Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix II Appendix II Biological Water Quality Data Collected by DWQ • • • Benthic Macroinvertebrate Collections Fish Community Assessments Lakes Assessments Appendices Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling Methods and Criteria Freshwater Wadeable and Flowing Waters Benthic macroinvertebrates can be collected from wadeable, freshwater, flowing waters using two sampling procedures. The Division of Water Quality's 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 (NCDEHNR, 1997). The purpose of these collections is to inventory the aquatic fauna and produce an indication of relative abundance for each taxon. Organisms are classified as Rare (1- 2 specimens), Common (3-9 specimens), or Abundant (≥10 specimens). Several data analysis summaries (metrics) can be produced 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 are combined with EPT taxa richness ratings to produce a final bioclassification, using criteria for coastal plain streams. EPT abundance (EPT N) and total taxa richness calculations also are used to help examine between- site differences in water quality. If the EPT taxa richness rating and the biotic index differ by one bioclassification, the EPT abundance value is used to determine the final site rating. Benthic macroinvertebrates can also be collected using an EPT sampling procedure. Four rather than 10 composite qualitative samples are taken at each site: 1 kick, 1 sweep, 1 leafpack and visual collections. Only EPT groups are collected and identified, and only EPT criteria are used to assign a bioclassification. 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 outside summer, EPT taxa richness can be adjusted by subtracting out winter/spring Plecoptera or other adjustment based on resampling of summer site. The biotic index values also are seasonally adjusted for samples outside the summer season. Criteria have been developed to assign bioclassifications ranging from Poor to Excellent to each benthic sample. These bioclassifications primarily reflect the influence of chemical pollutants. The major physical pollutant, sediment, is not assessed as well by a taxa richness analysis. A-II-1 Flow Measurement Changes in the benthic macroinvertebrate community are often used to help assess between-year changes in water quality. Some between-year changes in the macroinvertebrates, however, may be due largely to changes in flow. High flow years magnify the potential effects of nonpoint source runoff, leading to scour, substrate instability and reduced periphyton. Low flow years may accentuate the effect of point source dischargers by providing less dilution of wastes. For these reasons, all between-year changes in the biological communities are considered in light of flow conditions (high, low or normal) for one month prior to the sampling date. Daily flow information is obtained from the closest available USGS monitoring site and compared to the long-term mean flows. High flow is defined as a mean flow >140 percent of the long-term mean for that time period, usually July or August. Low flow is defined as a mean flow <60 percent of the long-term mean, while normal flow is 60-140 percent of the mean. While broad scale regional patterns are often observed, there may be large geographical variation within the state, and large variation within a single summer period. Habitat Evaluation The Division has developed a habitat assessment form to better evaluate the physical habitat of a stream. The habitat score has a potential range of 1-100, based on evaluation of channel modification, amount of instream habitat, type of bottom substrate, pool variety, bank stability, light penetration and riparian zone width. Higher numbers suggest better habitat quality, but no criteria have been developed to assign impairment ratings. A-II-2 Table A-II-1 Benthic macroinvertebrate data collected in the Catawba River Basin, 1983 - 2002 (Current basinwide sites are in bold font.) Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating 03-08-30 Catawba R SR 1274 at end McDowell 11-(1) 8/8/02 --- 26 --- 2.75 Good-Fair McDowell 8/7/97 --- 24 --- 2.88 Good-Fair Catawba R SR 1273 McDowell 11-(1) 4/18/85 99 49 4.24 2.97 Good Mill Cr at Graphite ab RR McDowell 11-7 8/7/97 --- 31 --- 1.63 Excellent 7/9/92 85 49 2.62 2.13 Excellent 2/10/92 --- 39 1.65 1.65 Good Mill Cr SR 1400/1407 McDowell 11-7 1/12/98 --- 40 --- 2.49 Good 6/15/94 81 43 3.40 2.33 Excellent Mill Cr SR 1401 McDowell 11-7 1/12/98 --- 37 --- 2.73 Good 8/7/97 --- 18 --- 3.26 Fair Swannanoa Cr SR 1400/1407 McDowell 11-7-9 8/8/02 --- 31 --- 2.26 Excellent 1/12/99 --- 35 --- 2.75 Excellent 1/12/98 --- 16 --- 2.31 Fair 4/8/97 --- 18 --- 1.34 Fair 6/15/94 --- 35 --- 1.90 Excellent Catawba R off SR 1234 McDowell 11-(8) 4/18/85 82 39 4.51 3.17 Good-Fair Catawba R I-40, be Old Fort McDowell 11-(8) 7/23/87 74 30 5.75 4.66 Good-Fair Catawba R SR 1234 McDowell 11-(8) 8/8/02 89 36 4.72 3.55 Good 8/7/97 70 31 5.32 4.18 Good-Fair 7/9/92 102 41 4.13 3.20 Good 7/26/90 84 38 4.43 3.71 Good 4/18/85 86 28 6.29 4.02 Fair Catawba R SR 1221 McDowell 11-(8) 8/7/02 73 27 5.38 4.11 Good-Fair 8/6/97 75 35 4.46 3.89 Good 7/8/92 90 42 4.42 3.60 Good 7/26/90 77 43 4.27 3.77 Good 8/11/88 86 31 5.60 4.74 Good-Fair 7/28/88 --- 27 --- 3.88 