Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Invertebrate-Based Water Quality Impairments and Associated Stressors Identified through the US Clean Water Act

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Macroinvertebrate community assessment is used in most US states to evaluate stream health under the Clean Water Act. While water quality assessment and impairment determinations are reported to the US Environmental Protection Agency, there is no national summary of biological assessment findings. The objective of this work was to determine the national extent of invertebrate-based impairments and to identify pollutants primarily responsible for those impairments. Evaluation of state data in the US Environmental Protection Agency’s Assessment and Total Maximum Daily Load Tracking and Implementation System database revealed considerable differences in reporting approaches and terminologies including differences in if and how states report specific biological assessment findings. Only 15% of waters impaired for aquatic life could be identified as having impairments determined by biological assessments (e.g., invertebrates, fish, periphyton); approximately one-third of these were associated with macroinvertebrate bioassessment. Nearly 650 invertebrate-impaired waters were identified nationwide, and sediment was the most common pollutant in bedded (63%) and suspended (9%) forms. This finding is not unexpected, given previous work on the negative impacts of sediment on aquatic life, and highlights the need to more specifically identify the mechanisms driving sediment impairments in order to design effective remediation plans. It also reinforces the importance of efforts to derive sediment-specific biological indices and numerical sediment quality guidelines. Standardization of state reporting approaches and terminology would significantly increase the potential application of water quality assessment data, reveal national trends, and encourage sharing of best practices to facilitate the attainment of water quality goals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alabama DEM (2015) Alabama’s Water Quality Assessment and Listing Methodology. Draft. Alabama Department of Environmental Management

  • Alaska DEC (2015) Alaska Water Quality Monitoring & Assessment Strategy. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Water, Juneau, Alaska

    Google Scholar 

  • Arizona DEQ (2015) Implementation Procedures for the Narrative Biocriteria Standard. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality

  • Arkansas DEQ (2016) Arkansas’ Water Quality and Compliance Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan (QTRAK #16-155). Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality, Little Rock, Arkansas

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbour M, Gerritsen J, Snyder B, Stribling J (1999) Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish, 2nd edn.. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC, EPA 841-B-99-002

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosch D, Ogg C, Osei E, Stoecker A (2006) Economic models for TMDL assessment and implementation. T ASABE 49:1051–1065. doi:10.13031/2013.21744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter JL, Resh VH (2013) Analytical approaches used in stream benthic macroinvertebrate biomonitoring programs of state agencies in the United States Open-File Report 2013-1129. US Geological Survey. Open-File Report 2013-1129

  • Collins AL, Naden PS, Sear DA et al. (2011) Sediment targets for informing river catchment management: international experience and prospects. Hydrol Process 25:2112–2129. doi:10.1002/hyp.7965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connecticut DEEP (2014) 2014 State of Connecticut Integrated Water Quality Report Pursuant to Sections 305 (b) and 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act. Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Bureau of Water Protection and Land Reuse, Hartford, CT

    Google Scholar 

  • Droppo IG, D’Andrea L, Krishnappan BG et al. (2014) Fine-sediment dynamics: towards an improved understanding of sediment erosion and transport. J Soil Sediment 15:467–479. doi:10.1007/s11368-014-1004-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fore LS (2003) Developing Biological Indicators: Lessons Learned from Mid-Atlantic Streams EPA/903/R-03/003. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Environmental Information and Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment Program, Ft. Meade, MD, Region 3

    Google Scholar 

  • Gammon JR (1970) The Effect of Inorganic Sediment on Stream Biota. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Quality Office, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao P (2008) Understanding watershed suspended sediment transport. Prog Phys Geogr 32:243–263. doi:10.1177/0309133308094849

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson GRJ (1992) Procedures for Initiating Narrative Biological Criteria EPA-822-B-92-002. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Science and Technology and Office of Water, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbst DB, Medhurst RB, Roberts SW (2011) Development of Biological Criteria for Sediment TMDLs: the Relation of Sediment Deposition to Benthic Invertebrate Communities of Streams Exposed to Varied Land Use Disturbances in the Sierra Nevada and Coast Range Mountains of California. Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Laboratory, Mammoth Lakes, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilsenhoff WL (1987) An improved biotic index of organic stream pollution. Gt Lakes Entomol 20:31–40. doi: 10.1016/S0025-326X(01)00271-5

    Google Scholar 

  • Houck OA (2002) The Clean Water Act TMDL Program: Law, Policy, and Implementation. Environmental Law Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Illinois EPA (2014) Illinois Water Monitoring Strategy 2015-2020. Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Bureau of Water, Springfield, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones J, Murphy J, Collins A et al. (2012) The impact of fine sediment on macro-invertebrates. River Res Appl 28:1055–1071. doi:10.1002/rra.1516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karr JR, Chu EW (1997) Biological Monitoring and Assessment: Using Multimetric Indexes Effectively. University of Washington, Seattle, EPA 235-R97-001

    Google Scholar 

  • Maryland DE (2015) Maryland’s Final 2014 Integrated Report of Surface Water Quality Submitted in Accordance with Sections 303(d), 305(b), and 314 of the Clean Water Act. Maryland Department of the Environment, Baltimore, MD

  • Michigan DEQ (2014) Water Quality and Pollution Control in Michigan 2014 Sections 303(d), 305(b) and 314 Integrated Report MI/DEQ/WRD-14/001. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Water Resources Division

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • New Jersey DEP (2015) 2016 New Jersey Integrated Water Quality Assessment Methods. Draft. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Division of Water Monitoring and Standards and Bureau of Environmental Analysis, Restoration and Standards

  • New York State DEC (2009) The New York State Consolidated Assessment and Listing Methodology. New York State Department of Environment and Conservation

