3
2 0 W2 2 2 0
7 2 5
2 0 2
2 0 2 2 2 0
1 0 1 1 1 0
14 2 12 1 1 0
24 0 24
9 0 . 9
10 1 9 14 7 7
233 94 139 23 16 7
644 215 429 208 133 75
6.77 2.26 4.51 2.92 1.87 1.05
10

SR 1677
SR 1653
Table 6. Metric values from the fish community structure collections on the Cullasaja River,
October 15-16, 1996. The metric scores are listed within the parentheses.
Location YOY 1
Included
Yes
No
Yes
No
Location YOY 1
SR 1677
SR 1653
Included
Yes
No
Yes
No
NCIBI
Score
58
58
50
42
No. Species
of Sunfish
& Trout
2 (5)
2 (5)
4 (5)
2 (5)
Location YOY 1
SR 1677
SR 1653
Included Insectivores
Yes
No
Yes
No
1YOY = young -of -year.
66 (3)
65 (3)
73 (3)
60 (3)
NCIBI
Rating
Excellent
Excellent
Good
Fair
No.
Species of
Suckers
2 (5)
2 (5)
2 (5)
2 (5)
Specialized
Insectivores
28 (3)
30 (3)
44 (3)
15 (1)
No.
Species
19 (5)
19 (5)
18 (5)
11 (3)
No.
Intolerant
Species
4 (5) -
4 (5)
2 (3)
2 (3)
No.
Species
Piscivores
2 (5)
2 (5)
2 (5)
0 (1)
No.
Individuals
644 (5)
429 (5)
208 (1)
75 (1)
Tolerants
0 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
% Diseased
Individuals
0.2 (5)
0.2 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
No. Species
Darters
4 (5)
4 (5)
2 (3)
1 (3)
Omnivores
11 (5)
13 (5)
18 (5)
27 (3)
% Species
with Multiple
Age Groups
47 (5)
42 (5)
50 (5)
55 (5)
Contrasting the two different fish communities, more total fish, species, species of darters, and
intolerant species were collected at SR 1677 than at SR 1653 (Tables 6 and 6). Approximately 1.5
times more total fish were collected at SR 1677 than at SR 1653 and the catch per unit effort
(No. fish/100 seconds shocking time) was 2.3 times greater upstream than downstream. In
addition, there were more juvenile and adult fish at SR 1677 than at SR 1653; at SR 1653, a
greater percentage of the fish were young -of -year than at SR 1677 (64% vs. 33%, respectively).
The two habitats were also different --extensive cobble riffles at SR 1677 and fast runs, snags, and
pools at SR 1653. The quality of habitat at SR 1677 favored stonerollers, warpaint shiners,
sculpins, and darters; whereas at SR 1653, more species and individuals of sunfish and whitetail
shiners were collected than at SR 1677.
Young -of Year Fish Affect
As stated above, 33% and 64% of the fish were YOY at the two sampling sites (Table 5). There
were no significant differences between inclusion and exclusion of these fish in the calculations of
the NCIBI at SR 1677. Both methods of data analysis yielded a rating of Excellent (Table 6).
However, at SR 1653 the NCIBI decreased by 8 units and the ecological rating declined from
Good to Fair upon exclusion of the YOY fish from the calculations (Table 6). The metrics
associated with species richness (number of species) and trophic relations (percentage of
omnivores and number of species of piscivores) were most affected. Some species, for example
warpaint shiner, mirror shiner, fatlips minnow, and rock bass, were represented only by YOY
individuals.
Whether or not to exclude or include the YOY in the calculation of the NCIBI and render an
assessment of the impact from the Highland WWTP upon the fish communities of the Cullasaja
River is not at issue here. The discharge from the WWTP did not have an affect upon the fish
community at the SR 1677 site. And the lower ecological integrity rating of the community at
11