Good-Fair 7/21/86 78 26 5.74 4.11 Good-Fair 8/15/85 73 24 5.50 4.38 Good-Fair 8/23/84 63 23 4.99 4.42 Good-Fair 8/9/83 70 27 5.64 4.61 Good-Fair Curtis Cr off SR 1227 McDowell 11-10-(6) 8/8/02 --- 30 --- 3.35 Good 8/7/97 --- 34 --- 2.46 Good 2/10/92 --- 42 2.13 2.10 Good 4/19/85 97 44 3.86 2.37 Good Curtis Cr US 70 below WWTP McDowell 11-10-(14) 6/15/94 --- 30 --- 2.65 Good 4/18/85 56 25 5.76 3.11 Fair Crooked Cr SR 1135 McDowell 11-12 8/7/02 74 32 4.41 3.65 Good 8/6/97 69 38 4.25 3.74 Good 7/8/92 --- 32 --- 3.02 Good Mackey Cr SR 1453 McDowell 11-15-(3.5) 8/8/02 --- 23 --- 3.32 Not Impaired 8/6/97 --- 29 --- 2.92 Good 2/11/92 --- 45 --- 1.98 Excellent Mackey Cr above US 70 McDowell 11-15-(3.5) 3/25/98 68 37 3.60 2.72 Good 10/2/96 68 30 4.36 3.82 Good Mackey Cr below US 70 McDowell 11-15-(3.5) 8/6/02 67 30 4.24 3.68 Good 3/25/98 29 15 4.44 3.92 Fair 10/2/96 43 25 4.90 4.47 Good-Fair Buck Cr off NC 80 McDowell 11-19-(1) 8/5/02 --- 31 --- 3.03 Good 8/6/97 --- 38 --- 2.58 Excellent 6/14/94 75 41 3.28 2.47 Excellent 2/10/92 --- 42 --- 2.19 Excellent Buck Cr US 70 McDowell 11-19-(14) 6/14/94 58 20 4.64 3.40 Good-Fair L Buck Cr SR 1436 McDowell 11-19-11 8/6/02 --- 35 --- 2.74 Good 8/6/97 --- 37 --- 2.44 Excellent 2/10/92 --- 43 --- 2.00 Excellent 7/9/91 60 37 2.75 2.31 Good A-II-3 Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating Toms Cr SR 1434 McDowell 11-21-(2) 8/5/02 --- 26 --- 2.41 Not Impaired 8/4/97 62 33 3.17 2.59 Good 7/7/92 75 37 3.54 2.68 Excellent 2/10/92 --- 49 --- 2.29 Excellent N Fk Catawba R Linville Falls McDowell 11-24-(1) 1/9/91 --- 37 --- 1.89 Good N Fk Catawba R US 221 McDowell 11-24-(1) 1/9/91 --- 42 --- 2.57 Good N Fk Catawba R SR 1573 McDowell 11-24-(1) 8/6/02 --- 28 --- 3.78 Good 8/8/97 --- 37 --- 2.74 Excellent 1/9/91 --- 37 --- 2.83 Good N Fk Catawba R SR 1560 McDowell 11-24-(1) 8/6/02 74 23 5.90 4.92 Fair 8/5/97 81 39 3.89 3.09 Good 7/7/92 95 41 4.19 3.30 Good 1/9/91 --- 44 --- 2.60 Excellent N Fk Catawba R below Sevier McDowell 11-24-(1) 8/5/97 84 39 4.52 3.48 Good 7/7/92 88 43 4.03 3.27 Excellent Laurel Br US 221 McDowell 11-24-3 1/8/91 --- 32 --- 1.37 Good Pond Br SR 1560 McDowell 11-24-4 1/9/91 --- 24 --- 1.54 Good Stillhouse Br SR 1560 McDowell 11-24-6 1/9/91 --- 25 --- 1.55 Good Honeycutt Cr US 221 McDowell 11-24-8 1/9/91 --- 44 --- 2.60 Good Pepper Cr US 221 McDowell 11-24-10 1/8/91 --- 42 --- 2.53 Good Armstrong Cr end of FS Rd McDowell 11-24-14-(1.5) 8/6/02 --- 38 --- 2.80 Excellent 8/5/97 --- 36 --- 2.15 Excellent 7/7/92 --- 38 --- 2.10 Excellent Three Mile Cr SR 1443 McDowell 11-24-14-10 6/14/94 --- 40 --- 2.17 Excellent Cox Cr OFF NC 226 McDowell 11-24-14-12 6/14/94 --- 37 --- 2.89 Excellent Armstrong Cr off NC 226 11-24-14-(13.5) 6/14/94 99 48 3.47 2.60 Excellent Paddy Cr NC 126 Burke 11-29 5/19/99 --- 36 --- 2.80 Good Linville R off NC 105 ab golf course Avery 11-29-(1) 6/9/97 60 32 2.90 1.86 Good Linville R NC 105, near Briery Knob Avery 11-29-(1) 6/9/97 --- 32 --- 2.18 Good 11/8/89 --- 27 --- 3.30 Good-Fair Linville R US 221 Avery 11-29-(1) 8/6/02 --- 28 --- 3.90 Good 8/5/97 --- 27 --- 3.25 Good-Fair 6/10/97 --- 24 --- 3.24 Good-Fair 7/6/92 --- 30 --- 3.27 Good 11/8/89 --- 22 --- 3.98 Good-Fair L Grassy Cr off NC 105 ab golf course Avery 11-29-2 6/9/97 60 37 1.83 1.06 Excellent W Fk Linville R SR 1349 Avery 11-29-4 11/8/89 --- 39 --- 1.76 Good Grandmother Cr SR 1511 Avery 11-29-5-(2) 11/7/89 --- 30 --- 2.62 Good Linville R NC 126 Burke 11-29-(23) 8/23/02 91 48 4.21 3.47 Excellent 8/7/02 90 47 3.98 3.20 Excellent 8/4/97 107 53 4.05 3.11 Excellent 7/7/92 108 48 4.14 3.14 Excellent 7/9/91 84 43 4.03 3.02 Excellent 1/8/91 --- 48 --- 2.51 Excellent 10/24/90 94 47 3.81 2.75 Excellent 7/27/90 104 46 4.22 3.13 Excellent 4/10/90 113 54 3.70 2.39 Excellent 1/22/90 --- 49 --- 2.14 Excellent 1/22/90 94 56 3.45 2.50 Excellent 11/7/89 100 54 3.42 2.62 Excellent 11/7/89 --- 48 --- 2.52 Excellent 8/8/89 --- 45 --- 3.10 Excellent 8/8/89 99 46 3.93 2.75 Excellent 3/29/89 89 43 3.67 3.18 Good 2/15/89 113 59 3.83 2.88 Excellent 2/15/89 --- 41 --- 2.77 Excellent 8/3/87 --- 42 --- 3.30 Excellent 7/23/87 113 48 4.52 3.32 Excellent 8/16/85 101 41 5.11 3.69 Good 8/10/83 105 45 4.61 3.45 Good A-II-4 Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating Catawba R SR 1147 Burke 11-(31) 8/8/02 60 21 4.03 2.97 Good 8/8/97 66 30 4.25 3.21 Good 8/12/88 79 34 4.83 3.36 Good N Muddy Cr SR 1750 McDowell 11-32-1-(0.5) 8/5/02 77 32 5.53 4.61 Good-Fair 8/4/97 63 33 4.76 4.26 Good 7/8/92 80 32 4.95 4.46 Good-Fair 4/17/85 85 35 5.48 4.16 Good-Fair Youngs Fk SR 1819 McDowell 11-32-1-4 8/7/02 66 22 5.79 4.65 Good-Fair 4/9/01 52 15 5.36 4.73 Fair 8/8/97 --- 16 --- 5.02 Fair 9/12/90 55 17 6.11 5.36 Fair 4/17/85 64 19 6.67 4.80 Fair Youngs Fk off NC 226 McDowell 11-32-1-4 4/9/01 30 5 7.46 6.52 Poor Jacktown Cr US 226 McDowell 11-32-1-4-1 4/9/01 54 19 4.88 3.93 Fair Youngs Fk SR 1794 McDowell 11-32-1-4 4/9/01 62 16 6.20 4.16 Fair 9/12/90 44 8 7.16 6.61 Poor 4/17/85 58 17 6.62 4.60 Fair S Muddy Cr SR 1764 McDowell 11-32-2-(8.5) 8/5/02 --- 23 --- 4.21 Good-Fair McDowell 8/4/97 --- 24 --- 3.67 Good-Fair McDowell 7/8/92 --- 27 --- 3.64 Good-Fair High Shoals Cr SR 1798 McDowell 11-32-2-6 7/22/86 76 32 4.30 2.91 Good Canoe Cr SR 1250 Burke 11-33-(2) 8/21/02 --- 28 --- 3.50 Good 8/04/97 --- 19 --- 4.05 Good-Fair 8/03/92 --- 25 --- 