  • Newcombe C, MacDonald D (1991) Effects of suspended sediments on aquatic ecosystems. N. Am J Fish Manage 11:72–82. doi: 10.1577/1548-8675(1991)011 < 0072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohio EPA (2016) Ohio 2016 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Division of Surface Water

  • Pennsylvania DEP (2015) Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Assessment and Listing Methodology for Integrated Water Quality Assessment Reporting Clean Water Act Sections 305 (b)/303(d). Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

  • Puerto Rico EQB (2014) Puerto Rico 305(b)/303(d) Integrated Report. Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board Plans and Special Projects Division, San Juan, Puerto Rico

  • Resh VH (2008) Which group is best? Attributes of different biological assemblages used in freshwater biomonitoring programs. Environ Monit Assess 138:131–138. doi:10.1007/s10661-007-9749-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg DM, Resh VH (1993) Freshwater Biomonitoring and Benthic Macroinvertebrates. Chapman & Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • RTI International (2014a) Technical Support for Assessment, TMDL Tracking and Implementation System (ATTAINS) Redesign Planning (EP-C-12-054, TO 1), Workgroup 1 “Data Elements and Scema” Recommendations Report

  • RTI International (2014b) Technical Support for Assessment, TMDL Tracking and Implementation System (ATTAINS) Redesign Planning (EP-C-12-054, TO 1), Workgroup 4 “Improved Assessment Methods” Recommendations Report

  • Sorensen DL, McCarthy MM, Middlebrooks EJ, Porcella DB (1977) Suspended and Dissolved Solids Effects on Freshwater Biota: a Review. Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR

    Google Scholar 

  • South Dakota DENR (2014) 2014 South Dakota Integrated Report for Surface Water Quality Assessment. South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources

  • Tennessee DEC (2016) Tennessee Division of Water Resources Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Surface Water Monitoring and Assessment Program Plan. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation Division of Water Resources, Nashville, TN

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuholske J (2001) A litigator’s perspective: the Montana TMDL litigation. Public L Resour Law Rev. 22:3–17. doi: 10.1525/sp.2007.54.1.23

  • United Nations (2016) Sustainable Development Goals. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgs

  • US EPA (1990) Biological Criteria National Program Guidance for Surface Waters. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC, EPA 440-5-90-004

    Google Scholar 

  • US EPA (2000a) Overview of Current Total Maximum Daily Load - TMDL - Program and Regulations EPA 841-F-00-009. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • US EPA (2000b) Stressor Identification Guidance Document EPA 822-B-00-025. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water and Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • US EPA (2001) The National Costs of the Total Maximum Daily Load Program. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC, (Draft Report) EPA 841-D-01-003

    Google Scholar 

  • US EPA (2002) Consolidated Assessment and Listing Methodology: Toward a Compendium of Best Practices. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds

  • US EPA (2005) Guidance for 2006 Assessment, Listing and Reporting Requirements Pursuant to Sections 303(d), 305(b) and 314 of the Clean Water Act. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Wetland, Oceans and Watersheds and Office of Water

  • US EPA (2010a) Causal Analysis/Diagnosis Decision Information System (CADDIS). Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. http://www.epa.gov/caddis

  • US EPA (2010b) Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load for Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Sediment. Established by the US Environmental Protection Agency

  • US EPA (2011) A Primer on Using Biological Assessments to Support Water Quality Management. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Science and Technology and Office of Water, Washington, DC, EPA 810-R-11-01

    Google Scholar 

  • US EPA (2014) EPA’s Water Quality Framework. https://usepa.sharepoint.com/sites/OW_Work/WQF/

  • US EPA (2016b) National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2008-2009: a Collaborative Survey EPA 841-R-16-007. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water and Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • US EPA (2016a) Assessment and Total Maximum Daily Load Tracking and Implementation System (ATTAINS). http://www2.epa.gov/waterdata/assessment-and-total-maximum-daily-load-tracking-and-implementation-system-attains

  • Vermont DEC (2014) Vermont Surface Water Assessment and Listing Methodology. Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation Watershed Management Division, Montpelier, VT

    Google Scholar 

  • Waters TF (1995) Sediment in Streams: Sources, Biological Effects, and Control; American Fisheries Society Monograph 7. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD

    Google Scholar 

  • Wohl E, Bledsoe BP, Jacobson RB et al. (2015) The natural sediment regime in rivers: Broadening the foundation for ecosystem management. Bioscience 65:358–371. doi:10.1093/biosci/biv002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood PJ, Armitage PD (1997) Biological effects of fine sediment in the lotic environment. Environ Manage 21:203–217. doi:10.1007/s002679900019

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wyoming DEQ (2014) Wyoming’s Methods for Determining Surface Water Quality Condition and TMDL Prioritization. Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality Water Quality Division, Cheyenne, Wyoming

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

HG has a Cunningham Doctoral Assistantship funded by the Virginia Tech Graduate School, an Interfaces of Global Change Interdisciplinary Graduate Education Program Graduate Research Fellowship from the Virginia Tech Global Change Center, and a William R. Walker Graduate Research Fellow Award from the Virginia Water Resources Research Center. The manuscript was substantially improved by comments from Paul Angermeier, Lawrence Willis, and two anonymous reviewers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biological Systems Engineering, Seitz Hall Rm. 200, Virginia Tech, 155 Ag Quad Lane, Blacksburg, VA, USA 24061, USA

    Heather Govenor, Leigh Anne H. Krometis & W. Cully Hession

Authors
  1. Heather Govenor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leigh Anne H. Krometis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. W. Cully Hession
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heather Govenor.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Govenor, H., Krometis, L.A.H. & Hession, W.C. Invertebrate-Based Water Quality Impairments and Associated Stressors Identified through the US Clean Water Act. Environmental Management 60, 598–614 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-017-0907-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-017-0907-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation