My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE69662
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
700000
>
PERMFILE69662
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:18:43 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 10:59:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982056
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Section_Exhibit Name
EXHIBIT 22 AQUATIC BIOLOGY MONITORING SURVEY OF FOIDEL CREEK
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />habitats at the two sample sites (Table 5). Oligochaetes and <br />chironomids predominated the pool habitats, while mayflies <br />(Ephemeroptera), caddisflies (Trichoptera), and the filter-feeding <br />fly, SimLliiim sp., were nearly as numerous or more numerous <br />than these two taxa in the riffle habitat. <br />Although the density of organisms was higher in 1981 sampling <br />than in the previous year's samples, the number of taxa, and the <br />diversity values are very similar between the two years (Table <br />6). Even the pattern of pool habitat diversity approximating <br />1.0 as compared to riffle habitat diversities between 2.57 and <br />2.90 were repeated in this year's samplings. <br />A pattern similar to Middle Creek is also apparent in the <br />two Fish Creek stations (Table 7). Oligochaetes and chironomids <br />dominated the pool habitat and, in combination with a low number <br />of taxa (6 and 5), resulted in a diversity value slightly greater <br />than 1.0. Riffle habitat contained 17 taxa, and three species <br />of mayflies (Ephemeroptera) and three species of caddisflies <br />(Trichoptera) were nearly as abundant as chironomids. Diversity <br />values for stations 1 and 2 on this creek were 2.06 and 2.01 <br />respectively. These figures are relatively low considering the <br />number of taxa present, but this is because of the very large <br />number of both chironomids and the caddisfly, Cheumatoosvche <br />'~ sp., at each of the two stations (Table 2). <br />Diversity values for the pool and riffle habitats of both <br />stations are also very similar to Middle Creek results and to <br />last year's sampling results (Table 8). The most notable <br />comparison on Table 8 is the number of organisms and taxa reported <br />for 1975 and 1979 versus recent sampling results. Sampling in <br />July of 1975 produced very low numbers of organisms and taxa (199 <br />and 6, respectively). Sampling at these same stations only one <br />month later produced results considerably higher in both density <br />and number of taxa (25,813 and 20, respectively), and in line <br />with more recent sampling results (Table 8). Apparently, the <br />July, 1975 sampling occurred during the early portion of the month <br />when invertebate numbers are low as a result of high spring runoff <br />and adult emergence (Harner-White Ecological Consultants, 1980). <br />The unnamed tributary to Foidel Creek contained fish only <br />below the settling pond at Station 3 (Table 9). while the 1980 <br />~• <br />19 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.