3.13 Good-Fair 03-08-31 Catawba R NC 181 Burke 11-(31) 08/22/02 46 21 4.44 3.54 Good-Fair 08/04/97 57 23 4.56 3.12 Good-Fair 07/06/92 76 30 4.79 3.71 Good Silver Cr SR 1127 Burke 11-34-(0.5) 08/21/02 --- 25 --- 3.74 Good-Fair Silver Cr SR 1149 Burke 11-34-(0.5) 08/04/97 73 32 5.26 4.48 Good-Fair 08/03/92 71 29 5.53 4.46 Good-Fair Clear Cr Ab Hospital Reservoir Burke 11-34-6-(1) 12/12/91 --- 30 --- 2.38 Good Bailey Fork SR 1102 Burke 11-34-8-(2) 08/03/92 --- 24 --- 3.30 Good-Fair Warrior Fk SR 1440 Burke 11-35-(1) 08/21/02 --- 34 --- 3.30 Good 08/04/97 --- 41 --- 3.25 Excellent Upper Cr NC 181 Burke 11-35-2-(1) 09/22/88 --- 46 --- 2.38 Excellent Upper Cr USFS Rd 128 Burke 11-35-2-(1) 03/29/89 --- 44 --- 2.53 Good 10/24/88 --- 34 --- 2.73 Good 09/21/88 --- 26 --- 3.37 Good-Fair Upper Cr Ab USFS Rd 982 Burke 11-35-2-(1) 06/13/94 100 51 3.58 2.60 Excellent 06/08/93 94 47 3.54 2.61 Excellent UT Upper Cr Ab Timbered Br Burke 11-35-2-(1) 06/13/94 56 27 3.30 2.20 Excellent 06/08/93 63 27 3.69 2.15 Excellent Timbered Br USFS Road 982 Burke 11-35-2-9 06/13/94 79 47 2.86 2.28 Not Rated 06/08/93 74 38 3.15 2.10 Not Rated 09/21/88 --- 20 --- 2.98 Good-Fair Upper Cr Be USFS Rd 982 Burke 11-35-2-(8.5) 06/13/94 103 57 3.45 2.63 Excellent 06/08/93 108 58 3.44 2.38 Excellent Upper Cr At Optimist’s Park Burke 11-35-2-(10) 09/21/88 108 45 4.47 3.12 Excellent Steels Cr USFS Rd 128 Burke 11-35-2-12-(1) 05/17/90 --- 48 --- 1.73 Excellent 09/22/88 --- 38 --- 2.70 Excellent Gingercake Cr USFS Rd 496 Burke 11-35-2-12-3 05/17/90 --- 39 --- 1.68 Excellent 10/25/88 --- 31 --- 1.38 Excellent Buck Cr Ab Steels Cr Burke 11-35-2-12-4 05/17/90 --- 40 --- 1.78 Excellent Little Fork USFS Rd 128 Burke 11-35-2-12-6 09/21/88 --- 38 --- 2.45 Excellent 03/19/86 102 45 3.27 2.38 Excellent Steels Cr Ab NC 181 Burke 11-35-2-12-(7) 05/17/90 --- 49 --- 2.12 Excellent 09/22/88 105 43 4.50 3.33 Good Upper Cr SR 1407 Burke 11-35-2-(13) 10/25/88 --- 34 --- 3.35 Good Upper Cr SR 1439 Burke 11-35-2-(13) 09/20/88 100 42 4.77 3.60 Good A-II-5 Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating SR 1367 Caldwell 11-38-(1) 03/28/89 --- 45 --- 2.25 Good Johns R Caldwell 11-38-(9) 08/22/02 --- 42 --- 3.46 Excellent 08/05/97 --- 49 --- 2.56 Excellent 08/03/92 --- 43 --- 3.15 Excellent 03/28/89 --- 40 --- 2.69 Good 10/30/84 108 48 4.10 2.85 Excellent Gragg Pr SR 1462 11-38-10 03/27/89 --- 47 --- 2.34 Good Anthony Cr Ab Gragg Pr 11-38-10-3 03/27/89 --- 30 --- 2.30 Good-Fair Johns R SR 1438 11-38-(28) 08/22/02 --- 35 --- 3.44 Good 03/28/89 116 63 3.90 2.76 Excellent 08/10/83 89 43 4.04 3.31 Excellent Mulberry Cr SR 1368 11-38-32-(11) 03/27/89 --- 53 --- 2.59 Excellent Mulberry Cr SR 1310 11-38-32-(15) 03/27/89 --- 43 --- 2.86 Good Wilson Cr US 221 11-38-34 07/23/90 65 32 2.65 1.32 Excellent 08/08/88 81 37 3.16 1.63 Excellent 07/24/86 67 36 2.58 1.54 Excellent 08/28/84 38 20 2.64 1.19 Good Wilson Cr SR 1358 11-38-34 07/09/91 92 50 3.78 2.88 Excellent 03/29/89 --- 57 --- 2.14 Excellent 07/24/86 106 49 3.68 2.65 Excellent Wilson Cr off SR 1328 Be Mortimer 11-38-34 08/22/02 85 45 3.33 2.48 Excellent Wilson Cr SR 1335 11-38-34 08/05/97 --- 47 --- 2.68 Excellent Harper Cr SR 1328 11-38-34-14 08/22/02 --- 42 --- 2.78 Excellent N Harper Cr USFS Rd 58 11-38-34-14-2 08/06/86 90 43 3.68 2.36 Excellent Lower Cr NC 90 Johns R SR 1356 Caldwell Caldwell Burke Caldwell Caldwell Avery Caldwell Caldwell Caldwell Caldwell Avery Caldwell 11-39-(0.5) 09/09/02 45 9 6.46 5.35 Poor 06/10/97 51 22 5.21 4.50 Good-Fair Lower Cr Harrisburg St, Lenoir Caldwell 09/15/87 65 22 5.92 4.73 Fair Lower Cr SR 1303, Fairview Rd Caldwell 09/10/02 57 13 6.67 5.53 Fair 06/10/97 43 18 5.36 4.35 Fair Zacks Fk Cr 11-39-(0.5) 11-39-(0.5) SR 1531 Caldwell 11-39-1 09/09/02 54 19 5.67 5.02 Not Impaired Zacks Fk Cr NC 18/321A Caldwell 11-39-1 09/10/02 32 6 6.87 6.15 Not Rated 06/10/97 --- 18 --- 4.54 Fair 09/15/87 55 19 6.05 5.39 Fair Spainhour Cr SR 1303 Caldwell 11-39-3 06/11/97 --- 14 --- 5.03 Fair Spainhour Cr NC 18 Bus Caldwell 11-39-3 09/09/02 49 15 6.46 5.82 Fair UT Spainhour Cr SR 1513 Caldwell 11-39-3 09/09/02 32 13 4.66 4.38 Not Rated Blair Fk NC 90 Caldwell 11-39-3-1 09/09/02 24 5 6.42 5.58 Not Rated Greasy Cr NC 18 Caldwell 11-39-4 09/10/02 45 14 5.70 5.19 Not Rated 06/11/97 --- 15 --- 4.31 Fair Greasy Cr SR 1305 Caldwell 11-39-4 09/10/02 47 13 4.86 3.99 Not Rated Abingdon Cr NC 18 Bypass Caldwell 11-39-6 09/10/02 57 20 5.60 5.11 Not Impaired Lower Cr SR 1142, Calico Rd Caldwell 11-39-(6.5) 09/10/02 50 11 6.52 5.54 Fair 06/11/97 39 16 5.91 4.86 Fair Lower Cr SR 1501 Burke 11-39-(6.5) 09/11/02 55 14 6.14 4.96 Fair 06/10/97 46 19 5.52 4.87 Fair 08/03/92 55 20 5.85 4.80 Fair 07/10/90 62 19 6.59 5.23 Fair 07/23/87 61 18 6.82 4.85 Fair 08/07/84 60 20 6.39 5.00 Fair Celia Cr Caldwell 11-39-7-1-(1) 09/11/02 39 10 5.78 4.77 Not Rated Husband Cr Old NC 18 Caldwell 11-39-7-(2) 09/11/02 59 24 5.28 4.54 Not Impaired Husband Cr NC 18 Caldwell 11-39-7-(2) 09/11/02 36 14 5.24 4.34 Not Rated 06/11/97 --- 20 --- 4.77 Good-Fair Bristol Cr NC 18 Caldwell 11-39-8 09/11/02 55 12 5.56 4.39 Not Rated 06/10/97 --- 15 --- 4.61 Fair White Mill Cr Piney Rd Caldwell 11-39-8-1-(2) 09/11/02 37 12 4.74 3.06 Not Rated Smoky Cr SR 1515 Burke 11-41-1 08/21/02 --- 26 --- 3.55 Good-Fair 08/05/97 --- 32 --- 3.58 Good 08/04/92 --- 30 --- 3.22 Good McGalliard Cr SR 1538 Burke 11-44-(0.5) 08/21/02 16 --- 5.09 Fair 08/05/97 --- 21 --- 4.81 Good-Fair 08/04/92 66 22 5.60 4.56 Good-Fair A-II-6 Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating 03-08-32 Huffman Br Sta 2, be Huffman Finishing Burke 11-(51)-1 10/11/84 13 0 9.30 --- Poor Huffman Br Sta 3 Burke 11-(51)-1 10/11/84 19 1 9.25 6.22 Poor Huffman Br Sta 4 Burke 11-(51)-1 10/11/84 20 0 8.94 N/A Poor Horseford Cr 16th Ave NW Catawba 11-54-(0.5) 09/12/02 32 8 6.58 6.34 Fair Gunpowder Cr SR 1718 Caldwell 11-55-(1.5) 08/21/02 --- 23 --- 4.68 Good-Fair Gunpowder Cr SR 1002 Caldwell 11-55-(1.5) 08/05/97 --- 25 --- 4.27 Good-Fair Upper Little R SR 1740 Caldwell 11-58-(5.5) 08/20/02 83 33 4.91 3.93 Good 08/06/97 90 39 4.35 3.47 Good 08/04/92 74 38 4.17 3.55 Good Middle Little R SR 1153 Alexander 11-62 08/20/02 18 --- 3.74 08/06/97 --- 26 --- 3.95 Good-Fair 08/04/92 32 32 4.14 4.14 Good Duck Cr NC 127 Alexander 11-62-2-(4) 08/20/02 --- 33 --- 3.76 Good 08/06/97 --- 26 --- 3.93 Good-Fair O8/04/92 --- 26 --- 3.42 Good-Fair Lower Little R SR 1313 Alexander 11-69 07/28/88 87 32 5.19 3.51 Good-Fair 08/27/88 --- 29 --- 4.42 Good 08/08/85 53 18 5.78 5.42 Fair Lower Little R SR 1131 Alexander 11-69 08/20/02 61 28 4.85 3.92 Good-Fair 08/06/97 74 34 4.94 4.19 Good 08/04/92 70 29 4.60 3.85 Good Muddy Fk Ab Schneider Mills Alexander 11-69-4 06/17/92 70 19 5.53 4.46 Good-Fair Muddy Fk NC 16, Be WWTP Alexander 11-69-4 06/16/92 66 19 6.79 4.92 Fair Muddy Fk SR 1313 Alexander 11-69-4 08/19/02 --- 12 --- 6.05 Fair 08/06/97 76 22 6.26 5.42 Good-Fair Elk Shoal Cr SR 1605 Alexander 11-73-(0.5) 08/20/02 --- 16 --- 5.03 Good-Fair 08/07/97 --- 18 --- 4.48 Good-Fair 08/05/92 --- 15 --- 4.92 Good-Fair Lyle Cr US 64/70 Catawba 11-76-(3.5) 08/19/02 --- 22 --- 4.69 Good-Fair 09/07/97 51 23 4.95 4.22 Good-Fair 08/05/92 62 22 5.66 4.88 Good-Fair McLin Cr SR 1722 Catawba 11-76-5-(0.7) 08/19/02 --- 23 --- 5.14 Good-Fair 08/07/97 57 27 5.17 4.33 Good-Fair 03-08-33 McDowell Cr SR 2128 Mecklenburg 11-115-(1) 8/20/02 48 8 6.6 5.7 Fair 9/13/90 54 17 6.2 5.4 Good-Fair McDowell Cr SR 2136 Mecklenburg 11-115-(1.5) 9/13/90 55 15 6.5 5.8 Fair Gar Cr SR 2074 Mecklenburg 11-116-(1) 8/20/97 --- 21 --- 4.9 Good 6/8/94 64 20 5.6 4.9 Good 8/20/92 87 24 5.5 4.6 Good Dutchmans Cr SR 1918 Gaston 11-119-(0.5) 8/21/02 --- 19 --- 5.0 Good-Fair 8/19/97 73 33 5.2 4.5 Good 6/8/94 66 26 5.1 4.5 Good 8/6/92 77 33 5.6 4.7 Good 7/26/88 83 34 5.3 4.7 Excellent Leepers Cr SR 1354 Lincoln 11-119-1-(1) 6/9/94 --- 31 --- 3.4 Excellent Leepers Cr NC 73 Lincoln 6/9/94 71 30 5.0 4.3 Excellent Leepers Cr NC 150 Lincoln 6/12/84 86 30 4.9 4.3 Excellent Leepers Cr SR 1820 Gaston 11-119-1-(12) 6/8/94 --- 29 --- 4.3 Excellent Killian Cr SR 1511 Lincoln 11-119-2-(0.5) 8/20/02 --- 12 --- 5.0 Fair 8/19/97 --- 24 --- 3.9 Good 6/8/94 82 33 5.1 4.9 Excellent 8/5/92 --- 28 --- 4.9 Excellent A-II-7 Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating 03-08-34 Long Cr SR 2042 Mecklenburg 11-120-(7) 7/12/879 65 17 6.1 5.7 Good-Fair Sugar Cr SC 160 York, SC 11-137 8/19/02 34 7 6.4 6.1 Fair 8/21/97 57 12 6.9 6.1 Fair 8/19/92 58 21 6.7 5.6 Good-Fair 7/8/91 49 14 6.7 6.1 Fair 7/24/90 39 7 7.0 5.6 Fair 7/25/88 53 9 7.9 6.6 Poor 7/23/86 40 2 8.5 8.9 Poor 8/6/84 45 9 8.0 6.1 Poor 11/8/83 30 3 8.2 6.1 Poor Sugar Cr SR 1156 Mecklenburg 11-137-1 8/20/02 --- 5 --- 7.0 Poor 8/21/97 --- 7 --- 6.1 Fair Irwin Cr I-77 Mecklenburg 11-137-1 8/18/92 55 8 7.7 6.7 Poor Irwin Cr SR 2523 Mecklenburg 11-137-1 2/28/90 52 17 6.0 5.0 Good-Fair Irwin Cr Ab Landfill Mecklenburg 11-137-1 10/17/84 50 13 7.4 6.1 Fair Irwin Cr Bel Landfill Mecklenburg 11-137-1 10/17/84 36 11 7.6 6.0 Fair Irwin Cr Ab WWTP Mecklenburg 11-137-1 11/9/83 23 2 8.2 6.9 Poor Stewart Cr SR 2050 Mecklenburg 11-137-1-2 2/27/90 37 14 6.6 3.9 Not Rated McCullough Br NC 51 Mecklenburg 11-137-7 2/27/90 34 5 7.6 6.9 Not Rated L Sugar Cr Polk Street Mecklenburg 11-137-8 8/19/02 --- 6 --- 6.7 Poor L Sugar Cr NC 51 Mecklenburg 11-137-8 8/21/97 --- 7 --- 6.9 Fair 9/19/92 43 3 8.1 6.3 Poor L Sugar Cr Archdale Rd Mecklenburg 11-137-8 11/9/83 15 1 8.8 7.4 Poor UT Edwards Br Shefield Park Mecklenburg 11-137-8-2-1 8/10/00 10 0 7.1 0 Not Rated Edwards Br Campbell St Mecklenburg 11-137-8-2-1 8/10/00 13 3 7.7 7.5 Not Rated Edwards Br Shefield St Mecklenburg 11-137-8-2-1 8/10/00 14 3 7.8 6.7 Not Rated McAlpine Cr NC 51 Mecklenburg 11-137-9 8/19/02 43 7 7.0 6.0 Fair 8/21/97 59 17 6.9 6.0 Fair 8/19/92 55 9 7.2 5.7 Fair McAlpine Cr Dorman Rd York, SC 11-137-9 8/19/92 40 11 7.0 6.3 Fair McAlpine Cr Ab WWTP Mecklenburg 11-137-9 3/26/87 33 5 7.5 5.3 Poor McAlpine Cr Bel WWTP Mecklenburg 11-137-9 3/26/87 18 2 7.8 3.7 Poor McAlpine Cr Sardis Rd Mecklenburg 11-137-9 3/26/87 45 12 6.1 5.0 Fair 11/9/83 61 12 6.7 5.8 Fair McAlpine Cr NC 521 Mecklenburg 11-137-9 11/9/83 24 3 8.5 6.4 Poor Walker Br NC 49 Mecklenburg 11-137-10-1 2/27/90 68 18 6.1 5.5 Good-Fair 03-08-35 S Fk Catawba R NC 10 Catawba 11-129-(0.5) 8/18/97 60 25 5.56 4.70 Good 8/17/92 75 24 6.20 5.05 Good-Fair 7/9/90 56 16 6.57 5.27 Fair 7/28/88 67 24 6.25 5.07 Good-Fair 7/21/86 49 12 6.59 4.68 Fair 8/7/84 67 26 5.28 4.15 Good-Fair S Fk Catawba R NC 27 Lincoln 11-129-(3.5) 9/10/84 77 29 5.58 4.17 Good Henry Fk SR 1854 Burke 11-129-1-(1) 9/13/01 38 18 5.5 5.2 Fair Henry Fk SR 1803 Burke 11-129-1-(1) 9/12/01 79 33 5.1 4.3 Good-Fair Henry Fk