Categories
Listserv

Getting The Most From Volunteer Monitoring

Comment

Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 12:14:49 -0500
From: Mayio.Alice@epamail.epa.gov
Subject: [volmonitor] Great article about volunteer monitoring in NWQEP Notes

Check out this interesting and supportive article in the March 2008 issue of NWQEP NOTES, published by NC State University Cooperative Extension, entitled “Getting the Most from Volunteer Monitoring,” by Steven Dressing of Tetra Tech, Inc. It includes many examples from volunteer programs around the country, as well as discussion of costs, kits vs. meters and probes, and suggestions for programs and agencies.

http://www.bae.ncsu.edu/programs/extension/wqg/issues/notes127.pdf

(also posted on this website if the remote one changes in the future>>)

Alice Mayio
USEPA Office of Water
Phone: 202-566-1184, Fax: 202-566-1437
Mail: 1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW (4503T), Washington, DC 20460
Delivery: 1301 Constitution Ave NW (Rm7330Q), Washington, DC 20460

Categories
Listserv

Beavers and Lakes

Question

Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:29:43 -0500
From: Kelley Curran
Subject: [volmonitor] Beavers

Hello:

I was wondering if anyone has had any experience with the following or could
point me in the direction of finding additional information:

1. The lake community association that I belong to is preparing to trap and
kill a local beaver family that has been building a dam on our lake. The
board members claim that they have been mandated by the state to get rid of
them. It just seems to me that there may be more humane ways to handle the
beavers and their dam building activities. Has anyone had any experience
with this?

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Kelley A. Curran
Director of Water Quality Programs
Great Swamp Watershed Association
ph: 973-538-3500 x16
fax: 973-538-5300
e-mail: kcurran@greatswamp.org
website: www.greatswamp.org

Responses

Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 06:43:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Kelly Stettner
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] Beavers

Hello, Kelley & group;

As far as the beaver problem goes, has anyone thought about beaver baffles? Essentially, it’s a tube type of structure which is installed at the bottom of the dam, draining a portion of it into the stream below. The level of water behind the dam is maintained at a height to serve the beavers’ needs, but the streamflow is kept to a level that meets landowner needs and fish needs downstream. My buddy Mary Beth Adler has installed many; she works with Vermont Fish & Wildlife and would LOVE to explain and answer any questions you may have: marybeth.adler@state.vt.us

A link to more information: www.loudounwildlife.org/PDF_Files/Build_Beaver_Baffle.pdf

Categories
Listserv

Decontamination Methods

Question

Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:53:48 -0500
From: “Boward, Dan”

Hi Folks.

I help run a statewide volunteer stream monitoring program, Maryland Stream Waders (see http://www.dnr.maryland.gov/streams/streamWaders.asp), the volunteer component of the Maryland Biological Stream Survey (MBSS). Stream Waders volunteers sample aquatic invertebrates in wadeable, freshwater streams throughout Maryland. Beginning last year, we began decontaminating (with bleach) all MBSS equipment that contacts stream water to guard against the spread of didymo and whirling disease. Has anyone taken such precautions with volunteer stream monitors? We want to administer a protocol this year that will work with the 150 or so volunteers we expect to sample this spring.

Any advice would be greatly helpful.

Thanks!

Dan Boward
Maryland Department of Natural Resources
Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division
Ecological Assessment Program
580 Taylor Ave.; C-2
Annapolis, Maryland 21401
410-260-8605 (voice)
410-260-8620 (fax)
dboward@dnr.state.md.us

Responses

Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:22:36 -0600
From: Kris Stepenuck

Dan

We asked volunteers to follow disinfection protocols to protect against viral hemorrhagic septicemia (VHS) and other invasives. There are details in our summer newsletter and links in there to protocols (which are the same our Dept. of Natural Resources staff are asked to follow.

Here’s a link: http://watermonitoring.uwex.edu/pdf/level1/news/Spring2007News.pdf

Only those people monitoring multiple locations were asked to follow the actual disinfection protocols since drying equipment is acceptable as well.

Let me know if I can provide other details.

Cheers,

Kris Stepenuck

 

Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:11:48 -0500
From: Danielle Donkersloot

As it relates to didymo….Our network just sent out an alert to the stream monitors within NJ. The alert was to notify them on what the stuff looks like (rock snot) and what to do to prevent spreading it….We may have to be more proactive with it.

According to Fish and Wildlife, NJ does not have a problem with it yet, but it’s coming.

Is anyone keeping track of this stuff in the NE?

Categories
Listserv

Girl Scouts

Question

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:50:39 -0400
From: Lorien Onderdonk
Subject: [volmonitor] Girl Scouts

Hello All,

I received a request today from a Girl Scout leader who is looking for someone who might be
willing to come out and talk to her troop about monitoring and water quality as part of their
World Water Monitoring Day participation. Is there anyone near Fort Washington, Maryland who
would be interested/willing to assist? (I’ll also take leads.)

Also, please note that WWMD is hosting its official kickoff on September 18 in Washington, D.C.
Any of you who can are welcome to attend.

Thank you,

Lorien Onderdonk
Program Manager, Public Communications
Water Environment Federation
601 Wythe Street
Alexandria VA 22314
Phone: 703-535-5264
Fax: 703-684-2472
Londerdonk@wef.org

Responses

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:11:49 -0500
From: “Miles, Karen”
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Girl Scouts

If people do speak to Girl Scout groups, it would probably be helpful to know about
and share information about the EPA’s Girl Scout Water Drop Patch:
https://wiki.epa.gov/watershed2/index.php/Water_Drop_Patch_Project_%28with_Girl_Scouts_of_the_USA%29

Karen K. Miles, Ph.D.
Environmental Program Specialist
Water Quality Division
Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 1677
Oklahoma City, OK 73101-1677
(405) 702-8192
Karen.Miles@deq.state.ok.us

 

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:29:58 -0400
From: Lorien Onderdonk
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Girl Scouts

We are currently doing that through involvement with the Girl Scout Linking Girls to the Land partnership. The brochure we’re using for scout groups is available on our website at http://www.worldwatermonitoringday.org/ in case anyone is interested. The EPA patch is on the front.

Lorien Onderdonk
Program Manager, Public Communications
Water Environment Federation
601 Wythe Street
Alexandria VA 22314
Phone: 703-535-5264
Fax: 703-684-2472
LOnderdonk@wef.org

Categories
Listserv

Online Event Scheduling and Mapping

Question 1: Have any of you found any free software online that helps with registration?

Question 2: Have any volunteer monitoring programs that created a relatively simple interactive online map that displays monitoring sites and data?

Question 1

Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 16:35:12 -0400
From: “Joanna A. Cornell”
Subject: [volmonitor] Ideas to make registration easier?

Hi Everyone,

I’d love to get some insights about how others deal with this. I coordinate many workshops and it takes a good deal of my time to respond to emails/calls. Have any of you found any free software online that helps with registration? I’d love a way for people to be able to register for a workshop – and then a computer program would automatically email them directions and add their name to a list. Ideas?

Any of you use google calendar for posting of events? Your experience with it?

Thanks in advance,

Joanna

———————–

Joanna A. Cornell, Ph.D.
Aquatic and Human Ecologist
Northern Virginia Soil and Water Conservation District
12055 Government Center Parkway, Suite 905
Fairfax, VA 22035
w: 703.324.1425
f: 703.324.1421

Responses to Question 1

Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 16:00:06 -0600
From: Claire Foster
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] Ideas to make registration easier?

Hi Joanna,

One program that I’ve used for events in the past that has worked
pretty well has been evite.com. You send out an invitation (or a link
to the website) and then people reply whether they are coming or not.
You can set it to send automatic reminders, directions, etc pretty
easily. Good luck in your search!