SR 1653, whether rated Good or Fair, was habitat, watershed, and land -use related rather than
effluent -related.
Analysis of Dr. McLarney's 1990-1996 Data
For comparative purposes, Dr. McLarney's fish community data were analyzed using the standard
NCIBI metrics that are applied to all applicable stream sites in the Little Tennessee River basin
(Tables 7 and 8).
Table 7. North Carolina Index of Biotic Integrity metric values from the fish community structure
collections at SR 1677 on the Cullasaja River, 1991-1996. Data provided by Dr. William
O. McLarney.1 The metric scores, calculated using Biological Assessment Unit Standard
Operating Procedures, are listed within the parentheses.
Location Year NCIBI NCIBI No.. No. No. Species
Score Rating Species Individuals Darters
SR 1677 1991
1993
1994
1995
1996
54
60
58
56
58
Location Year No. Species
of Sunfish
& Trout
Good -Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Good -Excellent
Excellent
No.
Species of
Suckers
14 (3)
17 (5)
• 18 (5)
17 (5)
18 (5)
No.
Intolerant
Species
385 (3)
472 (5)
425 (5)
411(5)
443 (5)
Tolerants
4 (5)
4 (5)
4 (5)
5 (5)
5 (5)
%
Omnivores
SR 1677 1991
1993
1994
1995
1996
Location Year
2 (5)
3 (5)
4 (5)
3 (5)
3 (5)
Insectivores
1 (3)
2 (5)
1 (3)
0 (1)
1 (3)
Specialized
Insectivores
4 (5)
4 (5)
4 (5)
5 (5)
5 (5)
No.
Species
Piscivores
0 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
% Diseased
Individuals
SR 1677 1991 85 (5)
1993 87 (5)
1994 82 (5)
1995 92 (5)
1996 85 (5)
45 (3)
35 (3)
46 (3)
39 (3)
31 (3)
6 (5)
7 (5)
5 (5)
2 (5)
2 (5)
% Species
with Multiple
Age Groups
57 (5)
82 (5)
67 (5)
47 (5)
44 (5)
1 The data supplied by Dr. McLamey (pers. comm.) were interpreted after assuming that 1) the collection method
that he used, although different, sampled the same area that the Biological Assessment Group sampled in October
1996; 2) multiple age class determinations, Metric 12, were conservatively made only on species which Dr.
McLarney had assigned a score of "5" indicating the presence of multiple year classes; and 3) no diseased fish were
collected, Metric 11, because no data where provided other than noting that: " ... wounded darter (Etheostoma
vulneratum) ... in 1996, nearly half the specimens taken were in poor physical condition".
2 No data were collected in 1992.
0 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
1.8 (5)
12

Table 8. North Carolina Index of Biotic Integrity metric values from the fish community structure
collections at SR 1653 on the Cullasaja River, 1990-1996. Data provided by Dr. William
O. McLarney.1 The metric scores, calculated using Biological Assessment Unit Standard
Operating Procedures, are listed within the parentheses.
Location Year NCIBI NCIBI No. No. No. Species
Score Rating Species Individuals Darters
SR 1653 1990 54 Good -Excellent
1991 54 Good -Excellent
1992 56 Good -Excellent
1993 58 Excellent
1994 60 Excellent
1995 48 Good
1996 48 Good
Location
Year
No. Species
of Sunfish
& Trout
No.
Species of
Suckers
17 (5)
14 (3)
16 (5)
18 (5)
22 (5)
18 (5)
20 (5)
No.
Intolerant
Species
261 (3)
385 (3)
302 (3)
294 (3)
503 (5)
149 (1)
151 (1)
%a
Tolerants
3 (5)
4 (5)
3 (5)
4(5)
3 (5)
2 (3)
2 (3)
Omnivores
SR 1653 1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
Location
Year
4 (5)
2 (5)
3 (5)
3 (5)
5 (5)
5 (5)
5 (5)
%
Insectivores
SR 1653 1990 84 (5)
1991 86(5)
1992 89 (5)
1993 93 (5)
1994 93 (5)
1995 76 (3)
1996 71 3)
1 (3)
1 (3)
1 (3)
2 (5)
3 (5)
2 (5)
2 (5)
Specialized
Insectivores
7 (1)
38 (3)
42 (3)
38 (3)
41 (3)
37 (3)
32 (3)
3 (5)
4 (5)
3 (5)
5 (5)
3 (5)
2 (3)
3 (5)
No.
Species
Piscivores
2 (5)
2 (5)
2 (5)
2 (5)
3 (5)
1 (5)
1 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
2 (5)
0 (5)
1 (5)
1 (5)
1 (5)
Diseased
Individuals
0 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
0 (5)
5 (5)
6 (5)
5 (5)
3 (5)
3 (5)
18 (5)
16 (5)
% Species
with Multiple
Age Groups
35 (3)
22 (3)
50 (5)
50 (5)
41 (5)
33 (3)
10 (1)
1 The data supplied by Dr. McLarney (pers. comm.) were interpreted after assuming that 1) the collection method
that he used, although different, sampled the same area that the Biological Assessment Group sampled in October
1996; 2) multiple age class determinations, Metric 12, were conservatively made only on species which Dr.
McLarney had assigned a score of "5" indicating the presence of multiple year classes; and 3) no diseased fish were
collected, Metric 11, because no data where provided.
Since 1991, the NCIBI scores and ratings have ranged between 54 and 60 and Good -Excellent to
Excellent, respectively at the SR 1677 site (Figure 2). During the last two years (i.e., since the
new WWTP discharge point has been used), the scores have been 56 and 58 and the ratings Good -
Excellent and Excellent. Since 1993, an average of 438 fish representing 17-18 species, 4-5
species of darters, 3-4 species of sunfish, and 0-2 species of suckers have been collected. The
presence or absence of suckers, may be a collection method bias resulting from the use of only one
backpack electroshocker. Since 1993, there has been a decline in Metric 12 which measures the
reproductive success of the fish community. The percentage of species represented by multiple age
groups has decreased from 82% in 1993 to 44% in 1996. It is unknown whether this decline is
real or the result of the conservative assumption made when analyzing the data (Footnote No. 1 in
Table 7). Dr. McLarney does not individually measure the total length of each fish but uses visual
assessment and professional judgment to determine if each species is represented by more than one
year class.
13

Near the lowest part of the watershed and further downstream at SR 1653, the biological integrity
of the fish community seems to have declined during 1995 and 1996 from previous ratings of
Excellent and Good -Excellent (Table 8 and Figure 2). During 1995 and 1996, the NCIBI score
was the lowest possible score (48) for the community to continue to be rated as Good. Although
there is year-to-year variability in fish communities and fish populations, a decline of 12 points is a
real decline.
Figure 2. Annual trends of the North Carolina Index of Biotic Integrity from two sites on the
Cullasaja River, Macon County, 1990-1996. Data provided by Dr. William O.
McLarney and NCIBI scores calculated using Biological Assessment Unit Standard
Operating Procedures. NS = not sampled.
NCIBT Score
60 — Excellent
56
52
48
44 —
40 —
36 —
32 —
28 —
24 —
ood-Excellent
20 —
16 —
Nis
12 BSI 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I 1 1 1 1 ill
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Year
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
SR 1677
SR 1653
The data showed a change in fish abundances, trophic structure, and reproduction. For example,
the number of fish collected decreased from 503 in 1994 to 151 in 1996, the percentage of
insectivores decreased from 93% in 1994 to 71% in 1996, and the percentage of species with
multiple age groups decreased from 41% to 10%. The decline in reproductive success may,
however, be an artifact of the conservative assumption made when analyzing the data (Footnote
No. 1 in Table 8). However, the overall assessment indicates there has been a decline in the
quality of fishery habitat, perhaps due to erosion and sedimentation, in the lower part of the
watershed.
Comparison of the October 1996 and Spring 1996 Data Sets
Comparing these two data sets (excluding the YOY fish from the October computations and
analyzing Dr. McLarney's data using the standard NCIBI metrics that are applied to all applicable
stream sites in the Little Tennessee River basin ), there were no differences in the ratings between
14

