Doc. # 2007-60
Issue/Agenda Committee
Cayuga Lake Watershed Network
July 25, 2007 Minutes
Village Hall, Interlaken NY

Present:Doug Haith, John Mawdsley, Ruth Richardson, Kevin Zippel, Susan Cushman, Sharon Anderson

1) The Significance of Biomonitoring and Indices of Biotic Integrity
Presentation by Susan Cushman, Monitoring Workgroup member, based on her graduate work and subsequent work with the Maryland Dept. of Natural Resources.

Biomonitoring is the measurement and evaluation of the condition of a living system or biota, which is used to track consequences of human activities. A scaled numerical index is created to reflect the ecological health of community. Indices have been developed for fish, “bugs” (macroinvertebrates) or periphyton (algae that cling to rocks). They sometimes will tell similar stories but sometimes they do not. For example, insects can more readily re-colonize a stream after a major disturbance.

An index of biological integrity (IBI). can be created for use at a particular scale such as physiographic region, state, or country (France and Japan). Bob Bode’s macroinvertebrate sampling protocol is a NYS index of biological integrity (IBI).

Benefits of biomonitoring include:
* Biological indicators improve our ability to assess environmental quality over using just WQ data
* Use of organisms to assess or monitor environmental conditions
* Condition of water can be evaluated by the “services” it provides biological communities
* Integrates health of entire ecosystem

An index integrates multiple characteristics and looks at both taxonomical characteristics (abundance, number of species, tolerance and intolerance to pollution, etc.) and functional characteristics (position in a food web, reproduction requirements such as fish that spawn under rocks, evidence of disease or damage, etc.). There is some overlap such as bottom dwellers are often intolerant.

A summary of the process to construct and IBI follows:
1. Categorize species
a) Trophic levels
b) Functional groups
c) Tolerances
d) Reproductive behavior
e) Taxonomic

2. Each metric is assigned a score based on expectations for that metric at minimally disturbed sites (reference condition)
a) 5 = metric expected “pristine” site
b) 3 = metric expected at sites that deviate
c) 1 = metric expected at site with strong deviation
The score criteria have a weighting process built in. The example in the figure above shows Maryland IBIs for one of 3 physiographic zones.

3. Assess which metrics indicate human impacts
4. Assess response to impact (increase, decrease)
5. Reduce list by redundant variables
6. Evaluate variation of metric – does it differ between low and highly impacted sites?
7. Calculation of thresholds (10th and 50th percentiles). See figure.
8. Assign score to metric values

Other factors such as temperature, phosphorus, or percentage of impervious surfaces can be analyzed for relations to the IBI . See figure.

Cushman has experience with IBIs for fish and macroinvertebrates. Fish identification is easier than macroinvertebrates however fish sampling takes greater skill and requires electroshocking and therefore unlikely to be undertaken by volunteers. Different fish IBI would be established for warm, cool and coldwater fisheries.

Macroinvertebrate sampling using the NYS IBI is being done once a year by the Sixmile Creek volunteer monitoring group. Other creek groups may do in the future. Samples collected above water falls would likely be different from one collected at the lake.

CONCLUSIONS:
* Extremely useful tool to assess quality of watershed, environment, ecosystem
* Easy to use, understand
– Public: general concern
– Gov’t: regulatory
* Assists in identifying impacted waters (using Clean Water Act criteria of fishable), as well as introduced species, disease, public health concerns
* Can direct restoration -- what, where, and why. – and evaluation the restoration site before and after.

Cushman was requested to provide similar information as an appendix to the monitoring guidance document.

The Issues Committee appreciated Cushman’s interesting and thought provoking presentation. Discussion to be continued at future meetings.

2) Fall Conference
Discussion of having plenary and break out sessions. A track related to septic systems might prove timely given the Tompkins County location and the inclusion of a septic system inspection program in the County’s comprehensive plan. Haith has contacts with a person designing alternative systems in the Otsego Lake area and Anderson has contacts with a person from the same area who is looking into waste water disposal systems for a cluster of home. Anderson was encouraged to pursue.

3) Next meeting: via conference call Aug 29, 4:00 p.m. to touch base about the conference.

Submitted by,
John Mawdsley, Chairperson