Claire

———————————-
Claire Foster
Field Instructor
McCall Outdoor Science School
PO Box 1025
McCall ID, 83638
http://www.mossidaho.org

 

Other sites you could use include:

Doodle (http://www.doodle.com/)
Google Calendar (https://accounts.google.com/ServiceLogin?service=cl&passive=1209600&continue=https://www.google.com/calendar/render?tab%3Dwc&followup=https://www.google.com/calendar/render?tab%3Dwc&scc=1)

Question 2

Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:14:09 -0800
From: Eleanor Ely
Greetings:
I’m wondering if there are any volunteer monitoring programs that have created a relatively simple interactive online map that displays monitoring sites and data, and which did not require a high degree of computer programming expertise to construct. By “displaying data” I mean either directly displaying the data on the map, for example in a pop-up balloon associated with the site, or linking to data that can be accessed by clicking on sites on the map.
The volunteer monitoring interactive maps that I’ve seen so far have been designed by people with extensive professional training as programmers, cartographers, or Web designers. However, it seems as if there is some technology available — e.g., Google My Maps (the easiest), or Google Maps API — that potentially could be used by people without so much expertise. If anyone has such an example, I would love to hear from them.
Thank you!
Ellie
Eleanor Ely
Editor, The Volunteer Monitor Newsletter
50 Benton Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94112

Responses to Question 2

Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:30:15 -0600
From: Laura MacFarland

Ellie,
Project RED (River Alliance of Wisconsin’s volunteer invasive species monitoring project)
and many other groups use www.citsci.org that allows volunteers to map their findings.
Their mapping application has had a few kinks but they are working them out.

Laura MacFarland, AIS Project Coordinator
River Alliance of Wisconsin
306 E. Wilson St., Ste. #2W
Madison, WI 53703
Ph: 608-257-2424 ext. 110
Fax: 608-260-9799
www.wisconsinrivers.org

 

Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:58:04 -0800
From: Erick Burres
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] displaying data with online maps

Ellie,
Here is a list of some Citizen Monitoring Websites with water quality maps.
They are all unique. Some groups in San Diego have found it easy to use
Ecolayers and I believe CCAMP has been able to use Google Maps. I hope
that this will be useful for you.

Santa Barbara Channel Keeper
http://www.stream-team.org/Ventura/main.html

Heal the Bay
http://www.healthebay.org/get-involved/volunteer/stream-team

Southern California Marine Institute (Might still be posted.)
http://scmi.us/category/programs/citizen-water-quality-monitoring

CCAMP (Central Coast Ambient Monitoring Program)
http://www.ccamp.org/ca300/3/3.htm

Ecolayers (They have worked with NGO’s and Agencies.)
http://www.ecolayers.com/

Sincerely,

Erick Burres
Citizen Monitoring Coordinator
SWRCB-SWAMP-Clean Water Team
Visit the Clean Water Team at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/swamp/cwt_volunteer.shtml

 

Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:47:55 -0800 (PST)
From: John Mickelson
Hi Eleanor,
It’s pretty straight forward to do within Google Maps andor Google Earth.
There are a wide range of tutorials out there to help you; most labor goes into formatting your data… I built a simple service for the stream walk group in our town.
See this link

John Mickelson
Geospatial and Ecological Services
501 Stage Rd.
Monroe, NY 10950-3217
(845) 893-4110
john.mickelson@yahoo.com

 

Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:11:32 -0500
From: John Murphy

Ellie,
Have you seen http://streamwatch.org/stream-conditions ?
John

John Murphy
Director, StreamWatch
434-242-1145
P.O. Box 181, Ivy, VA Â 22945
www.streamwatch.org

 

Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:24:31 -0500
From: “Boward, Dan”
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] displaying data with online maps

Hi Ellie,
We’ve done this http://dnr.maryland.gov/streams/streamWaders.asp with our MBSS sentinel sites. We’ve found out that our 5000 or so Stream Waders sites might be too much for Google maps.
Hope this is helpful.
Happy Thanksgiving.
Dan
Dan Boward
Maryland Department of Natural Resources
Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division
580 Taylor Ave.; C-2
Annapolis, Maryland 21401
410-260-8605 (voice)
410-260-8620 (fax)
dboward@dnr.state.md.us

 

Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:41:58 -0500
From: “Craddock, Timothy D”
Eleanor,
In my volunteer assessment database (VAD) I use latitudes and longitudes provided by the monitoring group to create a simple topographic map. The map is created by linking to Maptech. Nothing real fancy here… You can change the map scale and do a little zooming in and out, but that’s about it. Lat-Lon coordinates are displayed if you move your mouse over the map.
Links were created for VAD public pages, which were created for persons who want to view data only.
Tim Craddock, Program Coordinator
WVDEP’s Save Our Streams Program
601 57th Street, SE
Charleston, WV 25304
Office: (304) 926-0499 Ext. 1040
Mobile: (304) 389-7630
E-mail: timothy.d.craddock@wv.gov

 

Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:27:54 -0500
From: “Ward, David”
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] displaying data with online maps

Loudoun Watershed Watch provides links to several volunteer stream mapping efforts by their partners at http://www.loudounwatershedwatch.org/subitem5_6.html – This activity continues to be a work in progress. Some are simple imagemap hovers, some are standard framed Google maps, and there’s custom Google Maps mapping in preparation http://www.loudounwatershedwatch.org/maps/
– David Ward

 

Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:11:45 -0500
From: nolnacsj@aol.com

I am sure this has been asked and debated before but our town on Cape Cod is trying to determine what data management options are out there for all our water quality monitoring data and other environmental data that we have. Right now it is all on huge Excel spreadsheets which are hard to use when you want to try and present any information (many parameters, field observations, etc.). We also have land use and other data related to our wastewater planning activities so we need to house all the different data in a way that allows for sharing of information with citizens, town committees, other towns and other volunteer and environmental groups (and regulators). We know about EPA STORET (not very user friendly in my opinion), and the more recent WQX (better), and we think that is probably where we need to go (WQX), but I wondered if anyone out there cares to comment on their own experiences.

Thank You!

Judy Scanlon
Orleans Marine and Freshwater-Water Quality Task Force

 

Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:05:30 -0800 (PST)
From: John Mickelson
Hi Judy,
While I’ll guess there will be a fairly large gap between your immediate needs and this programs applications, I do think that the NSF-funded Consortium of Universities for Advancement of Hydrologic Science (CUAHSI) will have at least a great deal of interesting projects, if not immediately applicable tools.
http://www.cuahsi.org/
One sub-group of the program has been delving into the interoperability issues which have been bottlenecking large-scale efforts to connect and centralize access to the many disparate water quality programs and types that now exist (FedStateLocal). This Hydrological Information System (HIS) division http://his.cuahsi.org/
has a wide range of developing and capable tools, including HydroExcel: WaterOneFlow Excel Client, which might help you.
http://his.cuahsi.org/hydroexcel.html
Certainly worth our collective look and ideally our encouragement for a single, unified water quality data standard underpinning an integrated national water quality assessment and visualization service.

Cheers,
John

John Mickelson
Geospatial and Ecological Services
501 Stage Rd.
Monroe, NY 10950-3217
(845) 893-4110
john.mickelson@yahoo.com

Categories
Listserv

Nutrient Monitoring

Question 1: I’m looking for information on how groups are monitoring for nutrients.  Do spectrophotometers such as LaMotte or Hach get results comparable to a laboratory?

Question 2: Could anyone provide me with some information on ammonia monitoring?

Question 3: Do you know of nitrogen-focused fact sheets that are available online?

Question 4: I am requesting feedback from groups that have used nitrogen testing kits or probes.

Question 5: I’m wondering what methods you use in your programs to assess phosphorus?

Question 1

Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:53:52 -0500
From: Angel Dybas
Subject: Question regarding nutrient monitoring
To: Kris Stepenuck
Organization: Cornell Cooperative Extension

Hi Kris,

I tried to send out an email to the listserv last week, but I don’t know if it went through. I’m looking for information on how groups are monitoring for nutrients. I may be taking over a water quality monitoring program that we have at Cornell Cooperative. In the past, they monitored nutrients four times a year using the LaMotte spectrophotometer that we have. Since nutrients are a huge problem in the estuary we’re monitoring, I would like to monitor for nutrients more often, however, the spectrophotometer that we have is not giving accurate readings. I would like to know if spectrophotometers such as LaMotte or Hach are capable of getting results comparable to a laboratory. If you know of anyone that could provide some advice, it would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Angel

Responses to Question 1

Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:28:37 -0600
From: “Clay, David”
Subject: RE: [CSREESVolMon] Question regarding nutrient monitoring
To: Kris Stepenuck

My suggestion is to send you instrument in for recalibration and run appropriate standards.