SR 1918 Burke 11-129-1-(1) 4/18/88 106 53 3.29 2.11 Excellent Henry Fk SR 1922 Burke 11-129-1-(2) 4/19/88 116 62 3.59 2.52 Excellent Henry Fk NC 18 Burke 11-129-1-(2) 4/20/88 127 65 3.84 2.68 Excellent UT Henry Fk SR 1915 Burke 4/20/88 110 52 3.83 2.33 Good He Cr Ab Water Intake Burke 11-129-1-4-(1) 4/20/88 --- 45 --- 2.01 Excellent Ivy Cr SR 1919 Burke 11-129-1-6 4/19/88 --- 42 --- 2.36 Good Long Br SR 1917 Burke 11-129-1-8 4/19/88 --- 46 --- 2.87 Excellent Rock Cr SR 1915 Burke 11-129-1-12 4/19/88 --- 43 --- 2.84 Good Henry Fk SR 1124 Catawba 11-129-1-(12.5) 8/22/02 95 38 4.7 3.3 Good 8/18/97 76 38 3.90 3.30 Good 8/22/92 74 38 4.58 3.75 Good 7/10/89 64 27 4.65 4.22 Good 7/22/87 73 25 5.09 4.01 Good-Fair 7/21/86 79 28 5.39 3.88 Good-Fair Henry Fk SR 1008 Catawba 11-129-1-(12.5) 11/16/83 27 5 6.87 4.20 Poor A-II-8 Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating UT Henry Fk SR 1213 Catawba 6/20/85 29 8 6.34 4.23 Fair 6/20/85 31 7 6.24 2.71 Fair UT Henry Fk SR 1148 Burke 2/9/87 --- 36 --- 2.13 Excellent UT Henry Fk US 64 Burke 2/9/87 --- 0 --- 0 Poor UT Henry Fk Be Discharge Burke 2/9/87 --- 5 --- 5.96 Poor UT Henry Fk I-40 Burke 2/9/87 --- 17 --- 3.40 Good-Fair Jacob Fk S Mt St Pk Burke 11-129-2-(1) 5/18/90 --- 42 --- 2.49 Excellent Jacob Fk SR 1904 Burke 11-129-2-(1) 5/18/90 --- 42 --- 2.31 Excellent Jacob Fk SR 1924 Burke 11-129-2-(1) 8/22/02 --- 35 --- 3.3 Good 8/18/97 99 47 4.06 3.20 Excellent 8/20/92 104 48 4.48 3.32 Excellent 10/24/90 102 50 3.95 2.60 Excellent 7/10/90 92 45 4.77 4.01 Excellent 5/18/90 --- 48 --- 2.56 Excellent 1/25/90 86 55 3.41 2.87 Excellent 7/22/87 96 35 4.96 3.76 Good 8/6/85 75 32 5.14 3.99 Good-Fair Shinny Cr S Mt St Pk Burke 11-129-2-3 5/18/90 --- 41 --- 2.13 Excellent Jacob Fk NC 27 Catawba 11-129-2-(9.5) 11/16/83 79 35 --- --- Good Jacob Fk SR 1139 Catawba 11-129-2-(9.5) 11/16/83 69 23 --- --- Good-Fair Hop Cr SR 1131 Catawba 11-129-2-14 6/19/85 86 36 4.56 3.44 Good Howards Cr SR 1200 Lincoln 11-129-4 8/21/02 --- 17 --- 4.5 Good-Fair 8/19/97 --- 25 --- 4.15 Good 8/17/92 --- 25 --- 4.33 Good Clark Cr US 64 Catawba 11-129-5-(0.3) 9/12/84 57 15 6.14 5.15 Good-Fair Clark Cr SR 1149 Catawba 11-129-5-(0.3) 4/17/01 49 20 5.6 4.6 Good-Fair 7/26/00 37 13 6.0 5.6 Fair 8/5/92 --- 16 --- 5.74 Good-Fair 9/12/84 60 16 6.65 5.81 Good-Fair Clark Cr SR 2014 Catawba 11-129-5-(0.3) 9/12/90 50 13 7.16 6.46 Fair 9/12/84 59 15 6.79 6.17 Fair 6/12/84 59 16 6.25 5.80 Good-Fair Clark Cr SR 2012 Catawba 11-129-5-(0.3) 7/26/00 38 13 6.0 5.6 Fair 9/12/90 40 6 7.11 5.33 Fair 9/12/84 64 19 7.11 6.26 Good-Fair 6/12/84 46 14 6.51 5.81 Good-Fair Clark Cr SR 1274 Catawba 11-129-5-(9.5) 9/12/84 70 16 6.92 6.06 Fair Clark Cr 16th St Catawba 11-129-5-(9.5) 4/17/01 28 9 7.2 5.7 Not Rated Clark Cr Sweetwater Rd Catawba 11-129-5-(9.5) 4/17/01 19 3 7.6 6.5 Not Rated 7/18/00 22 8 6.6 6.4 Not Rated Clark Cr 20th Ave Catawba 11-129-5-(9.5) 8/14/00 42 10 6.5 6.0 Fair Clark Cr SR 1008 Lincoln 11-129-5-(9.5) 8/21/02 47 9 6.2 5.1 Fair 8/19/97 48 16 5.72 5.16 Good-Fair 8/5/92 48 10 6.67 5.63 Fair 7/27/88 54 11 6.78 6.11 Fair 8/5/85 48 13 7.14 6.25 Fair 9/11/84 79 27 6.62 5.40 Good 11/16/83 38 9 --- --- Fair Cline Cr SR 1164 Catawba 11-129-5-2 7/26/00 37 16 5.5 5.2 Not Rated 9/12/84 50 11 7.16 6.21 Fair Town Cr US 321 Catawba 11-129-5-4 8/14/00 49 14 5.6 5.4 Good-Fair Pinch Gut Cr SR 2007 Catawba 11-129-5-7 4/17/01 76 29 5.3 4.3 Good Maiden Cr SR 1858 Catawba 11-129-5-7-2-(1) 3/18/93 55 22 4.85 4.02 Good Maiden Cr SR 1810 Catawba 11-129-5-7-2-(3) 8/21/02 31 5 7.1 6.4 Fair 3/18/93 67 26 4.93 4.26 Good Maiden Cr SR 2007 Catawba 11-129-5-7-2-(3) 9/11/84 86 18 6.55 5.76 Good-Fair Shady Br SR 2005 Catawba 11-129-5-7-3 9/11/84 32 1 8.86 7.37 Poor Carpenter Cr US 321 Lincoln 11-129-5-9 4/17/01 57 27 4.6 4.4 Not Rated Carpenter Cr US 301 Lincoln 11-129-5-9 6/9/94 64 28 4.47 3.90 Good 9/11/84 85 30 4.94 4.61 Excellent Walker Cr SR 1405 Lincoln 11-129-5-10 9/11/84 75 18 7.09 6.11 Good-Fair A-II-9 Waterbody County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating Indian Cr SR 1177 Lincoln 11-129-8-(5) 8/21/02 --- --- 4.8 Fair Indian Cr SR 1252 Lincoln 11-129-8-(5) 73 24 5.23 4.63 Good 8/17/92 79 29 6.06 Location 13 8/19/97 5.38 Good 7/22/87 67 18 6.33 5.52 Good-Fair 7/23/86 77 18 6.58 5.40 Good-Fair 11/16/83 50 6 6.90 5.36 Fair 8/12/83 51 12 6.39 6.00 Good-Fair Hoyle Cr SR 1836 Gaston 11-129-15-(4) 11/15/83 50 15 6.12 4.88 Good-Fair Mauney Cr SR 1831 Gaston 11-129-15-5 5/13/97 49 11 6.73 5.34 Fair 03-08-36 S Fk Catawba R SR 2003 Gaston 11-129-(15.5) 8/11/83 49 19 6.51 5.65 Good-Fair S Fk Catawba R NC 7 Gaston 11-129-(15.5) 8/20/97 61 16 6.02 5.05 Good-Fair 8/18/92 63 18 6.70 5.40 Good-Fair 7/11/89 62 15 6.32 4.72 Good-Fair 7/20/87 65 23 6.50 5.43 Good-Fair 8//585 55 16 7.02 5.34 Fair 11/15/83 7 2 7.82 5.64 Poor Limekiln Cr Kiser Dairy Gaston 11-129-16-2 5/21/01 60 6 7.4 3.2 Not Rated Limekiln Cr SR 1409 Gaston 11-129-16-2 4/20/98 71 22 5.2 4.3 Good Long Cr SR 1409 Gaston 11-129-16-(2.3) 4/18/95 67 14 5.84 4.78 Good-Fair Long Cr SR 1408 Gaston 11-129-16-(2.3) 4/4/94 81 29 5.28 4.39 Good Long Cr SR 1405 Gaston 11-129-16-(2.3) 4/5/93 83 31 5.21 3.80 Good 4/11/92 73 26 5.47 4.43 Good 4/3/91 63 24 5.53 4.55 Good 4/18/95 --- 22 --- 5.07 Good-Fair 4/4/94 89 29 5.63 4.70 Good Long Cr NC 274 Gaston 11-129-16-(4) 4/5/93 75 28 4.90 3.95 Good 4/2/92 