the two sample periods at the SR 1677 site (Tables 6 and 7). The communities during both periods
were scored 58 out of 60 possible points classifying the ecological integrity of the communities as
Excellent. Furthermore, the decline in the populations of the Northern hogsucker and the Gilt
darter (McLamey pers. comm.) were not substantiated. In October, 5 Northern hogsuckers and 10
Gilt darters were collected.
However, in the lower part of the watershed at SR 1653, the spring sample rated the fish
community as Good, whereas in October it was rated only as Fair (Tables 5 and 7). Species
richness and trophic metrics varied the most. For example, species richness decreased from 20 to
11 and the percentage of omnivores increased from 16% to 27%. It is possible there is more
seasonal variability in the fish community and in the NCIBI in lower ecologically rated streams or
sections of streams (i.e., at SR 1653) than there is in higher quality streams or sections of streams
(i.e., at SR 1677).
SUMMARY
A direct comparison of the macroinvertebrate data collected in October 1991 and that collected in
October 1996 indicated a slight improvement for the Cullasaja River at Station 1 above the Town
of Highlands. However, comparing the October 1996 data to the December 1990 data, no change
in the macroinvertebrate community is suggested at this site. No change occurred in the
macroinvertebrate communities at the other three sampling sites located below the NPDES
permitted discharge between October 1991 and October 1996. These data indicated that the
relocation of the Town of Highlands WWTP's discharge to the Cullasaja River below Lake
Sequoyah have had no impact on the river's macroinvertebrate community. Evaluation of
macroinvertebrate data from collections during other seasons since December 1990 also supported
this conclusion.
An October 1996 assessment of two fish communities, one in the middle and the other in the lower
part of the Cullasaja River watershed below the Town of Highlands, documented no impacts from
the treatment plant discharge. Spatial fish community differences were related to habitat quality
differences between the two sites. Data collected during the past five years (analyzed with
standardized techniques) have not shown any impact at the middle site (at SR 1677). A decline in
the ecological health of the fish community at the lower site during the past two years may be more
the result of watershed degradation and other dischargers than the discharge from the Highlands
WWTP located approximately 19 miles upstream.
REFERENCES
Angermeier, P. L. and J. R. Karr. 1986. Applying an Index of Biotic Integrity based on stream -
fish communities: Considerations in sampling and interpretation. N. Amer. J. Fish. Manage.
6:418-429.
Angermeier, P. L. and I. J. Schlosser. 1987. Assessing biotic integrity of the fish community in
a small Illinois stream. N. Amer. J. Fish. Manage. 7:331-338.
Karr, J. R 1981. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries. 6:21-27.
, Fausch, K. D., Angermeier, P. L., Yant, P. R, and I. J. Schlosser. 1986. Assessing
Biological Integrity in Running Water: A Method and Its Rationale. Ill. Nat. Hist. Surv. Spec.
Publ. 5. 28 pp.
NCDEHNR. 1995. Standard Operating Procedures, Biological Monitoring. Environmental
Sciences Branch. Water Quality Section. Division of Environmental Management. North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh, NC.
15

Appendix 1. Macroinvertebrate taxa list and relative abundance at Stations 1 and 2, Cullasaja
River, Macon County, 1990-1996 (A = abundant, C = common, R = rare).
Station 1 Station 2
Taxon 10/91 10/96 12/90 10/91 10/96 12/90 7/94
Ephemeroptera
Baetis flavistriga C R R A R R
B. pluto A C A C
Centroptilum spp R
Ephemerella hispida R
E. invaria (gr) R
E. rossi (gr) R
Epeorus dispar C
Eurylophella funeralis C R
E. temporalis C
Heptagenia spp R
H. marginalia
Heterocloeon sp
Isonychia spp R C C C C C
Leptophlebia spp C R
Neoephemera purpurea R
Paraleptophlebia spp R
Pseudocloeon spp R C R C
Stenonema meririvulanum R
S. modestum A A A A A A A
S. pudicum R C A C A A C
Stenacron pallidum R C R R
Plecoptera
Acroneuria abnormis
Allocapnia spp R A
Amphinemura spp
Diploperla duplicata R
Helopicus subvarians
Leuctra spp
Malirekus hastatus
Paragnetina immarginata
Strophopteryx spp
Taeniopteryx burksi A
Tallaperla spp
Trichoptera
Apatania sp
Ceraclea ancylus
Cheumatopsyche spp
Chimarra spp
Diplectrona modesta
Dolophilodes spp
Glossosoma spp
Hydropsyche betteni A A A
Hydatophylax argus
Hydroptila spp
Lype diversa R
Micrasema wataga
Nyctiophylax spp
N. celta R
Oecetis persimillis R
Polycentropus spp R
Ptilostomis spp
CC CC
A
R
R R
R
C . C
C
R A
R
C
A A A
R C
R A A
C
R
A A A A
A A A A
A A A A
R
R R R R
R
A A CC
R R
R
C R
R
R R
C
R R R
R
16

i
Appendix 1 (continued).
Taxon
Pycnopsyche spp
Rhyacophila anucus
R. vuphipes
R. spp
Symphitopsyche sparna
Coleoptera
Macronychus glabratus
Stenelmis spp
Odonata
Boyeria vinosa
Megaloptera
Corydalus cornutus
Nigronia serricomis
Station 1 Station 2
10/91 10/96 12/90
10/91 10/96 12/90 7/94
A C
R
R
R
C R A A A A
R
R
Diptera: Chironomidae
Ablabesmyia mallochi C
Brillia spp R
Orthocladius (Euorthocladius): C/O sp3 R
O. clarkei gr: C/O sp54 A
Cardiocladius spp R
Conchapelopia group A
Diamesa spp C
Dicrotendipes neomodestus R
Eukiefferiella brehmi gr (E sp 12) R
Tvetenia bavarica gr (E spl) R
T. discoloripes gr (E sp3) R
Microtendipes spl A
Nanocladius downesi R
N. spp R
Polypedilum convictum R
Pagastia spp C
Parachironomus pectinatellae R
Parametriocnemus lundbecki R
Phaenopsectra sp2 R
Rheocricotopus robacki R
Rheopelopia sp R
Rheotanytarsus spp A
Stenochironomus spp R
Synorthocladius spp R
Tanytarsus sp2 R
Thienemaniella spp C
Tribelos spp C
Misc. Diptera
Antocha spp A
Atherix lantha R
Empididae C
Simulium spp A
Tipula spp R
Oligochaeta
Enchytraeidae
Lumbriculidae
R
17

Appendix 1 (continued).
Station 1 Station 2
Taxon 10/91 10/96 12/90 10/91 10/96 12/90 7/94
Crustacea
Caecidotea sp (streams) A
Crangoayx spp R .
Hyallela azteca R
Other
Hydracarina R
18

Appendix 2. Macroinvertebrate taxa list and relative abundance at Stations 3 and 4, Cullasaja
River, Macon County, 1990-1996 (A = abundant, C = common, R = rare).
Station 3 Station 4
Taxon 10/91 10/96 12/90 7/94 10/91 10/96 12/90
Ephemeroptera
Baetis flavistriga C C A R
B. intercalaris A C A A R
B. pluto A A R C R
B. propinquus C C R
B. tricaudatus C R
Baetisca carolina C A R R R
Brachycercus spp C
Caenis spp C R R
Centroptilum spp R C_ R - R
Ephemerella hispida A A A
E. invaria (gr) C
E. rossi (gr) C R C
Epeorus spp C A
E. dispar A R
E. rubidus . A
Ephemera spp R
Eurylophella spp A R
E. funeralis C R
E. temporalis C A R C
Heptagenia marginalis C A
Isonychia spp A C A R
Leptophlebia spp R
Leucrocuta spp R
Neoephemera purpurea R C R
Paraleptophlebia spp R C C R
Pseudocloeon spp A AR A
Stenonema modestum A A A C
S. pudicum C A A R
Serraxella deficiens C
S. serrata C
Stenacron pallidum R R C
C R C
C C
R R
R R
A A A
C A A
C C R
Plecoptera
Acroneuria abnormis A A A A R. C R
Allocapnia spp A A A A C C A
Clioperia clio R
Cultus decisus C C
Haploperla brevis C
Helopicus subvarians A C
Isogenoides hansoni R
Leuctra spp R
Paragnetina ichusa R
P. immarginata A A A C
Perlesta spp A
Pteronarcys spp C C R A C C
P. dorsata R
Strophopteryx spp C A
Suwallia spp R
Sweltsa spp . R
Taeniopteryx spp C R R
T. burksi A A
Tallaperia spp C A C C R R
Yugus bulbosus R
R
R C
19

Appendix 2 (continued).
Station 3 Station 4
Taxon 10/91 10/96 12/90 7/94 10/91 10/96 12/90
Trichoptera
Brachycentrus appalachia C C A A A
B. nigrosoma R
B. spinae C R R C R R
Ceraclea ancylus C C R R
Cheumatopsyche spp A A CC A A A
Diplectrona modesta R C R R
Dolophilodes spp A A A R R
Glossosoma spp C R R R C
Goera spp R R C
G. calcarata C
Hydropsyche betteni R • R
H. scalaris R R
Hydatophylax spp R
H. argus C R C
Hydroptila spp R R R
Lepidostoma spp R R C
Lype diversa R
Micrasema bennetti R A
M. charonis R
M. wataga C C
Nectopsyche exquisita R C
Neophylax spp R
N.oligius R
Neureclipsis spp C
Nyctiophylax spp A C R C
N. celta A
N. nephophilus A
Oecetis persimillis R
O. spl A R C
Polycentropus spp C R C C R R
Ptilostomis spp R
Pycnopsyche spp C A R R
Rhyacophila caroling R
R. fuscula C
Setodes spp C R C A
Symphitopsyche bronta R R R
S. morosa A R R R A C C
S. spp R
S. sparna A A A A C R A
Triaenodes tardus A C
Coleoptera
Ectopria nervosa R C R
Helichus sp R C A
Macronychus glabratus C C C
Promoresia elegans R C R
Psephenus herricki R R C
Odonata
Boyeria grafiana R
B.vinosa R R C
Calopteryx spp C
Cordulegaster spp R R
Gomphus spp R
20