David Clay, Director
Drought Center
SDSU
Brookings, SD 57007
605-688-5081
david.clay@sdstate.edu

 

Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:54:49 -0800
From: Bridget Hoover
Subject: RE: [CSREESVolMon] Question regarding nutrient monitoring

Hi Angel, most of our nutrient analysis is conducted by a certified lab, however, for a couple of programs we do use Hanna meters in the field for orthophosphate and ammonia. Both have shown good correlation with lab samples (with slight modifications to the manufacturer’s instruction and reagents). If you’d like more details I can provide them.

Bridget Hoover
Water Quality Protection Program Director
Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary
299 Foam Street
Monterey, CA 93940
B (831) 647-4217
F (831) 647-4250
www.montereybay.noaa.gov/

 

Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 10:01:24 -0600
From: Jay Gilbertson
Subject: Nutrient monitoring question
To: ald68@cornell.edu

Angel: Through the wonders of listserv, your question about nutrient monitoring made it to South Dakota. For several years now, we have been using a couple of HACH sprectophotometers (DR/4000 and DR/5000) to test for nitrate in well water and other samples. The particular test we use is one that does not require any additional sample manipulation, so it lends itself well to public outreach (www.eastdakota.org/NT.html). When we have checked our machine results against those from splits sent to our State Health laboratory, the results have been very good (for the both the project summarized at the website, and all subsequent tests). So far, we have really only had one sample exhibit a large deviation, and that is attributed to operator error (I had loaned the device out to a local soil conservation district, and they appear to have screwed up the math).

We have not tried measuring any other constituent, but I am reasonably confident that the results would be the same. We have been very satisfied with our HACH units (although at >$6,500 each, I would hope they work well!).

Jay P. Gilbertson, Manager
East Dakota Water Development District
132B Airport Avenue Brookings, South Dakota 57006
(605) 688-6741
edwdd@brookings.net

 

Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:02:54 -0500
From: Todd Walter
Subject: Re: [Fwd: [CSREESVolMon] Question regarding nutrient monitoring]
To: Angel Dybas , “Brian K. Richards” ,
Larry Geohring

Hello Angel,

Your question about monitoring nutrients was forwarded to me (among others). We do quite a bit of nutrient monitoring and might be able to help answer your questions. First, what is the objective of your monitoring (what do you want to see) and what nutrients are you interested in? Also, what are typical nutrient concentrations?

In general, you can get very good results with a wide range of approaches if the person doing the analysis is careful. The community science institute here in Tompkins County has one spectrophotometer and some burettes that make up the core of its analysis equipment and they generally get reliable numbers.

Peace,
Todd

 

Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 13:05:29 -0800 (PST)
From: Paul Mack
Subject: Re: [CSREESVolMon] Question regarding nutrient monitoring
To: ald68@cornell.edu

Angel,

Here are my 2 cents…

Hach spectrophotometers are respected and widely used in industry. We have had good reliability with our old Hach instrument in nutrient analysis, and it still can calibrate to standard solutions with an accuracy of 1%. Accuracy isn’t so much a factor of the device itself rather than the skill of the operator using it. In good hands it will give results that are within the ballpark of a professional lab; in sloppy hands, it is useless. So, we try to use volunteers with job experience or education in science/engineering.

Professional laboratories are not always a gold standard by which you should compare your results: we once tried a side-by-side test with a local professional lab, but their results were so bad that we could draw no conclusion and it was a waste of money. That said, even two professional labs testing the exact same water sample will arrive at two slightly different results.

In your email, you question the validity of your test results and mention “nutrients are a huge problem in the estuary we’re monitoring”. If you mean that the nutrient concentration is known to be severe (such as in excess of 5 mg/L) in the estuary, then you must dilute the water sample prior to testing, and then multiply the spectrophotometer reading by the same factor to arrive at the final value. The amount of dilution is dependent on the estuary’s nutrient concentration as well as your spectrophotometer’s test range. Your spectrophotometer’s manual specifies a different working range for each analyte; for example, it might specify “Range: 0 – 4.5 mg/L” for nitrate. If your estuary’s actual nitrate concentration is 21 mg/L, then you would dilute the sample by 5x to bring it down to the spectrophotometer’s range. Then, you would multiply the spectrophotometer reading by 5 to arrive at the final value.

Dilution should be done with laboratory-grade deionized/distilled water.

Paul Mack
Sierra Club – DuPage County, Illinois
http://www.illinois.sierraclub.org/rpg/watermonitorproj.htm

Question 2

From: Brian Soenen [mailto:Brian.Soenen@dnr.state.ia.us]
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 3:14 PM
To: Volunteer water monitoring
Subject: [volmonitor] Volunteer Programs and Ammonia Monitoring

Greetings from Iowa!

I am wondering if anyone could provide me with some information on ammonia monitoring. We’d really like to improve the IOWATER program by adding ammonia as a parameter, but would first like to find a monitoring kit that satisfies a couple requirements:

1) Field kits – Any kit we choose to adopt must be a field kit – i.e., results are obtained in the field at the monitoring site. Most of our current kits for our other parameters use test strips and/or color
comparators.
2) Ease of use – The easier to use the better
3) Reliable data – When dealing with easy-to-use field kits, data quality is sometimes compromised. We conduct side-by-side monitoring with all of our kits and professional methods to ensure data quality, but it would be nice to know which kits not to spend our money/time on.
4) Non-hazardous wastes – We are not interested in kits that yield heavy metals and/or pose any other disposal or health issues.
5) Inexpensive – The cheaper the better

Any ideas/suggestions you can send will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!

Brian Soenen
IOWATER Coordinator
3625 Nebraska Street
Sioux City, IA 51104
515.205.8587 (cell)
Brian.Soenen@dnr.state.ia.us
http://www.iowadnr.gov/Environment/WaterQuality/WaterMonitoring/IOWATER.aspx
www.iowaprojectaware.com

Responses to Question 2

>>> “Chris Sullivan”
7/11/2005 2:30 PM

Hi Brian,

How are you doing? For Project SEARCH we utilize Lamotte Colorimetric analysis using the Nesslerization method, but this does generate mercury waste, so dont try that one.
I also coordinate a volunteer program in my spare time that uses Hach Pocket Colorimeter for ammonia anlaysis. The colorimeter is electronic so costs are higher but more reliable and precise than the color wheel option offered by Hach.

Here is a link to the product we use.

like I said it is a little pricey, but my volunteers (mostly retired folk or high school students) have no problems using the equipment or reagents. I am pretty sure there is no mercury generated in this process either, so that is beneficial for you as well.

Good luck with your quest!!

peace
chris

Chris Sullivan
Project SEARCH Coordinator
(203) 734-2513
FAX 203-922-7833
Center for Environmental Research Education
Kellogg Environmental Center
500 Hawthorne Ave
Derby, CT 06418

>>> Kris Stepenuck 7/11/2005 3:01 PM >>>
Hi Brian-

For rough scale stuff, we have the volunteers use the Hach test strips. We
expect them to find no ammonia based on specificity of the test strips, and
if they do find some positive result, then we follow up with a grab sample
that gets shipped to a lab. Here is the catalog number for the strips we use: Test Kit, Ammonia
Test Strips, 0-6 ppm, 25 tests Cat# 2755325

Kris

>>> Phil Emmling
7/11/2005 3:32 PM >>>
Brian,

I will look at my kits for ammonia. I made analytical standards and tried 3 or 4 kits. The best kit I found was a cheap cube from either Hach or LaMotte. The test uses salicylate. The kit was the least toxic, needed the least time for color development (1 minute), and seemed to be able to tell normal (~0.050ppm) from problem (>1.000) concentrations. I did not like the color wheels or comparators. I had a problem using the same glassware for nitrate-nitrite for ammonia in a color comparator because the nitrate test converted N03 to ammonia and was higher 1-10ppm than the usual ammonia range of 0.025-0.100. I actually used 50% sulfuric acid to rinse the plastic tubes and later used glass tubes. The basic reagents in the Cd reduction N03 test stuck to the plastic tubes more than the glass.