73 25 5.58 4.91 Good 4/3/91 63 21 5.69 4.90 Good-Fair 4/19/95 79 19 5.82 5.22 Good-Fair 4/5/95 90 24 6.35 4.92 Good-Fair Long Cr SR 1443 Gaston 11-129-16-(4) 4/5/94 90 37 5.09 4.35 Good Long Cr SR 1446 Gaston 11-129-16-(4) 4/6/93 98 35 5.22 4.40 Good 4/11/92 65 25 5.30 4.80 Good 4/4/91 54 20 5.58 4.87 Good-Fair 4/4/94 76 24 6.20 5.40 Good-Fair 4/3/93 70 23 5.52 4.68 Good Long Cr SR 1448 Gaston 11-129-16-(4) 4/1/92 76 26 4.97 4.19 Good 4/4/91 62 22 5.57 4.89 Good-Fair 4/19/95 80 23 5.82 5.15 Good 4/4/94 86 30 5.83 5.04 Good Long Cr NC 275 Gaston 11-129-16-(4) 4/5/93 89 31 5.51 4.54 Good 4/1/92 59 21 5.45 5.0 Good 4/5/91 51 21 5.55 5.07 Good-Fair 4/18/95 72 20 6.36 5.47 Good-Fair 4/4/94 84 21 6.26 5.17 Good-Fair Long Cr SR 1456 Gaston 11-129-16-(4) 8/20/97 62 21 5.81 4.79 Good-Fair 7/25/90 67 18 6.42 5.39 Good-Fair 7/20/87 71 19 6.59 5.61 Good-Fair 8/6/84 62 17 6.25 5.44 Good-Fair Long Cr SR 2003 Gaston 11-129-16-(4) 7/25/90 54 14 7.33 6.30 Fair 11/15/83 20 3 8.61 4.93 Poor UT Long Cr SR 1446 Gaston 11-129-16-(4) 4/5/94 --- 26 --- 4.89 Good-Fair 4/4/91 76 25 5.46 4.39 Good UT Long Cr SR 1456 Gaston 11-129-16-(4) 4/5/91 55 26 4.44 4.25 Good UT Long Cr Dallas WWTP Gaston 11-129-16-(4) 6/17/92 42 10 6.45 6.11 Good-Fair UT Long Cr SR 2275 Gaston 11-129-16-(4) 6/17/92 39 8 7.60 6.40 Fair Kiser Br Kiser Dairy Gaston 11-129-16-(4) 5/21/01 60 6 7.4 3.2 Not Rated 4/20/98 60 10 6.7 4.0 Fair 6/13/96 59 8 7.09 6.13 Fair Kaglor Br Rankin Park Gaston 11-129-16-5 4/20/98 33 9 6.3 5.4 Not Rated 6/13/96 55 8 6.29 5.8 Not Rated A-II-10 Waterbody Location County Index No. Date ST EPT BI EPT BI Rating 03-08-37 Catawba Cr SR 2446 Gaston 11-130 7/26/90 42 10 6.94 6.66 Fair 5/8/85 55 16 7.09 6.13 Fair Catawba Cr SR 2439 Gaston 11-130 7/25/90 43 1 8.12 7.40 Poor 5/8/85 38 5 8.55 6.07 Poor Catawba Cr SR 2435 Gaston 11-130 5/8/85 43 6 8.44 6.50 Poor Crowders Cr SR 1118 Gaston 11-135 5/21/02 31 10 5.1 5.0 Not Rated 9/12/89 50 14 6.02 4.73 Good-Fair Crowders Cr SR 1125 Gaston 11-135 5/21/02 63 21 5.4 5.1 Good-Fair 9/12/89 55 13 7.07 6.11 Fair Crowders Cr SR 1131 Gaston 11-135 5/22/02 54 14 6.2 5.3 Fair 9/13/89 46 7 7.69 7.00 Fair Crowders Cr NC 321 Gaston 11-135 9/13/89 46 10 6.81 5.64 Fair Crowders Cr SR 2424 Gaston 11-135 9/13/89 51 15 6.86 5.87 Fair Crowders Cr SC 564 York, SC 11-135 5/20/02 57 14 6.3 5.9 Fair 8/20/97 67 11 6.56 5.94 Fair 6.83 6.13 Fair 8.30 7.50 Poor --- 5.5 6.90 Poor --- 1 --- 6.57 44 40 0 4.41 Good-Fair 5.56 Good-Fair 5.1 Good-Fair 6.62 Fair 8/18/92 66 18 6.55 5.65 Good-Fair 9/14/89 61 15 7/26/88 43 4 McGill Cr Ab WWTP Gaston 11-135-2 9/12/89 --- 4 7.43 Poor McGill Cr SR 1300 Gaston 11-135-2 9/12/89 --- 6 --- 7.09 Poor Abernethy Cr SR 1302 Ab UT Gaston 11-135-4 5/21/02 56 18 5.1 Not Impaired 3/23/93 56 20 5.76 4.95 Good-Fair 9/12/89 --- 12 --- 4.93 Fair 6/10/87 67 13 7.40 5.81 Fair Abernethy Cr SR 1302 Bel UT Gaston 11-135-4 5/21/02 38 12 6.4 5.7 Fair 3/23/93 51 19 6.49 5.39 Good-Fair 6/10/87 43 4 7.78 7.53 Poor Abernethy Cr Ab WWTP Gaston 11-135-4 9/12/89 --- 3 --- Abernethy Cr Bel WWTP Gaston 11-135-4 9/12/89 Poor UT Abernethy Cr Bel Lithium Gaston 11-135-4 5/21/02 12 5.7 3.5 Not Rated 3/23/93 5 7.77 7.52 Poor 6/10/87 25 0 7.90 Poor Blackwood Cr Davis Park Rd Gaston 11-135-7 5/21/02 35 8 6.3 6.2 Not Rated S Fk Crowders Cr SC 148 York, SC 11-135-10 5/20/02 --- 13 --- 4.7 Fair S Fk Crowders Cr SC 79 York, SC 11-135-10 5/20/02 --- 19 --- 4.3 Good-Fair S Crowders Cr SR 1103 Gaston 11-135-10-1 5/9/85 89 31 5.31 S Crowders Cr SR 1109 Gaston 11-135-10-1 5/20/02 59 18 5.7 5.1 Good-Fair 9/13/89 --- 16 --- UT Crowders Cr SR 2416 Gaston 5/20/02 67 15 6.2 9/13/89 --- 11 --- 03-08-38 Twelvemile Cr NC 16 Union 11-138 2/27/90 --- 30 --- 4.93 Good-Fair 7/11/89 71 20 6.25 5.37 Good-Fair 11/8/83 50 7 7.15 6.33 3.58 5.53 5.39 Fair Sixmile Cr SR 3445 Mecklenburg 11-138-3 3/26/87 67 22 5.26 Good-Fair Waxhaw Cr SR 1103 Union 11-139 8/19/92 --- 14 --- Good-Fair 11/8/83 38 6 6.82 Fair A-II-11 Fish Community Sampling Methods and Criteria Wadeable Stream Sampling Methods At each sample site, a 600-foot section of stream was selected and measured. The fish in the delineated stretch of stream were then collected using two backpack electrofishing units and two persons netting the stunned fish. After collection, all readily identifiable fish were examined for sores, lesions, fin damage, or skeletal anomalies, measured (total length to the nearest 1 mm), and then released. Those fish that were not readily identifiable were preserved and returned to the laboratory for identification, examination and total length measurement. Detailed descriptions of the sampling methods may be found at http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/bar.html. NCIBI NCIBI Analysis The assessment of biological integrity using the North Carolina Index of Biotic Integrity (NCIBI) is provided by the cumulative assessment of 12 parameters or metrics. The values provided by the metrics are converted into scores on a 1, 3 or 5 scale. A score of 5 represents conditions which would be expected for undisturbed reference streams in the specific river basin or ecoregion, while a score of 1 indicates that the conditions deviate 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 NCIBI score. Finally, the score (an even number between 12 and 60) is then used to determine the ecological