||Proof of concept for integrating bioassessment results from three state probabilistic monitoring programs : final report /
||Versar, Inc., Columbia, MD.;Environmental Protection Agency, Fort Meade, MD. Office of Environmental Information. Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment.
||U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Information, Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment,
Water quality biological assessment--Middle Atlantic States. ;
Stream ecology--Middle Atlantic States.
Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment (Program) ;
West Virginia ;
State programs ;
Data collection ;
Probabilistic monitoring programs ;
Stream Condition Indices ;
Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity ;
Stream assessment ;
||Env Science Center Library/Ft Meade,MD
||Most EPA libraries have a fiche copy filed under the call number shown. Check with individual libraries about paper copy.
||v, 28 pages : figures, tables ; 28 cm
If data from state stream monitoring assessment programs can be integrated, EPA will be able to obtain estimates of stream condition over larger regions. We assessed the feasibility of integrating three probabilistic monitoring programs -Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia- and calculated a provisional combined estimate of condition for the non-Coastal Plain region of these states using multimetric indices. All three states had probability-based surveys with similar sample frames (ranges of stream types and sizes) and benthic macroinvertebrate collection procedures outside of the Coastal Plain. Virginia and West Virginia used similar Stream Condition Indices (SCIs) where index scores were derived from the range of values at all sample sites (with thresholds for rating stream condition based on reference condition), while Maryland used a Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity (B-IBI) with metric scores assigned relative to reference condition (and thresholds based on the average of metric scores). To compare the three index methods and establish a common benchmark, SCIs were first calculated for Maryland sites using the Virginia and West Virginia methods. The two SCIs produced nearly identical results on Maryland data indicating that the Virginia and West Virginia methods were directly comparable. The Maryland B-IBI had a more uniform distribution of scores than the SCIs and was not directly comparable. The West Virginia procedure for selecting reference sites included site-by-site best professional judgment (BPJ) exclusions that were more restrictive, but which could not be reproduced for other states, so were not included in the provisional integrated assessment. Application of each state's reference criteria to Maryland data (excluding West Virginia's BPJ exclusions) resulted in different suites of reference sites. However, the distributions of reference sites selected were similar, suggesting the different reference sites were of similar stream quality (comparably
affected by human disturbance). Using our example integration approach (and treating each state as a stratum) and the 10th percentile of reference sites as a degradation threshold, we estimated that approximately 39% of all streams in the non-Coastal Plain of the three states would be classifi ed as degraded for 1997-2003. Applying a threshold of degradation derived from higher quality reference sites (e.g., those including West Virginia's BPJ exclusions) would increase the proportion of streams designated as degraded. We conclude that similar integrations at the level of stream condition assessment will be possible even when data integration is problematic.
"EPA/903/R-05/003." "June 2006." "COMMITS Contract No. 50CMAA900065." Includes bibliographical references (pages 26-28).