You should buy a kit and try to make it work with analytical standards or ammonia added to real samples having ammonia to see if you can make it work before turning it over to volunteers. Chemetrics has a low and a high range test. The low does increments of 0-1.0 and the high does
0-10. I would bet that the 0-1.0 tests are hard to distinguish and reproduce but most samples will be less than 1.0. It would be good to do pH on the samples since NH3 is toxic to fish and NH4 is not toxic
but both will be analyzed with any test. At pH 9.3 1/2 will be in each form. At higher pH NH3 will dominate and at lower pH (most of the time)NH4 will dominate. The range around the 50% each mark of 9.3 (isoelectic point)is about 1 pH unit. At pH 10.3 about 100% will be NH3 and lower than 8.3 100% will be NH4. There are tables for estimating each form if you know the pH.

I will get back to you tomorrow with the kits I played with.

Phil Emmling
Environmental Chemistry & Technology Program
660 N. Park St.
Madison, WI 53706
Phone: 608 262-2899
FAX: 608 262-0454

>>> “Petersen, Gordon”
7/12/2005 5:44 PM >>>

Mr.. Soenen,
Your message was forwarded to me. My name is Gordon Petersen and I am with the Hach Company and I am located in central Iowa.

I would recommend salicylate chemistry with a color disc wheel or Pocket Colorimeter II. The color disc wheel is catalog #24287-00 and measures up to 2.5 mg/L. The PC II is 58700-40. You will probably prefer the color disc wheel because of the price and non-hazardous chemicals.

Let us know if you have further questions. You can contact sales or tech support at 800-227-4224 or leave me a message at ext. 2112.

>>> Phil Emmling
7/27/2005 8:35 AM >>>

OK. I ordered several kits and settled on 2 but I honestly can’t remember why. The standard is made for 1 mg/L N. It might be useful to remember that pH determines the % that is likely to be NH3 versus NH4.
There are tables with the values. The 50% point is pH 9.3 and generally 1 pH unit either side determines whether 100% is one form or the other. At pH 10.3 100% should be in the toxic to fish NH3 species while at pH 8.3 100% should be in the NH4 form. Since most streams are between 7.5-8.9 a lot is NH4. I don’t know what the situation is for an anhydrous ammonia spill or liquid manure slug. I assume these are undiluted plumes that can be toxic and the pH is probably alkaline.

Phil Emmling
Environmental Chemistry & Technology Program
660 N. Park St.
Madison, WI 53706
Phone: 608 262-2899
FAX: 608 262-0454

>>> Phil Emmling
7/27/2005 8:58 AM >>>

Brian,

Here is a Website that I found for testing aquarium water http://www.novalek.com/kpd52.htm. The hobby people can be a good source of information about water chemistry that can be useful to citizens.
This looks like the cube that I have at home. I don’t see any mention of carryover from test to test. There is a link to a table for pH and temperature considerations and mention of 0.6ppm total ammonia being
toxic to aquarium fish. The ammonia standard of 1 mg/L N is equivalent to 1.22mg/L as NH3 if all the N in the test is NH3. There is a nice example at the bottom of the table for calculating NH3 at pH 7 and 18C at a total ammonia concentration of 0.8 mg/L.

Phil Emmling
Environmental Chemistry & Technology Program
660 N. Park St.
Madison, WI 53706
Phone: 608 262-2899
FAX: 608 262-0454

>>> Phil Emmling
7/27/2005 9:15 AM >>>

Brian,

I used the table to make a calculation of toxic NH3. If we measure 0.8mg/L with a kit at pH 8.3 and 20C (conditions in a lot of stream for pH and T) the factor is 0.0736 from the table. 0.8mg/L x 0.0736 is
0.058mg/L N as NH3. If we subtract 0.058 from the total measured N of 0.08 we have 0.742 mg/L N as NH4. I calculate 92.6% N as NH4 and 7.4% N as NH3. I think we need to take the 0.058mg/L N as NH3 and convert it to NH3 by multiplying by 1.22 or 0.058 x 1.22= 0.07 mg/L NH3. I made my standard according to the directions given in Standard Methods and the conversion of 1mg/L N to 1.22 mg/L for NH3 comes from Standard Methods. The aquarium article does not give a toxicity value for NH3.

Phil Emmling
Environmental Chemistry & Technology Program
660 N. Park St.
Madison, WI 53706
Phone: 608 262-2899
FAX: 608 262-0454

>>> Phil Emmling
7/28/2005 8:48 AM >>>
Brian,

Last night and this morning I tried my 2 kits with newly made standards. I made a 1000ppm N-Nh4 and diluted to 100ppm. I used the 100ppm to make 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 for LaMotte kit code 3304. I used the same 100ppm standard to make 0.8 and 0.4 ppm for the low range Hach kit cube #22669.
I made the dilute standards fresh from the 100ppm for each evening and morning tests.

Both sets of standards gave the same but confusing results. The LaMotte kit has a color matching Octa slide #1100 and the standards all looked about 1/4 of the anticipated values. Thus the 2.0, 1.0, and 0.5ppm standards looked like 0.5, 0.25, and >0.1 or about 0.125. I repeated the tests this morning because I thought the standards were made incorrectly. I don’t think the 1000ppm was wrong and 100ppm is a no brainer from 1000ppm. The Hach cube read high instead of low. The 0.8ppm and 0.4ppm standards read about 1.0 and 0.6ppm respectively. All standards were made from the same 100ppm stock.

I called LaMotte to ask whether my LaMotte reagents are too old. I need to order new reagents because 2 of 3 are past recommended shelf time (1 and 1 1/2 years). The lots were made early in 2003. The low range Hach cube(0,.2,.4,.6,.8) seems OK. The LaMotte kit reagent 1 is sodium hydroxide and this is hard to rinse so I am still rinsing with 50% sulfuric acid. I might try vinegar as a less dangerous rinse. It
seems particularly important not to use nitrate test glassware for the ammonia test. The 5-10ppm nitrate levels are converted to ammonia and the base reagent increases carryover to the lower level ammonia test.

The Lamotte 3304 has ranges 0,.05, .1, .25, .5, 1, and 2ppm. I don’t think the 0, .05, or .1 are easy to distinguish from each other. Most of the samples I had run at UW Stevens Point lab for ammonia/ammonium from Castle Rock Creek in SW WI ranged around .03-.05ppm at base flow.
This creek is similar to NW Iowa springcreeks in dairy cow areas. I think you can tell .1, .25, .5, 1, and 2ppms apart using the Octa slide. I need to order new reagents and try again. After I get the standards
to work, I would like to do a standard addition experiment using creek water. Both kits use Salicylate reagents.

I think you could try these 2 kits.

Phil Emmling
Environmental Chemistry & Technology Program
660 N. Park St.
Madison, WI 53706
Phone: 608 262-2899
FAX: 608 262-0454

>>> Phil Emmling
8/9/2005 2:34 PM >>>

Brian,
I received fresh reagents from LaMotte and it made a big difference. The replacement 3 reagents cost $25.50. I think you have the kit number. It is difficult to match the color with the Octet reader but if
it is darker than 0.025 and lighter than 1.00, it could be reported as 0.050 or the color in the middle. I won’t have time this week to play with it using standard additions. The test takes about 25 minutes.
It will distinguish <0.50 from 1 and 2ppm. Perhaps it works best as a red flag than a test for spatial or temporal trend analysis. I used vinegar instead of 50% sulfuric acid to clean the glassware and it seemed to work OK. I would suggest having the Iowa DNR lab play with the ammonia test. If you decide on a test I would like to know which one worked. I would rate this test about as good as the standard N-nitrite/nitrate test.