Appendix 2 (continued).
Station 3 Station 4
Taxon 10/91 10/96 12/90 7/94 10/91 10/96 12/90
Hagenius brevistylus R
Lanthus parvulus R
Stylogomphus albistylus R
Megaloptera
Corydalus comutus C C R
Nigronia serricornis C C C
Sialis spp R
Diptera: Chironomidae
Ablabesmyia mallochi R C
Brillia spp R C
Orthocladius obumbratus gr: C/O sp 10 C
O. robacld: c/o sp12 R
O. (Euorthociadius) type iii: C/O sp13 A
O. (E.): C/O sp20 R
O. clarkei gr: C/O sp54 C C
Cricotopus varipes gr: CIO sp6 R C
Cardiocladius spp R C
Cladotanytarsus spp R
Conchapelopia group C C R
Corynoneura spp C R C
Cryptochironomus fulvus R R C
Demicryptochironomus spp R
Diamesa spp C R
Eukiefferiella brehmi gr (E sp12) R
E. devonica gr (E sp2) A
Tvetenia bavarica gr (E spl) C
T. discoloripes gr (E sp3) R R
Microtendipes spp C
M. sp2 R
Nilothauma spp R
Polypedilum aviceps C
P. convictum C
Parachaetocladius spp R
Paracladopelma undine R
Parakiefferiella spp R
Parametriocnemus lundbecki C R
Phaenopsectra sp4 R
Potthastia longimanus R
Pseudorthocladius spp R
Rheotanytarsus spp C R A
Robackia claviger A
R. demeijerei A R
Stenochironomus spp R
Stictochironomus spp A
Stilocladius clinopecten R
Synorthocladius spp A R
Tanytarsus sp2 C
T. sp3 R
Thienemaniella spp A C C
Tribelos spp C
21

Appendix 2 (continued).
Station 3 Station 4
Taxon 10/91 10/96 12/90 7/94 10/91 10/96 12/90
Misc. Diptera
Antocha spp C C
Atherix spp R
A. lantha C
Chrysops spp R
Dicranota spp C
Dixa spp R
Hexatoma spp R R R
Palpomyia (complex) R R
Simulium spp A A
S. (Phosterodoros) spp A
S. vittatum C
Tipula spp C
Oligochaeta
Lumbriculidae C C
Nais spp R
Crustacea
Caecidotea sp (streams)
Astacidae
R
R
R
R
C
Pelecypoda
Pisidium spp R
Gastropoda
Elimia sp A R C
Ferrissia spp C A C
Physella spp R
Other
Hydracarina R R C
22

Appendix 3. Scoring criteria for the Little Tennessee River Basin NCIBI metrics.
N o . Metric
Score
1 Number of species
2 Number of individuals
3 Number of species of darters
>_ 3 species
1-2 species
0 species
4 Number of species of sunfish and
>_ 2 species
1 species
0 species
5 Number of species of suckers
>_ 2 species
1 species
0 species
6 Number of intolerant species
>_ 3 species
1-2 species
0 species
7 Percentage of tolerant individuals
<20%
20-45%
> 45%
trout
8 Percentage of omnivorous individuals
<20%
20-45%
> 45%
9 Percentage of insectivorous individuals
> 80%
40-79%
<40%
10 Number of piscivorous species
>_ 1 species
< 0 species
11 Percentage of diseased fish
<2%
2-5%
>5%
12 Percentage of species with multiple age
groups
> 40% of all species have multiple age groups
20-40% of all species have multiple groups
< 20% of all species have multiple age groups
Score dependent upon drainage area
(Appendix 4)
Score dependent upon drainage area
(Appendix 4)
5
3
1
5
3
1
5
3
1
Refer to Appendix 5
5
3
1
Refer to Appendix 5
5
3
1
Refer to Appendix 5
5
3
1
Refer to Appendix 5
5
3
1
Refer to Appendix 5
5
1
5
3
1
5
3
1
23

Appendix 3 (continued).
A brief explanation of each of the NCIBI metrics for the Little Tennessee River Basin is presented:
1 & 2. Number of Species and Number of Individuals: The total number of species and
individuals supported by streams of a given size in a given region decrease with
environmental degradation. In addition, streams with larger watersheds or drainage areas
can be expected to support more species and a greater number of fish. Both of these
metrics are rated according to the river basin from which the sample was taken and the
drainage area size at the sampling point. Drainage area size is calculated from USGS 7.5
minute series topographic maps, if not otherwise known (ambient database, USGS
publications, or a USGS Masterfile printout which gives drainage areas for many streams
at given road crossings).
All fish should be identified to the species level. If a fish can not be identified below the
genus level and it is the only fish of that genus in the sample, it is counted as a species in
the Number of Species metric. Recent exotics, for example, tilapia and grass carp, are not
included in the index because they are not part of the native North Carolina fish fauna.
The relative number of species and number of fish that can be expected, based upon
drainage area size, for the Little Tennessee River Basin are presented in Appendix 4.
3. Number of Species of Darters: Darters are sensitive to environmental degradation
particularly as a result of their specific reproductive and habitat requirements (Page 1983;
Kuehne and Barbour 1983). Darter habitats are degraded as a result of channelization,
siltation, and reduced oxygen levels. The collection of fewer then the expected number of
species of darters can indicate that some degree of habitat degradation is occurring. This
metric is a count of all the species of Etheostoma and Percina in the sample.
4. Number of Species of Sunfish and Trout: Sunfish and trout species are used because they
are particularly responsive to habitat degradation such as the sedimentation -in of pools and
the loss of instream cover. This metric is a count of all the species of Lepomis, and
Ambloplites, as well as all species of trout, whether native or stocked, in the sample.
5. Number of Species of Suckers: Suckers are intolerant of habitat and chemical degradation
and, because they are long lived, provide a multiyear integrated perspective. They also
reflect the condition of the benthic community which may be harmed by sedimentation or
by sediment contamination. This metric is a count of all species within the family
Catostomidae in the sample.
6. Number of Intolerant Species: Intolerant species are those which are most affected by
environmental perturbations and therefore should disappear, at least as viable populations,
by the time a stream is rated as "Fair". This metric is a count of all intolerant species in the
sample as determined from Appendix 5.
7. Percentage of Tolerant Individuals: Tolerant species are those which are often present in a
stream in moderate numbers but as the stream degrades, they can become dominant. The
number of individuals in each of the tolerant species (Appendix 5) is summed and divided
by the total number of fish collected to obtain the percentage of tolerant fish.
8-10. Percentages of Omnivorous and Insectivorous Individuals and Number of Piscivorous
Species: The three trophic composition metrics --proportion of omnivores, insectivores (or
specialized insectivores), and piscivores--are used to measure the divergence from expected
production and consumption patterns in the fish community that can result from
environmental degradation. The main cause for a shift in the trophic composition of the
24

Appendix 3 (continued).
fish community, a greater proportion of omnivores and lesser proportion of insectivores
that what is to be expected, is nutrient enrichment. The number of individuals in each of
the omnivorous and insectivorous trophic classes (Appendix 5) are summed and divided by
the total number of fish collected to obtain the percentage by that trophic class.
In Mountain ecoregion streams, the Percentage of Insectivores metric can be interchanged
with the Percentage of Specialized Insectivores metric whose scores are : < 25% = 1, 25-
50% = 3, and > 50% = 5. The metric (Percentage of Insectivores or Percentage of
Specialized Insectivores) which yields the greatest score is then used.
The Number of Piscivorous Species metric is a count of the number of piscivorous species
(Appendix 5) in the sample. The metric scores for the Number of Piscivorous Species are:
0 piscivorous species collected = 1 and >_ 1 piscivorous species collected = 5 (the
intermediate score is deleted).
11. The Percentage of Diseased Fish: The percentage of fish with disease, tumors, fin damage,
and skeletal anomalies increases as a stream is degraded. To rate this metric, the number of
fish in the sample which have sores, lesions, skeletal anomalies (as evident externally), or
diseased, damaged, or rotten fins is summed and divided by total number of fish collected
to obtain the percentage of diseased fish. Fin or other external damage as a result of
spawning should not be counted. Fish are considered to be in spawning condition when
tubercles or breeding colors are evident.
12. The Percentage of Species with Multiple Age Groups (Length Distribution): For each
species, the total length distribution data are used to determine the presence of different age
groups and thus, the amount of reproductive success. This metric is calculated by first
counting the total number of species present in the sample. Then, the total lengths of all the
fish of each species are examined to determine whether or not all the fish of that species are
of one or multiple age groups. Finally, the percentage of species with multiple age groups
is determined by dividing the number of species with multiple age groups by the total
number of species collected in the sample. Although some species are rare and some
species have fewer age groups than others, at least three individuals per species must have
been collected to determine the presence of multiple age groups within the population. In
some instances, professional judgment may also be used to determine the reproductive
success of a particular species. Publications such as Carlander (1969 and 1977), Kuehne
and Barbour (1983), Page (1983), Manooch (1984), Etnier and Starnes (1993), Jenkins
and Burkhead (1993), and Rohde et al. (1994) may also be consulted to determine length -
age class relationships.
REFERENCES
Carlander, K. D. 1969. Handbook of Freshwater Fishery Biology, Vol. 1. Life History Data on
Freshwater Fish of the United States and Canada, Exclusive of the Perciformes. Iowa State
University Press, Ames, IA. 752 pp.
. 1977. Handbook of Freshwater Fishery Biology, Vol. 2. Life History Data on
Centrarchid Fishes of the United States and Canada. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA.
431 pp.
Etnier, D. A. and W. C. Starnes. 1993. The Fishes of Tennessee. The University of Tennessee
Press, Knoxville, TN 681 pp.
25