integrity class of the stream from which the sample was collected. The NCIBI has recently been revised (NCDENR, 2001). Currently, the focus of using and applying the NCIBI has been restricted to wadeable streams that can be sampled by a crew of four persons. The bioclassifications and criteria have also been recalibrated against regional reference site data (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum 09222000) (Table 1). Table 1 Revised Scores and Classes for Evaluating the Fish Community of a Wadeable Stream Using the North Carolina Index of Biotic Integrity (NCIBI) in the Broad, Catawba, Savannah and Yadkin River Basins Scores NCIBI Classes > 54 Excellent 48 - 52 Good 42 - 46 Good-Fair 36 - 40 Fair ≤ 34 Poor A-II-12 Table 2 Fish Community Structure Data Collected in the Catawba River Basin, 1993 – 2002 (Current basinwide sites are in bold font.) Subbasin/Waterbody Location County Index No. Date NCIBI Score NCIBI Rating 03-08-30 Catawba R SR 1110 McDowell 11-1 04/29/02 46 Good-Fair McDowell 11-7-(0.5) 60 Mackey Cr 11-15-(3.5) Poor 04/15/99 11-32-1 04/30/02 48 05/07/97 52 Good SR 1764 McDowell 11-32-2 Good 05/05/97 54 Excellent 05/07/97 50 Good Mill Cr SR 1400 06/08/99 58 Excellent Curtis Cr US 70 McDowell 11-10 04/30/02 Excellent Crooked Cr SR 1135 McDowell 11-12 04/30/02 56 Excellent US 70/SR 1413 McDowell 11-15-(3.5) 03/25/98 48 Good Mackey Cr US 70 McDowell 04/29/02 52 Good 03/25/98 18 Armstrong Cr SR 1456 McDowell 11-24-14-(1) 09/23/99 54 Excellent 06/22/99 56 Excellent 54 Excellent 05/07/97 56 Excellent Paddy Cr NC 126 Burke 11-28 05/01/02 46 Good-Fair 05/05/97 40 Fair North Muddy Cr SR 1760 McDowell Good Corpening Cr SR 1794 McDowell 11-32-1-4 09/23/02 40 Fair South Muddy Cr 05/01/02 48 Good 07/02/97 50 06/28/93 50 Good Canoe Cr SR 1250 Burke 11-33-(2) 05/02/02 50 Good 05/10/93 46 Good-Fair 03-08-31 Silver Cr SR 1149 Burke 11-34-(0.5) 05/01/02 60 Excellent Upper Cr Excellent SR 1439 58 Good-Fair SR 1515 11-41-(1) SR 1439 Burke 11-35-2-(13) 09/22/99 56 Excellent 06/21/99 54 Excellent 04/16/99 56 07/01/97 54 Excellent Irish Cr Burke 11-35-3-(2) 05/02/02 38 Fair Hunting Cr SR 1512 Burke 11-36-(0.3) 05/01/02 38 Fair Gragg Prong SR 1367 Caldwell 11-38-10 05/25/99 56 Excellent 10/01/98 56 Excellent Mulberry Cr NC 90 Caldwell 11-38-32-(15) 09/22/99 60 Excellent 06/21/99 Excellent 04/16/99 56 Excellent 05/08/97 60 Excellent Lower Cr SR 1142 Caldwell 11-39-(6.5) 05/10/93 44 Good-Fair Lower Cr SR 1501 Burke 11-39-(6.5) 05/02/02 42 10/24/97 44 Good-Fair Smoky Cr Burke 05/03/02 58 Excellent McGalliard Cr SR 1538 Burke 11-44-(0.5) 05/03/02 40 Fair 05/06/97 48 Good 05/10/93 38 Fair 03-08-32 SR 1786 Caldwell 11-58-(5.5) 05/24/02 42 Good-Fair Middle Little R SR 1002 Alexander 56 Excellent 05/08/97 52 Good Duck Cr NC 90 Alexander 11-62-2-(1) 05/23/02 48 Good 05/08/97 05/11/93 40 Fair SR 1318 Alexander 11-69-(0.5) 05/23/02 38 Fair 05/09/97 48 Good 05/11/93 28 Poor Upper Little R 11-62 05/23/02 05/11/93 46 Good-Fair 48 Good Lower Little R A-II-13 Subbasin/Waterbody Location County Index No. Date NCIBI Score NCIBI Rating Elk Shoal Cr SR 1605 Alexander 11-73-(0.5) 05/23/02 48 Good 05/09/97 54 Excellent 05/11/93 48 Good Lyle Cr US 70 Catawba 11-76-(3.5) 07/01/97 48 Good 05/11/93 50 Good Buffalo Shoals Cr SR 1503 Iredell 11-78-(0.5) 06/04/97 58 Excellent 03-08-33 McDowell Cr SR 2136 Mecklenburg 11-115-(1.5) 05/20/02 22 Poor Good 05/20/97 06/12/97 40 Fair Dutchmans Cr SR 1918 Gaston 11-119-(0.5) 06/30/93 50 Good Leepers Cr NC 73 Lincoln 11-119-1-(1) 05/20/97 52 06/29/93 56 Excellent Killian Cr NC 73 Lincoln 11-119-2-(0.5) 05/21/02 46 Good-Fair 52 Good Killian Cr SR 1511 Lincoln 11-119-2-(0.5) 06/29/93 56 Excellent 03-08-34 Sugar Cr SR 1156 Mecklenburg 11-137-1 04/15/99 28 Poor 06/30/97 32 Poor 06/30/93 18 Poor Little Sugar Cr NC 51 Mecklenburg 11-137-8 04/15/99 42 Good-Fair 06/30/97 40 Fair 03-08-35 Henry Fork SR 1922 Burke 11-129-1-(2) 09/28/98 52 Good Henry Fork SR 1916 Burke 11-129-1-(2) 11-129-3-(0.7) 05/21/02 off SR 1892 48 05/06/97 46 Good-Fair Jacob Fork SR 1924 Burke 11-129-2-(4) 05/03/99 54 Excellent 09/28/98 52 Good 05/06/97 56 Excellent Pott Cr SR 1217 Lincoln 50 Good 05/21/97 50 Good Maiden Cr SR 1858 Catawba 11-129-5-7-2-(1) 03/18/93 42 Good-Fair Maiden Cr Catawba 11-129-5-7-2-(1) 03/18/93 30 Poor Indian Cr SR 1252 Lincoln 11-129-8-(6.5) 05/21/02 38 Fair 07/01/97 38 Fair Beaverdam Cr SR 1609 Gaston 11-129-9-(0.7) 05/21/02 50 Good Hoyle Cr SR 1836 Gaston 11-129-15-(1.5) 05/22/02 42 Good-Fair 06/12/97 Good 03-08-36 Long Cr US 321 Gaston 11-129-16-(4) 05/22/02 46 Good-Fair 05/20/97 40 Fair 06/30/93 30 Poor 03-08-37 Catawba Cr SR 2435 Gaston 11-130 05/22/02 40 Fair 05/19/97 42 Good-Fair Crowders Cr SR 1108 Gaston 11-135 05/22/02 38 Fair 05/19/97 36 Fair 03-08-38 Twelvelmile Cr NC 16 Union 11-138 05/20/02 42 Good-Fair 06/11/97 48 Good Sixmile Cr SR 1312 Union 11-138-3 05/20/02 38 Fair 06/11/97 40 Fair Waxhaw Cr SR 1103 Union 11-139 06/11/97 56 Excellent A-II-14 Lake Assessment Program Lakes Monitored Ten lakes in the basin were monitored as part of the Lakes Assessment Program in 2002 (Table 3). Surface physical and photic zone chemistry data collected from 1997 through 2002 (from 1992 for Newton City and Bessemer City Lakes) are presented in Table 5. The North Carolina water quality standards per 15A NCAC 2B .0200 are used in determining if a lake is meeting its designated uses. In addition to data collected through field sampling efforts, lake water quality assessments are also based on information obtained from other lake monitoring programs such as those implemented by municipalities and major hydroelectric companies. Observations and comments from citizens, local government personnel, water treatment facility staff, and others are also considered in the assessment process. Lake Sampling Methods Lake monitoring stations are sited to provide representative samples of lake water quality based on morphology, size and site-specific features such as coves and tributaries. Physical field measurements (dissolved oxygen, pH, water temperature and conductivity) are made with a calibrated HydrolabTM. Readings are taken at the surface of the lake (0.15 meters) and at one- meter increments to the bottom of the lake. Secchi depths are measured at each sampling station with a weighted Secchi disk attached to a rope marked off in centimeters. Surface water samples are collected for chloride, hardness, fecal coliform bacteria and metals. A LablineTM sampler is used to composite water samples within the photic zone (a depth equal to twice the Secchi depth). Nutrients, chlorophyll a, solids, turbidity and phytoplankton are collected at this depth. Nutrients and chlorophyll a from the photic zone are used to calculate the North Carolina Trophic State Index score. The LablineTM sampler is also used to collect a grab water samples near the bottom of the lake for nutrients. Water samples are collected and preserved in accordance with specified protocols (NCDEHNR, 1996; and subsequent updates). Data Interpretation A-II-15 Table 3 Lakes Monitored in the Catawba River Basin during the 2001 – 2002 Sampling Effort Subbasin/ Lake County Classification Surface Area (ac) Mean Depth (ft.) Volume (X106m3) Watershed (mi2) Mean Retention Time (days) 03-08-30 Lake Tahoma McDowell WS-II, B Tr, HQW 1,61 30 0.7 23 Lake James Burke WS-IV, V, B Tr 6,510 46 36.9 380 208 03-08-31 Lake Rhodhiss Burke- Caldwell WS-IV, B, CA 3,515 20 36.7 1,090 21 03-08-32 Lake Hickory Alexander- Catawba WS-IV, V, B, CA 4,100 33 17.0 1,310 33 Lookout Shoals Lake Catawba Iredell WS-IV, V, B, CA 1,270 30 4.6 1,450 7 Lake Norman Mecklenburg - Lincoln WS-IV, B, CA 32,510 33 131.5 1,790 239 03-08-33 Mountain Island Lake Mecklenburg - Gaston WS-IV, B, CA 3,235 16 71.0 1,860 12 03-08-34 Lake Wylie Mecklenburg - York, SC WS-IV, V, B, CA 12,450 23 35.3 3,020 39 03-08-35 Newton City Lake Catawba WS-III, CA 17 10 0.1 100 03-08-36 Bessemer City Lake Gaston WS-II, HQW, CA 15 10 0.02 0.4 In addition to determining use support, data collected during ambient lakes monitoring are used to evaluate the trophic state of lakes. An index was developed specifically for North Carolina lakes as part of the state's original Clean Lakes Classification Survey of 1982. The North Carolina Trophic State Index (NCTSI) is based on total phosphorus (TP in mg/L), total organic nitrogen (TON in mg/L), Secchi depth (SD in inches), and chlorophyll a (CHL in µg/L). Lakewide means for these parameters are used to produce a NCTSI score for each lake, using the equations: TON Score = ((Log (TON) + 0.45)/0.24)*0.90 TPScore = ((Log (TP) + 1.55)/0.35)*0.92 SDScore = ((Log (SD) – 1.73)/0.35)*-0.82 CHLScore = ((Log (CHL) – 1.00)/0.48)*0.83 NCTSI = TONScore + TPScore + SDScore + CHLScore A-II-16 In general, NCTSI scores relate to trophic classifications (Table 4). When scores border between classes, best professional judgment is used to assign an appropriate classification. Scores may be skewed by highly colored water typical of dystrophic lakes. Some variation in the trophic state between years is not unusual because of the variability of data collections, which usually involve sampling a limited number of times during the growing season. Table 4 Lakes Classification Criteria NCTSI Score Trophic Classification < -2.0 Oligotrophic -2.0 – 0.0 Mesotrophic 0.0 – 5.0 Eutrophic > 5.0 Hypereutrophic Oligotrophic lakes are characteristically found in the mountains or in undisturbed watersheds. Many mesotrophic and eutrophic lakes are found in the central piedmont. There are a few hypereutrophic lakes where point or nonpoint sources of pollution contribute to high levels of nutrients. A-II-17 References Chutter, F. M. 1972. An Empirical Biotic Index of the Quality of Water in South African Streams and Rivers. Water Research. 6:19-30. Hilsenhoff, W. L. 1977. Use of Arthropods to Evaluate Water Quality in Streams. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Technical Bulletin No. 100. Lenat, D. L. 1993. A Biotic Index for the Southeastern United States: Derivation and List of Tolerance Values, with Criteria for Assigning Water Quality Ratings. J. North American Benthological Society. 12:279-290. NCDEHNR. 1996. Standard Operating Procedures Manual. Physical and Chemical Monitoring. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources. Division of Water Quality. Water Quality Section. Raleigh, NC. NCDENR. 2001. Standard Operating Procedures Manual. Biological Monitoring. Stream Fish Community Assessment and Fish Tissue. Ibid. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Division of Water Quality. Water Quality Section. Raleigh, NC. A-II-18