Phil Emmling
Environmental Chemistry & Technology Program
660 N. Park St.
Madison, WI 53706
Phone: 608 262-2899
FAX: 608 262-0454

>>> “Linda Green”
8/17/2005 2:00 PM >>>
Hi Brian,
Here at URI Watershed Watch we have our own analytical lab and use an Astoria-Pacific segmented continuous flow nutrient autoanalyzer for our nutrient analyses, since our waters are typically
<2ppm in any form of nitrogen, which I think is pushing the limit on kits. I was fortunate that our Dean contributed ~ 75% of the $42K it cost to purchase the autoanalyzer last year, it was replacing a 15 year old model that had been purchased by a professor I worked with. The prof departed a number of
years ago without the analyzer, I took it over. My background is in soils and chemistry and I already was a lab tech when I started Watershed Watch so I was fortunate to have good lab access, and also great support from URI and my college. Analyzing ammonium-N was pain with the old autoanlayzer, much
better with the new one, my detection limit is ~ 20 ppb, 0.020 ppm as N. Elizabeth Herron shared with me your reply about top 3 choices for NWQ 06 vol mon workshops. We really appreciate your enthusiastic response!
Cheers!
Linda

URI Cooperative Extension Water Quality
Department of Natural Resources Science
1 Greenhouse Road
Kingston, RI 02881-0804
401-874-2905
www.uri.edu/ce/wq/
www.usawaterquality.org/volunteer

Question 3

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:44:13 -0500
From: Kris Stepenuck
Subject: [CSREESVolMon] Nitrogen (and other) publications sought

Hi everyone-

Do you know of nitrogen-focused fact sheets that are available online? We’ve been approached by a volunteer monitoring coordinator looking for information about nitrogen (as related to water quality, but
also in general) and would like to add listing of these publications to a section of our website that lists volunteer-monitoring related publications (http://www.usawaterquality.org/volunteer/GuideForGrowing/Publications.html). Any suggestions of nitrogen-related informational fact sheets would be appreciated!

Also, if anyone else has ideas for publications they’d like to have listed in clearinghouse format (like we plan to do with the nitrogen ones), please let me know what topics you’re interested in having available at the website.

Cheers,
Kris Stepenuck, on behalf of the Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring
National Facilitation Project
http://www.usawaterquality.org/volunteer

Wisconsin Volunteer Stream Monitoring Program Coordinator
445 Henry Mall, Rm 202
Madison, WI 53706-1577
Phone: 608-265-3887
Fax: 608-262-2031

Responses to Question 3

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 14:55:42 -0700
From: “Snouwaert, Elaine (ECY)”

The Washington Department of Ecology has this general focus sheet on
nutrients available:
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/0210004.html

 

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:47:20 -0700
From: Erick Burres

Kris,

Fact sheets can be found at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/nps/cwtguidance.html#30

3.3. Nutrients
3.3.1. Ammonia
3.3.1.0. Ammonia Fact Sheet [English] [Spanish]
3.3.1.2. Ammonia Salicylate Kits (SOP)
3.3.2. Oxidized Nitrogen – Nitrate (NO3) and Nitrite (NO2)
3.3.2.1. Measuring Nitrate and Nitrite (SOP)

Sincerely,

Erick Burres
Citizen Monitoring Coordinator
SWRCB- Clean Water Team

You can self-subscribe to the Clean Water Team’s E-Mailing List. To subscribe go online to our website and check the box marked Citizen Monitoring Program/Clean Water Team.

 

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:38:09 -0400
From: Tony Williams
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Nitrogen (and other) publications sought
We monitor nitrogen…
http://www.savebuzzardsbay.org

and scroll down to our watershed protection publications…
http://www.savebuzzardsbay.org/GetConnected/Publications?

 

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 15:05:44 -0700
From: Sandy Lyon
Subject: RE: [CSREESVolMon] Nitrogen (and other) publications sought

Hello Kris,
I have been doing some nitrate assays in our water quality monitoring program in the Umpqua Basin in Oregon. I have been very happy with an enzymatic assay produced by the Nitrate Elimination Co., Inc. (NECi) which produces an assay with no toxic components; it can just be flushed when you are done. Their website (http://www.nitrate.com/)has information about the assay as well as a section at the bottom of their homepage called “Useful Information”. This provides links that may be of interest.
Sandy Lyon
Monitoring Coordinator
Partnership for the Umpqua Rivers
1758 N.E. Airport Road
Roseburg, OR 97470
(541) 673-5756

 

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 09:08:53 -0500
From: “Broz, Robert R.”
Subject: RE: [CSREESVolMon] Nitrogen (and other) publications sought

Kris,

Several years back we produced a series of Water Quality guides and some of the first were on nitrogen. They can be found at the University of Missouri website: http://extension.missouri.edu and go to the google search of the site. The guides are

WQ252 Nitrogen Cycle
WQ253 Nitrogen’s Most Common Forms
WQ254 Nitrifcation
WQ255 Denitrification
WQ256 How Nitrogen Enters Groundwater
WQ257 Ammonia Volatilization
WQ258 Nitrate Poisoning
WQ259 Nitrogen in the Plant
WQ260 Mineralization – Immobilization
WQ261 Nitrogen Fixation

There are a couple more but these will give a pretty good overview of
nitrogen basics, and then how it enters the environment. I don’t have
anything in this series that focuses on surface water.

Good luck and I hope this helps.

Bob

Bob Broz
University of Missouri
205 Agricultural Engineering
Columbia, MO 65211
(573) 882-0085
brozr@missouri.edu

 

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 10:34:28 -0400
From: Ailene
Subject: Re: [CSREESVolMon] Nitrogen (and other) publications sought
Kris,
This is such helpful information.  The only resources that I use regularly for comparison and clarification are:

Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste Water ( which has nitrogen information) and LaMotte information on Colorimeter and Spectrophotometer testing for various forms of nitrogen.
I can give you better reference information on these if that would be helpful.

(Go to http://www. lamotte.com; click onto Kit Instructions; Move down to the manuals for 1200 Colorimeter and Smart Spectrospectrophotometer. Click on one of these and then click on to Individual Test Instructions.  Go to the nitrogens including ammonia , nitrite, etc).
Thanks you for sending your bibliography.  I know I will use it.

Ailene
Ailene K. Rogers

Marine Program Educator for Water Logging
Cornell University Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County
180 Little Neck Road
Centerport, NY 11721

Tel: 631-854-5544 x22
Fax: 631-854-5543
email: ar295@cornell.edu

 

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 11:37:54 -0500
From: Kate Reilly
Subject: Re: [CSREESVolMon] Nitrogen (and other) publications sought

Kris,
The Environmental Literacy Cycle has some good information on biochemical cycles http://www.enviroliteracy.org/subcategory.php/198.html, including nitrogen http://www.enviroliteracy.org/article.php/479.html . At the end of the general info on the nitrogen cycle you’ll see resources cited for a number of nitrogen-related resources/materials.

Kate

 

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 11:45:15 -0500
From: Susan S Brown
Subject: Re: [CSREESVolMon] Nitrogen (and other) publications sought
Kris,

Our Heartland Regional Water Coordination Initiative has just released a publication on agricultural nitrogen management that belongs in your links:

Agricultural Nitrogen Management for Water Quality Protection in the Midwest.
Wortmann, C., alKaisi, M., Helmers, M., Sawyer, J., Devlin, D., Barden, C., Scharf, P., Fergusen, R., Kranz, W., Shapiro, C., Spalding, R., Tarkalson, D., Holtz, J., Francis, D. 2006.
Heartland Water Quality Bulletin, University of Nebraska Press, RP189.

The pdf document with bookmarks can be obtained online at:
http://www.ianrpubs.unl.edu/sendIt/rp189.pdf

A pdf image of the publication only is also available at:
http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/waterquality/nitrogen%20pub.pdf

I am copying this message to members of the Heartland Nutrient and Pesticide Management issue team, as they may have other recommendation for pubs from their own universities.

susanb

 

Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 17:10:43 -0400
From: Art Gold
Subject: RE: [CSREESVolMon] Nitrogen (and other) publications sought
Hi,

Here are two excellent links on nitrogen and water quality from the
Ecological Society of America.  The first page of each document appears
blank, so scroll down before you give up:

http://www.esa.org/science_resources/issues/FileEnglish/issue1.pdf

http://www.esa.org/science_resources/issues/FileEnglish/issue3.pdf

Art

Arthur J. Gold Ph.D.
Professor
Dept. Natural Resource Sciences
110 Coastal Institute
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
phone: 401-874-2903
Fax: 401-874-4561
agold@uri.edu

 

Question 4

From: HANSON Steve [mailto:HANSON.Steve@deq.state.or.us]
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 6:56 PM
To: Volunteer water monitoring
Cc: Sandy Lyon
Subject: [volmonitor] Nitrogen testing kits and probes

I am requesting feedback from groups that have used nitrogen testing kits or probes. I’m interested in what kits/probes you have used, what the detection limits are (please specify mg/L as N or NO3), and how the kits performed for you. If you were able to compare the results from your kit/probe to samples analyzed at a laboratory, or any other quality control testing you did, I’d be very interested in how the samples compared .

I work with volunteer groups all over the state of Oregon who do water quality monitoring. I am trying to determine what methods could be used by Oregon groups to identify nutrient sources.

Thanks for your response.

Steve Hanson
Volunteer Monitoring Specialist
Oregon DEQ Laboratory
Phone: 503.229.5449
Toll Free: 1.800.452.4011
Fax: 503.229.6957
email: hanson.steve@deq.state.or.us
2020 SW Fourth Ave. Suite 400
Portland, OR 97201

Responses to Question 4

—–Original Message—–
From: Linda Green [mailto:LGreen@uri.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 11:26 AM
To: HANSON Steve
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Nitrogen testing kits and probes

I am program director of a volunteer monitoring program in RI, URI Watershed Watch, housed at Cooperative Extension. We have an analytical lab and use an Astoria-Pacific segmented continuous
flow nutrient autoanalyzer for our nutrient anlyses, since our waters are typically <2ppm in any form of nitrogen, which I think is pushing the limit on kits. I was fortunate that our Dean contributed ~ 75% of
the $42K it cost to purchase the autoanalyzer last year, it was replacing a 15 year old model that had been purchased by a professor I worked with. The prof departed without the analyzer, I took it over.

Best Wishes,

Linda Green
URI Cooperative Extension Water Quality
Department of Natural Resources Science
1 Greenhouse Road
Kingston, RI 02881-0804
401-874-2905
www.uri.edu/ce/wq/
www.usawaterquality.org/volunteer

 

Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 16:23:26 -0700
From: Lesley Jones
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] Nitrogen testing kits and probes

Steve,
We only take grab samples and process in the lab. The methodology is:

TKN – EPA 351.2, sulfuric acid to pH<2 preservation, 4C, analyze within 48 hrs
Nitrate/Nitrite – EPA 300.0, 4C, analyze within 48 hrs
TP – EPA 365.3, sulfuric acid to pH<2 preservation, 4C, analyze within 28 days

The weird thing is that the Practical Quantitation Limit for TP is above the guideline of 0.05 mg/L. If there is a non-detect, the result is reported as one half of the PQL and is above the guideline. Therefore, no matter what result you get, the guideline is exceeded. The City of Bend lab is working on this issue to see if they can lower the PQL for TP.

Regarding nutrient probes, we have never used them, but I hear rumor that 'they are not as good as lab analyses methods'. I personally like to use meters and probes when possible, so I am interested to hear what you find out from this inquiry.

Have fun!

Lesley Jones, Water Quality Specialist
Upper Deschutes Watershed Council
Water Quality Monitoring Program
541-382-6850

 

Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 10:18:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: NOLNACSJ@aol.com

Steve, our nutrient samples are analyzed by the National Parks Service-Cape Cod National Seashore (CCNS) lab. In the past we used the County health department lab and the detection limits were not sensitive enough (especially for P) because they were primarily set up to do drinking water samples, not lake/pond ones. I have passed on your question to the lab chemist at the CCNS in hopes she will reply.

I am not aware of any field instruments that are inexpensive enough for volunteer groups to use, which also meet the detection limit requirements, or would be approved by some of the state agencies who require analyses be done under an approved QAPP and a certified lab. We do use YSI DO meters in the field for DO, but follow up with a water sample for Winkler analysis at a lab (for marine samples), if DO readings are below 5.0 mg/L.

I am interested in what you find out!

Judy Scanlon
Orleans Water Quality Task Force

 

Editor’s note: Steve Hanson summarized the rest of the responses he received:

Responses are summarized in the following manner:

Nitrogen Testing Kits Comparison Information.
XContact/Organization
a. Kit Description
b. Method
c. Detectioin Limits/ Resolution
d. Performance
e. Comments

1. Jacqueline Fern OSU Extension Service Water Quality Educator
a. LaMotte Zn Based test Kit (Order Code 3354?)
b. Zinc Reduction Octa-Slide color comparator
c. “0” to 15 in increments of 1 ppm NO3-N
d. “goal is not to provide precise readings…but reasonably accurate
readings.”
e. Recently switched from Hach colorwheel method b/c of concerns about
Cadmium.

2. Natalie Galatzer, Prairie Rivers Network, Illinois Stream Team,
Water Quality Intern
a. LaMotte Kit Code 3354
b. Zinc Reduction Octa-Slide color comparator 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and
15 ppm NO3-N
c. NA
d. It’s colorimetric, so you can see that perhaps the actual value
lies between 0 and 1, but you can’t determine what that value is with
this kit.

3. Ginger North, Stream Watch Coordinator, Delaware Nature Society,
302-239-2334×100, Fax 302-239-2473, ginger@delawarenaturesociety.org,
www.delawarenaturesociety.org
a. LaMotte Field Kits Code 3110
b. Cadmium Reduction Octet color comparator
c. 0.025 (error? I can’t find any LaMotte kits with this low a DL) –
10 ppm NO3-N. LaMotte reports Range/Sensitivity as: 0.25,0.5,1.0, 2.0,
4.0, 8.0, 10.0 ppm NO3-N
d. “Under quality control testing the nitrate kits compare better than
the phosphate kits”
e. “The data is published by DE DNREC for their Watershed Assessment
Report – 305(b)”

4. Chris Sullivan, Project SEARCH Coordinator, (203) 734-2513, FAX
203-922-7833, www.sciencecenterct.org/projectsearch, Center for
Environmental Research Education, Kellogg Environmental Center, 500
Hawthorne Ave., Derby, CT 06418
a. LaMotte Colorimetric analysis order code 3649-SC
b. Cadmium reduction with Colorimetric % Transmission determination.
c. 0.02 – 3.01 ppm NO3-N in increments increasing from 0.01 to 0.14
relative to magnitude of concentration. LaMotte reports sensitivity of
0.05 ppm NO3-N
d. “The results are slightly less reliable down at the lower end of
the scale, but have corresponded fairly well with the health lab values
in past years of Project SEARCH”
e. “We used to run replicate samples with the state health lab and the
school groups were usually statistically similar to the health lab
samples.”

Question 5

From: Stepenuck, Kris
Date: November 29, 2012, 11:01 AM

I’m wondering what methods you use in your programs to assess phosphorus? We most often have our volunteers send water samples to a lab to be analyzed for total phosphorus, but we do have one local group using Chemetrics to assess phosphate. My experience with that kit is that it’s tough to read results at low levels. Have you had similar experiences? Do you have any recommendations for other kits/methods that students might use to assess phosphorus levels in the field or back at their schools?
Thanks,
Kris

Kristine Stepenuck
Water Action Volunteers Stream Monitoring Program Coordinator
445 Henry Mall, Rm 202
Madison WI 53706
608-265-3887 (MTF)
608-264-8948 (WR)
608-575-2413 (mobile)

Responses to Question 5

Higgins, Susan
Date: November 29, 2012, 11:06 AM

At MO Stream Team VWQM, we use the Hach phosphate colorimeter for phosphate measurement. These are usually reserved for higher trained volunteers because they are a bit expensive (around $400).

Suzy
Susan J Higgins
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Coordinator
Volunteer Lake Monitoring Coordinator
P O Box 176
Jefferson City, MO 65102-0176
573-526-1002  FAX: 573-526-6802
susan.higgins@dnr.mo.gov

 

From: Chris Riggert
Date: November 29, 2012, 11:29 AM

For our more advanced volunteers, we in Missouri provide the Hach Phosphate II Colorimeter (http://www.hach.com/pocket-colorimeter-ii-orthophosphate-reactive-/product?id=7640442984&callback=qs) measuring reactive orthophosphate.
It is a very accurate method and is very easy to use.  However, it isn’t cheap (lists for $420)…which is why we don’t provide this to everyone, but rather to those that have chosen to participate and attend the higher levels of trainings.
Really, the only issues we’ve had with these is that the vials MUST be kept clean and not wiped with a paper towel.  Spots or small scratches in the glass will skew the results because the light won’t refract properly.

Hope this helps!
Chris
Christopher M. Riggert
Stream Team Program
Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program Coordinator
Missouri Department of Conservation
P.O. Box 180

2901 W. Truman Blvd.
Jefferson City, MO  65102-0180
Phone: (573) 522-4115 ext. 3167
Fax: (573) 526-0990
Chris.Riggert@mdc.mo.gov
www.mostreamteam.org

 

From: Cheryl Cheadle
Date: November 29, 2012, 11:37 AM

I like the Hach kit (Ortho-phosphate model PO-19).  Yes, it is difficult to read at low levels.  I still like it.  Our QA sessions are often devoted to this.  We do find that volunteers get some of the steps wrong from time to time.  Again, why we have a stringent QA program.

 

From: Cheryl Nenn
Date: November 29, 2012, 11:38 AM

My experience with those (Chemetrics) kits is that they are always a weird tinge of green (instead of light blue). I have been interpreting that to be .15 based on the intensity (between .1 and .2 orthoP) but I’m honestly not sure. I did get a perfect .2 once in late summer! I took ortho-P last year and this year as well as sent samples to the SLOH for total P. Would be good to take a quick look at those and see if there are any correlations this year.

Cheryl Nenn
Riverkeeper
Milwaukee Riverkeeper
1845 N. Farwell Ave Suite 100
Milwaukee, WI 53202
(414) 287-0207 x2
(414) 378-3043 (cell)

 

From: James, Krista
Date: November 29, 2012, 1:19 PM

We use the Phosphate Phosphorus Hach Kit.

Krista C. James
Environmental Science Coordinator
Applied Science Program
Biology Department
327 Jarvis Hall Science Wing
410 10th Avenue E
University of Wisconsin-Stout
715-232-1557

 

From: Rebecca Kauten
Date: November 29, 2012, 11:05 AM

IOWATER uses the Chemetrics kits.

 

Nancy Mueller nysfolanancy@verizon.net
Date: November 29, 2012, 11:55 AM

NY’s CSLAP program: “send the samples to the lab” for TP (and etc.) analysis.  We don’t use any test kits at all.

Nancy J. Mueller, Manager,  NYS Federation of Lake Associations, Inc.
P.O. Box 84
LaFayette, NY  13084
(800)796-3652
fola@nysfola.org

 

From: Mike Daniels mdaniels@uaex.edu
Date: November 29, 2012, 12:28 PM
Here is some feedback from some of my colleagues at the University of Arkansas
From: “Andrew N. Sharpley”

My experience with kits for P, especially dissolved P, are that while they might be “convenient” they are not accurate enough to reliably measure the concentrations we routinely find in runoff.  You could use the kit on an unfiltered sample and get an estimate of reactive P or field-filter a sample.
The bottom line is that even though it might be a volunteer program you would like them to be getting information on forms of P that would have some meaning to the ongoing water quality and land use impact debate.
Andrew

 

From: Mike Daniels mdaniels@uaex.edu
Date: November 29, 2012, 12:28 PM
Some more feedback
From: “Thad Scott”

My two cents on this…. From an in-stream water quality perspective, which is how nutrient criteria are likely to be applied, total P is generally the most reliable metric that integrates forms across temporal and spatial scales.

I also understand that the ease of measurement is a big consideration for these volunteer groups… but I would suggest that less data, collected in a more appropriate fashion, is actually better. The Dodds paper discusses the issues of ease of measurement and information gained… I hope this helps.—T

 

From: Jane Herbert
Date: November 29, 2012, 2:14 PM

You may have seen this before but it’s a summary of a study we did a few years ago on correlating transparency and P in surface water.  Essentially, it was a no go unless you were dealing with high fractions of particulate phosphorus.  Neither Dean or I are working with phosphorus these days though. [Editor’s note: Thus, please don’t contact them in follow up regarding this.]

 

From: Daniel Starr
Date: November 29, 2012, 2:20 PM

I think Vernier has some equipment for this, but you may have already been familiar with this.  When I talked to Vernier about getting the phosphate probe they said that it will generally not get any readings because the numbers are so low in “clean” environments.
Take care, Dan

 

From: Mary Holleback
November 29, 2012, 4:02 PM

Testing the Waters collects total phosphate data using Hach test kits (model # PO-24; catalog # 22501).  It’s $146 last time we purchased. Investment in the kit may be worth it if they’re going to stick with the testing over a number of years – otherwise maybe not.
Otherwise we’ve been sending our level 2 WAV water samples to the state lab.

Mary Holleback
Adult Programs Coordinator
Riveredge Nature Center
P.O. Box 26
Newburg, WI 53060
800-287-8098
262-416-1224
www.riveredge.us

 

From: Janet Andersen
Date: November 29, 2012, 7:30 PM

I haven’t tried it yet, but my professor at school just told me about the Hanna Instruments HI 713 and HI 736  –  http://www.hannainst.com/usa/prods2.cfm?id=045001&ProdCode=HI%20713   – he recommends it – approx $55 with a pack of reagents via Amazon.
Jan

Janet Andersen
Fablesx2@optonline.net

 

From: Rathbun, Joseph (DEQ) RATHBUNJ@michigan.gov
Date: November 29, 2012, 7:45 PM

Be careful with anything resembling a test kit – you need a detection limit of 0.01 ot 0.03 mg/L, and the simplest kits come in at around 1 mg/L.  Get the manufacturer to confirm the DL; the catalogs often say they go from “zero to 10 mg/L” or some such, but that’s nonsense – nothing measures down to nothing.  The original test kits of a few decades ago were designed for sewage treatment plants where influent P = 10 mg/L or so, so a DL of 1 was fine.  Some the same treatment plant folks, certainly not meaning any harm, guided development of some of the early volunteer monitoring handbooks.  And ever since some of our colleagues have used simple test kits that, for surface waters, are just random number generators.

 

From: Dave Ropa
Date: November 29, 2012 8:00 PM

Although we use the Lamotte kits, they aren’t typically accurate enough for the waters we test.  However, we often take sediment samples and compare the results of the levels in the sediment to those in the water and usually get more dramatic results.  – Dave

 

From: Kelly Eskew
Date: November 30, 2012, 8:52 AM

I have been using the Green (Global Rivers EE Network) test kits which are a LaMotte product as well. We only use these with teaching though not for river monitoring purposes.  You may have the same issue with it not being able to read low levels given it is a fairly basic test, it is also very subjective.  I have never compared them with other tests or a lab to see their accuracy.

However, they work great with getting water quality concepts across to students because the tests are simple to conduct, most tests only take 5 minutes and the color difference is easy for the kids to see. The sheet with the kit explains that the test tabs contain ammonium molybdate which reacts with phosphorous to form a phosphomolybdate complex. This is reduced to a blue complex by ascorbic acid. The test turns blue and comes with a color chart to interpret your results from 0-4 ppm depending on how blue the test turns.

Might be too basic for what you are doing but for what its worth, link to the website I order the from (acorn naturalists):
http://www.acornnaturalists.com/store/GREEN-Global-Rivers-Environmental-Education-Network-INTRODUCTORY-WATER-QUALITY-MONITORING-KIT-P488C0.aspx

You can also order each test separately from their website rather than getting the entire kit so could just get the phosphorus kit.  Might be fun to try these because they are simple and fairly inexpensive and send samples to the lab for comparison.
Let me know if you find other better alternatives.

 

From: HANSON Steve
Date: November 30, 2012, 8:52 AM

I would second Joseph’s comments below and urge you to take a look at what concentrations you need to detect in order to answer your questions.  Furthermore I’ve seen problems with what test the kits actually do.  The kits I’ve seen only test for phosphate, which is fine if you filter your sample through a 0.45 micron filter and call your test dissolved or ortho-phosphorus.  Unfortunately the tests sometimes say total phosphorus.  Total phosphorus requires a digestion step in order to free up tightly bound phosphorus for reaction with the color reagent.  From my perspective, if you run the test without either digesting or filtering you are kind of in no man’s land, although you might be able to compare between samples.