Appendix 3 (continued).
Jenkins, R E. and N M. Burkhead. 1993. Freshwater Fishes of Virginia. Amer. Fish. Soc.,
Bethesda, MD. 1079 pp.
Karr, J. R 1981. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries. 6:21-27.
, Fausch, K. D., Angermeier, P. L., Yant, P. R, and I. J. Schlosser. 1986. Assessing
Biological Integrity in Running Water: A Method and Its Rationale. Ill. Nat. Hist. Surv. Spec.
Publ. 5. 28 pp.
Kuehne, R A. and R W. Barbour. 1983. The American Darters. Univ. Press of KY. Lexington,
KY. 177 pp.
Manooch, C. S, M. 1984. Fisherman's guide, Fishes of the Southeastern United States. North
Carolina State Museum of Natural History, Raleigh, NC. 362 pp.
Menhinick, E. F. 1991. The Freshwater Fishes of North Carolina. North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission. Raleigh, NC. 227 pp.
Page, L. M. 1983. Handbook of Darters. T. F. H. Publications, Inc. Neptune City, NJ. 271
pp.
Rohde, F. C., Arndt, R G., Lindquist, D. G., and J. F. Parnell. 1994. Freshwater Fishes of the
Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. The University of North Carolina Press. Chapel
Hill, NC. 222 pp.
26

Appendix 4. Expectations and metric scores for the number of species and number of fish as
functions of the drainage area size (mi2) in the French Broad River, Hiwassee,
Little Tennessee River (including the Cullasaja River), and Savannah River basins.
40
Number of Species
Number of Fish
.
.
.
35-
30-
25-
20-
1 5-
1 0
950113
l
OD
WOO
•
0 5
0 0 0
00 ® O O 0 0
0 COO 0
0 3
0
0 ® 0 0
O
1.11
O
O
0 0
1
10
1 10
Drainage area
Drainage area
100
1000
27

T
Appendix 5. Tolerance ratings and adult trophic guild assignments for the fish species collected
from the Cullasaja River, October 15-16,1996.
Family/Species
Common Name
Tolerance Rating
Trophic Guild of Adults
Petromyzontidae
Ichthyomyzon greeleyi
Cyprinidae
Campostoma anomalum
Cyprinella galactura
Luxilus coccogenis
Nocomis micropogon
Notropis leuciodes
N. spectrunculus
Phenacobius crassilabrum
Rhinichthys cataractae
Catostomidae
Hypentelium nigricans
Moxostoma duquesnei
Centrarchidae
Ambloplites rupestris
Lepomis auritus
L. gulosus
L. macrochirus•
Micropterus dolomieu
Percidae
Etheostorna blennioides
E. chlorobranchium
E. vulneratum
Percina evides
Cottidae
Cottus bairdi
Lampreys
Mountain Brook Lamprey
Minnows
Stoneroller
Whitetail Shiner
Warpaint Shiner
River Chub
Tennessee Shiner
Mirror Shiner
Fatlips Minnow
Longnose Dace
Suckers
Northern Hogsucker
Black Redhorse
Sunfish and Bass
Rock Bass
Redbreast Sunfish
Warmouth
Bluegill
Smallmouth Bass
Darters
Greenside Darter
Greenfin Darter
Wounded Darter
Gilt Darter
Sculpins
Mottled Sculpin
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intolerant
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intermediate
Intolerant
Intolerant
Intolerant
Intermediate
Planktivore
Herbivore
Insectivore
Specialized Insectivore
Omnivore
Specialized Insectivore
Specialized Insectivore
Specialized Insectivore
Insectivore
Insectivore
Insectivore
Piscivore
Insectivore
Insectivore
Insectivore
Piscivore
Specialized Insectivore
Specialized Insectivore
Specialized Insectivore
Specialized Insectivore
Insectivore
28