Application of Wetland Bioassessment Protocols for Making Aquatic Life

Beneficial Use-Support Determinations in Montana

Randy ApfelbeckWater Quality SpecialistMontana Dept. of Environmental Quality

Wetland Bioassessments• Very brief overview of past research activities• Explain how Montana uses biological data to

determine whether water quality standards are being achieved.

• Discuss the application of bioassessments within our TMDL program and provide an example of our assessment process for listing impaired waters (303(d) list).

• Briefly discuss our recent efforts to develop a comprehensive watershed monitoring assessment program to determine status and trends (305(b) purposes).

Brief overview of past research activities in Montana to develop wetland biocriteria

1993-94 Study Objectives

• Develop bioassessments tools that can detect human impacts to wetlands (wetter environments).

• Develop a classification system that could stratify the natural variability found in wetland biological communities.

• Determine whether aquatic life uses were supported.

Wetland Classification• Ecoregions

– Rocky Mountain– Intermountain Valleys and Prairie Foothills– Plains

• Hydogeomorphology– Headwater – Riparian– Open Lakes– Closed Basins

Open Lake Wetlands of the Plains Ecoregion

Riparian Wetlands of the Plains Ecoregion

Ephemeral Wetlands of the Plains Ecoregion(Closed Basin)

Algae (Diatoms)

Macroinvertebrates

Lessons Learned• The use of hydrogeomorphology and ecoregions

appears to be a useful approach to wetland classification for developing biocriteria.

• In most cases, the macroinvertebrates and diatoms identified the same wetlands as having a similar biological condition.

• Diatom and macroinvertebrate biocriteria were most useful for detecting impairment to permanent wetlands with stable water levels.

• We were not successful in developing biocriteria for wetlands that were highly saline or alkaline.

Additional Research

• Cici Borth (Montana State University)– Vegetation (1997-1998)– Focus on dryer wetlands

• Vicki Ludden (University of Montana)– Macroinvertebrates (1999-2000)– Focus on depressional wetlands

APPLICATION OF BIOASSESSMENTS

• How are biological assessments used to determine if Montana’s water quality standards are being achieved?

Water Quality Standards• Clean Water Act (Section 101(a))

– restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.

• Designates beneficial uses for all surface water, including wetlands.

• Nondegradation– Existing uses of state waters must be maintained and

protected

Wetland Beneficial Uses

• Aquatic Life Use Support– Waters are suitable for the growth and propagation of

fish and associated aquatic life, waterfowl andfurbearers.

– Bioassessments are very useful for assessing aquatic life beneficial uses because they are a direct measure of the health of aquatic communities.

Numeric Criteria• Chronic and acute aquatic life standards.• Changes in pH, turbidity and temperature are

limited.

Narrative Criteria• No increases are allowed above “naturally

occurring” concentrations of sediment, settleable solids, floating solids, etc. which are harmful, detrimental, or injurious to birds, fish or other wildlife.

• Prohibition of undesirable aquatic life.

• Pollution resulting from non-point sources, including agriculture, construction, logging, and other practices must be minimized.

“Naturally Occurring”

• Refers to the chemical, physical and biological conditions or materials present from which man has no control, or from developed land where “reasonable” land soil, and water conservation practices have been applied.

“Reasonable” Land, Soil and Water Conservation Practices

• Means methods, measures or practices that protect existing and designated beneficial uses.

• Often determined by comparing to reference condition.

Reference Condition• Reference condition is the greatest potential for a

waterbody to support all of its beneficial uses given the historical land use.

• used to interpret narrative criteria and numeric criteria that limit how much a parameter can change from what would be naturally occurring.

Reference Condition(Primary Approach)

• Collecting baseline data from minimally impaired water bodies within the same region having similar geology, hydrology and morphology

• Evaluating historical data

• Using internal references or a paired watershed approach

Reference Condition(Secondary Approach)

• Reviewing existing literature

• Expert Opinion

• Quantitative Models

• How are biological assessments being used by Montana’s TMDL Program?

What is a TMDL?(Total Maximum Daily Load)

• Technically, a TMDL is the total amount of a pollutant, per day, (including a margin of safety) that a waterbody may receive from any source (point, non-point, or natural background) without exceeding the State water quality standards.

What is a TMDL?

Practically, a TMDL is a water quality restoration plan that is developed to protect beneficial uses which has quantifiable goals or endpoints.

– Must be linked to pollutants (e.g. nutrients)– May not be useful for restoring wetlands that

have physical, habitat or hydrologic impairments (pollution)

Application of Biological Assessments in the TMDL Program

• Detecting impairment– Direct measure of aquatic life use – Interpretation of the biological data helps

identify probable sources and causes of impairment

• TMDL– Establish targets or restoration goals– Effectiveness monitoring

303(d) List

• List of impaired waters that are not achieving State water quality standards and may require TMDLs

• There are currently eight wetlands on the 303(d) list.

• Biological data were used to assess aquatic life use support for 94% of the waters that have been placed on Montana’s 303(d) list.

• How are biological data considered when making Montana’s 303(d) listing decisions and what is sufficient credible data?

Sufficient Credible Data“….chemical, physical, or biological

monitoring data, alone or in combination with narrative information, that supports …... whether a water is achieving compliance with applicable water quality standards.”

….Must use all readily available data.

How does Montana assess aquatic life uses?

BiologyChemistry

Habitat

Landscape

Sufficient Credible Data Categories for making ALUS

Determinations

• Biology• Physical/Habitat • Chemistry (e.g., Toxins)

Biological Data Category

• Biocriteria– Fish– Macroinvertebrate– Algae– amphibians– vegetation

• Fish populations• Wildlife populations

Chemistry Data Category• Numeric Criteria

– Acute and chronic aquatic life standards– Dissolved oxygen– changes in pH, turbidity and temperature

• Narrative Criteria (reference condition)– Nutrients (chlorophyll) – salinity– Clean and contaminated sediment– Bioaccumulation

Physical/Habitat Data Category• Habitat• Hydrology• Geomorphology• Landscape (sources)

Landscape Data- Percent land use/land cover - Grazing intensity- Fragmentation of riparian corridors- Road density or number of stream crossings- Number of irrigation withdrawals or miles of ditches

Functional Loss

Landscape - Physical Loss

Sufficient Credible Data• How does Montana decide when

there is a sufficient amount of data and information to make an ALUS determination?

Evaluate Data for:• Technical Rigor of Methods• Coverage /Quantity• Quality• Applicability to Present

Conditions

Scoring Example: Biological Data

Score Methods Data Quantity Data QualityData

Currency

1

Visual observation; no reference

LimitedUnknown or

low; no specialist

Data no relevant; may

have been significant changes

2

1 group; use reference

Single time or single site

Low to moderate;

some specialist guidance

Data older than ideal; likely still accurate

3

1 or more groups; use reference

Target sites; 1 season

Moderate; specialist

makes assessment

Recent data

4

2 or more groups; use reference

Broad CoverageHigh; all work

done by specialist

Current data

Sufficient Credible Data for Making ALUS Determinations

• All available data are evaluated.• Data are usually required from at least two data

categories• Minimum score of 6 required out of 12• Data that scores 1 are not considered• Assessments based on reference condition are

generally scored higher.

Beneficial Use Support

• How does Montana make aquatic life use support determinations for 303(d) purposes?

Assessment Process

• Gather & Organize Data

• Evaluate Data Quantity & Quality

• Beneficial Use Support Determination

Aquatic Life Use Support Determination

• Overwhelming Evidence Test

• Independent Evidence Test

• Weight of Evidence Test

Assessment Process (continued)

• Use Support:Full ThreatenedPartial Not Supporting

• Application of Results– 305(b) Statewide WQ Database– 303(d) Impaired Waters List

Case StudyBenton Lake National

Wildlife Refuge

*

Benton Lake National Wildlife Refuge• 5,600 acre saline marsh created by a glacier• Established in 1929 to provide habitat for up to

100,000 ducks, 40,000 geese and 5000 swans• Currently receives a large portion of its water

from irrigation drainage• The marsh is currently divided into separate

units that are periodically flooded.• Because there is no surface outlet, salts and

contaminants are concentrated in the water.

Benton Lake National Wildlife Refuge(Example of Sufficient Credible Data)

• Chemistry (Score 3 of 4)– water column, sediment, and tissue data

• Physical/habitat (Score 2 of 4)– Visual habitat assessment with photo

documentation and interpretations

• Biology (Score 3 of 4)– Macroinvertebrate and algae bioassessment– Substantial amount of waterfowl population data

• Total Score = 8 (Sufficient Credible Data)

Benton Lake National Wildlife Refuge(Example of Aquatic Life Use-Support Determination)

• Chemistry– High nitrates in water column– High selenium in sediment and tissue

• Physical/Habitat/Landscape– Saline seeps were found along wetlands– intensive agriculture occurs within watershed – Water levels intensively managed to control salinity

• Biology– Algae biocriteria indicates moderate impairment

Macroinvertebrates indicate slight impairment

Benton Lake NWR 303(d) listing

• Weight-of-Evidence Test– Chemistry and biology data indicate impairment – Physical/habitat data identifies probable sources

• Partial Support of Aquatic Life Use• Probable Causes of Impairment

– nitrogen, selenium, salinity, noxious algae • Probable sources of impairment

– agriculture

Summary• Biological assessments directly measure impacts to

the aquatic life communities.

• Physical/habitat and chemistry data often provide valuable information concerning the probable causes and sources of impairment.

• Therefore, Montana DEQ is emphasizing a holistic approach for making ALUS determinations which usually entails consideration of data from at leasttwo data categories.

Final Thoughts on Wetland TMDLs

• The TMDL process can be a useful tool for addressing constraints to biological integrity if the impairment can be linked to a pollutant.

• However, we feel that load-based TMDL targets that are solely based on pollutants often do not address impacts to wetland aquatic life uses.

Next Step: Developing a Comprehensive Watershed

Assessment Program• “Under development”• Integrated assessment of wetlands, streams and

lakes within a watershed• Report on overall aquatic health at the subbasin and

watershed level • Determine if aquatic life uses are at risk.• Status and trends - 305(b) purposes

Why Develop a Comprehensive Watershed Assessment Program?

• Wetland aquatic life uses are often dependant on having a population of wetlands on the landscape and are affected by the fragmentation of riparian areas.

• Stream aquatic life uses and geomorphology are often affected when the wetlands within its watershed are altered.

• The aquatic life uses within wetlands that are adjacent to streams are often affected by changes in stream water quality and geomorphology.

Comprehensive Watershed Assessments

• Therefore, we believe that we should use an integrated approach to evaluate watershed health by assessing the ecological condition of all waterbody types within a given watershed using a combination of biological, habitat, landscape and functional assessments.

Goal- include the assessment of

wetlands as part of our statewidewater quality monitoring strategyto assess water quality statusand trends, and watershed health. (305(b) purposes)

Objectives• Level 1 (Landscape)

– Develop landscape assessment tools that can be used to determine if aquatic life uses within a watershed are at risk (GIS or remote sensing).

• Level 2 (Rapid Field Assessment)– Develop rapid field assessment protocols to evaluate

aquatic ecological conditions by using indicators and best professional judgement.

• Level 3 (Site-specific Assessment)– Develop site-specific biological assessment protocols

to evaluate wetland aquatic life uses.

Original Study Design For Assessing Wetlands

• Focus on three pilot subbasins (4th Level HUCs) each located in a different ecoregion.

• Focus on riparian and depressional wetlands.• Use landscape assessments to rank and catagorize

watersheds and wetlands within each subbasin as least-impaired, intermediately impaired and most impaired .

• Use a random approach for selecting watersheds and wetlands for rapid field assessments and site-specific biological assessments.

Upper Kootenai Middle Milk

Red Rock

• Randy Apfelbeck– DEQ (macroinvertebrates and diatoms)

• Marc Jones– Natural Heritage Program (vegetation)

• Brad Cook– University of Montana (vegetation)

• Bryce Maxell– University of Montana (amphibians and reptiles)

• Duane Anderson– State Library (GIS - Landscape)

• Michelle White– Montana Water Center (Rapid Assessments ?)

Lessons Learned

• Our GIS landscape assessment did not have enough resolution for ranking watersheds (remote sensing?).

• We are having difficulty identifying depressionalwetlands on existing maps (need NWI maps or to use air photos).

• We are having difficulty accessing wetlands when using the random approach.

Montana DEQ Web Page

Http://www.deq.state.mt.us/ppa/mdm/

• Water Quality Assessment Process and Methods

Randy ApfelbeckMontana Dept. of Environmental Qualityrapfelbeck@state.mt.us(406) 444-2709