Development of a Southeastern Reference Stream Monitoring Network

1. Development of a Southeastern Reference Stream Monitoring Network Debbie Arnwine Water Resources, TDEC Debbie.arnwine@tn.gov 615-532-0703

2. Started with Climate change 2011 • Biologists from the 8 EPA Region IV states and TVA considered the need for a stream monitoring network for detecting the effects of climate change on stream biota. • Representatives from EPA ORD, USGS, USFS, UC and SIFN gave presentations and held a mini-workshop.

3. Concerns • Changing climate has the potential to affect biological communities in aquatic systems. • Existing biological data are not adequate to isolate climate change related effects. • More information is needed on sensitive indicators and species traits. • Shifting populations may have an effect on bioassessment programs.

4. How changing climate can affect stream communities Temperature • Warming water in all seasons • Change in timing and length of seasons • Increase in number of high degree days. • Changes in riparian vegetation species

5. Hydrologic • Increase frequency and duration of droughts • Increase frequency and severity of floods • Change in timing of peak flows

6. Most vulnerable fauna • Limited dispersal options due to biological or geographical constraints including human-caused habitat fragmentation. • Small rangesrestricted to specific types or to habitats with temperatures already near the species thermal limits. • Small populationssubject to extirpation by extreme events. • Low upper thermal limits

7. Standard assessment biometrics are usually geared toward detecting a suite of stressors. Changes in Taxa Richness, EPT and pollution tolerance are expected but are also responsive to many other stressors. • Toxins • Nutrients • Dissolved Oxygen • Sedimentation

8. Biometrics that might help tease out climate change effects Feeding Guilds Species Replacement Thermal Tolerance Hydrologic Variability Tolerance Drought Tolerance

9. Indicators that would be difficult or time-consuming to measure Early emergence Reproductive Cycle Size at maturity Growth Rate

10. Fledgling SE Climate Change Monitoring Network Monitoring • Alabama DEM • Georgia DNR • Kentucky DOW • North Carolina DNR • South Carolina DHEC • Tennessee DEC • TVA Support • EPA Region IV • EPA ORD • Tetratech • USFS • USGS • Southeast Aquatics • Florida DEP • Mississippi DEQ

11. Climate Change monitoring hard to add when faced with Shrinking Monitoring Budgets and Growing Needs Needed to expand objectives and work within existing programs

12. Benefits of Regional Monitoring • Pool limited resources. • More data to analyze . • Coverage of ecoregions and watersheds that cross jurisdictional boundaries. • Several stressors (drought, acid rain, mercury air deposition, riparian forest infestations) are regional phenomena • Data can be used for multiple assessment and trend analysis purposes in shared watersheds and ecoregions.

13. Name Change!SE Reference Stream Monitoring Network March 2012 Planning Meeting What do we want to do? What can we do? Who can do it? How should we do it? Where should we do it? What do we need? When could we start?

14. Climate Objectives • Identify vulnerability to climate change • Determine whether stream communities are being affected by climate change. • Distinguish climate change effects from natural variation and other stressors. • Detect changes early in a way that informs management strategies. • Create a formal partnership to develop a consistent, long-term monitoring program that can withstand changes in staff.

15. Challenges • Getting 9 agencies in 8 states to agree on s standard protocol. • Incorporating monitoring into existing state assessment programs with little extra time or cost expenditures • 5-year watershed cycles and probabilistic programs creates difficulty for annual monitoring of reference sites • Need for continuous flow and temperature data

16. What we agreed on • Importance of starting monitoring as soon as possible and continuing it – target 2013 • Macroinvertebrate as primary indicators (fish and diatoms as secondary) • Annual monitoring • Consistent methodology • Species level identification • Reference site criteria

17. SE Network Site Selection Criteria • Moderate to high gradient stream with riffle habitat • Existing site with historic data showing a stable macroinvertebrate community • Protected watershed with land-use unlikely to change within next 20 years • 90% forested watershed • No point source discharge and minimal NPS or other stressors.

18. Perennial Flow • Established riparian with minimal invasive species • Natural channel with no flow modification structures • No power lines or pipelines upstream • Few or no roads in watershed • Active flow gage preferable

19. Proposed Monitoring Sites 39-41 sites Does not include Ga 2-4

20. Where we are now Reference Sites • 37 Sites have been identified for monitoring, expect 3-4 more. • Keep original reference site selection (riffle, wadeable, ecoregions) and not follow NE plan (small stream, moderate gradient). • Ky include reference site being treated for HWA. • Select potential replacement sites in case other sites become compromised.

21. Macroinvertebrates • Riffle Kick – 300 organism subsample • Qualitative habitats kept separately • Species identification • Annual sampling • Spring

22. FISH • TVA will help sample TN River drainage sites and will help coordinate fish sampling in other drainages if needed. • Spring/summer annually

23. Diatoms • Annual spring sample • EPA SPINBR or equivalent • Hold for future analysis if necessary

24. Temperature and Flow • Continuous temperature loggers at each site. • Continuous flow or surrogate (such as depth logger) at each site.

25. Water Quality • Minimum field parameters (DO, Cond., pH) at each site visit. • Nutrients, metals etc at discretion of each agency. (Recommend baseline and if changes in benthic community to rule out other stressors.)

26. Habitat • EPA Rapid Bioassessment Habitat Form Concurrent with macroinvertebrate samples. • Digital photo documentation.

27. Data Management • Each agency will house their own data and will provide data to a shared storage facility (TBD). • Considering options for shared home and assistance with statistical analyses.

28. SWPBA Workgroup Meeting • Monitoring site commitments – Reference Sites • Finalize monitoring protocols – develop draft workplan. • Narrow down spring sample window • Continuous monitoring considerations • Status – who needs help • Data storage and analysis options

29. QUESTIONS?SUGGESTIONS? Debbie Arnwine Water Resources, TDEC Debbie.arnwine@tn.gov 615-532-0703