Steve Hanson
ODEQ Lab:  Volunteer Monitoring Coordinator
Ph: 503.693.5737

 

From: Thorpe, Anthony Paul (thorpet@missouri.edu)
Date: November 30, 2012, 8:52 AM

The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program is housed in the University of Missouri and we use our own lab to analyze phosphorus. Some of our lakes consistently have 5 or 8 ug/L of total phosphorus. I have yet to see a test kit that can accurately measure even ten times that. When you are only looking at the reactive phosphorus, the concentration will be even lower. We’re finding that many commercial labs can’t even get that low. That is not a brag about our lab, but rather a statement about where the demand for nutrient testing is. My thought is that until nutrient criteria kick in, most of the commercial labs and available test kits will be set up for the sewage treatment industry.

Tony Thorpe
Coordinator, Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program
302 ABNR University of Missouri
Columbia, MO 65211
Phone: 1-800-895-2260
Fax: 573-884-5070
Skype: lmvptony
www.lmvp.org

 

From: Linda Green
Date: November 30, 2012, 10:44 AM

The URI Watershed Watch program, housed at URI Cooperative Extension, uses an Astoria-Pacific (API) segmented flow autoanalyzer to analyze nutrients. Total P and total N are simultaneously analyzed after a persulfate digestion. Kits would never work in our waters some as low as 5 ug/l (ppb) total P.  Lots of rigorous cleaning too! If anyone want the details I can send you our SOP or QAPP.

A bit of chemistry –  many kits express results as “phosphates” (PO4) where most scientists/agencies/VM programs express results in terms of phosphorus, in the original query, when filtered, dissolved reactive phosphorus (PO4-P). To convert ppb phosphates to  ppb phosphate-as-P, you must divide the molar weight of phosphate (103= 1 P (39) plus 4 oxygen@ 16)) by that of phosphorus (39).  103/39 = 2.64.   If your water is 100 ppb phosphate, it is 38 ppb phosphate-P.  Conversely, if it is 100 ppb phosphate-P it is 264 ppb phosphates.  The same applies to nitrates vs nitrate-N.  So you need to be very careful, especially when comparing these kit results to other results. It’s not quite comparing apples to oranges, more like macintosh to red delicious apples.

Linda Green
Program Director
URI Watershed Watch
102 Coastal Institute,
1 Greenhouse Road
Kingston, RI 02881
401-874-2905 (v)
email: lgreen@uri.edu
http://www.uri.edu/ce/wq/ww

Project Lead,
Extension Volunteer Monitoring Network
www.usawaterquality.org/volunteer

 

From: Paul Mack
Date: Dec 1, 2012

Do the students have access/experience with test equipment like spectrophotometers?

We have used EPA-approved Hach colorimetric method #8048 (orthophosphate/ascorbic acid) for over a decade and are satisfied with its results. It is a single-reagent method that is safe for older students in the presence of an adult, and can be used in both portable (field) and bench-top spectrophotometers.

As Linda pointed out in her email yesterday, this method returns PO4, which arithmetically converts to the more common P.

Paul Mack
River Prairie Group
Sierra Club – DuPage, IL

 

From: Nancy Mesner
Date: Dec 2, 2012

Just a note to make sure everyone reading this exchange understands that these tests provide the ionic form of phosphorus (PO4) and NOT total phosphorus. Total phosphorus analysis requires a digestion (oxidation) step which, to my knowledge, cannot be done with any of the field tests.

PO4 is the most biologically available form but often is below detection limits. In our part of the country, at least, total phosphorus is the form of P that the state agencies are considering in their discussions of phosphorus standards.

Nancy Mesner, Associate Professor, Dept of Watershed Sciences
Associate Dean, College of Natural Resources
Extension Water Quality Specialist
Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322-5210
office – 435 797 7541
cell- 435 770 2363
nancy.mesner@usu.edu

 

From: Iles, Jerome
Date: Deceber 3, 2012

As far as I know, in Ohio only grab samples / lab evaluation is done.

Jerry

Categories
Listserv

Macroinvertebrate Monitoring

Spanish Materials

Question 1: Does anyone who developed a program having volunteers enter data online and possibly identifying macroinvertebrates in the field have any comments or suggestions that may be helpful.

Question 2: Is there a good basic key out there for BMI identification?

Announcement 1: Recently, we developed an Interactive Verification Program to complement the spiral bound identification manual for Citizen Volunteers.

Announcement 2:New on the WV Save Our Streams web page is a “Field Guide to Aquatic Invertebrates”.

Question 3: I am looking for crisp black and white images of macroinvertebrates and  suggestions about benthic macroinvertebrates or biological monitoring websites.

Question 4: What are some of the methods used to safely do a stream bioassessment in a stream that’s only 15 or 18 inches wide?

Question 5: Does anyone happen to know a supplier/distributor for ethanol to be used for macroinvertebrate preservation?

Question 6: Can you please share your favorite online macro identification tools?

Question 1

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008
From: “Weglein, Sara”

Greetings all,

I am with the MD Department of Natural Resources volunteer stream sampling program, Stream Waders. We are looking to make some changes to our program such as having volunteers enter data online and possibly identifying macroinvertebrates in the field. I was just wondering if anyone who had such programs in place had any comments or suggestions that may be helpful.
Thank you!

Sara Weglein
MD Dept. of Natural Resources
RAS – MANTA

Responses to Question 1

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:19:01 -0700
From: Sandy Derby

Hello Sara,
Just thinking some of what I have online might be helpful to you– and interesting. Our BioSITE Program, curricula, and data can be viewed online (actually, the data is not updated yet so more will come..) Let me know if you have any questions–

S
Sandra Derby
Environmental Education Manager
BioSITE Program Director
Children’s Discovery Museum
180 Woz Way, San Jose CA. 95110
w408.298-5437 x261
f408.298-6826

 

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008
From: Eleanor Ely

Sara,

Are you familiar with the Summer 2005 issue of The Volunteer Monitor newsletter? It profiles a number of macroinvertebrate monitoring programs and hopefully will give you some ideas about the different possible approaches. See www.epa.gov/owow/volunteer/vm_index.html.

I believe online data entry by volunteers is getting more and more common. One good example is Alabama Water Watch (https://aww.auburn.edu/).

Good luck with your program!

Ellie

Eleanor Ely
Editor, The Volunteer Monitor Newsletter
50 Benton Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94112

 

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 16:35:01 -0400
From: Jo Latimore
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] MD Stream Waders

Hi Sara,

Here in Michigan we’ve had mixed results in asking volunteers to enter their data online. The Michigan Clean Water Corps (www.micorps.net) set up an online database a few years ago for both stream and lake monitoring data. We handle stream and lake monitoring a little differently, based on program history. Our lake program has been functioning in one form or another since the 70s, with some monitoring done by lake associations, and some by individuals. They pay a small fee to participate, to (almost) cover the cost of equipment and lab analysis. In general, our lake volunteers have been resistant to entering their own data online. Some say that they don’t want to do more work, and others are uncomfortable with computers. We initially hoped to make volunteer data entry required, but so many were opposed that we have abandoned that hope and do much of it ourselves.

Our stream monitors are all organized within their own groups (watershed councils, conservation groups, etc.). The statewide stream monitoring program is relatively young, compared to the lake program, and so are the folks involved. Computer literacy can be assumed, and when groups join the stream program, we require that they enter their own data – and these groups are fine with that. Since they are already organized into groups, they already have plans to use their data for stream/watershed protection, and want their data in electronic form anyway. Our online database allows volunteers to enter their data and then download a copy for themselves in Excel format, so we essentially save them from having to design their own database. We also offer groups an alternative – if they already have their own database they use, they can just send us a copy of their electronic data, and we import it into our database.

Regarding field ID of macroinvertebrates, I’d give the handy answer, “It depends.” It depends on the level of taxonomic resolution. Order-level IDs by volunteers in the field are certainly possible, with training. I’ve found that often, though, volunteers – especially new ones – aren’t always comfortable with that level of responsibility. You’ll want to have a Quality Control plan in place to check ID’s, and make sure the volunteers know that, so they don’t worry quite as much about getting one or two
wrong. I’d also recommend providing a way for them to turn in bugs that they are unsure of – a “mystery jar” of sorts. One big upside of field ID is that the volunteers know the result of their search right away. If you’re looking for family-level ID, though, I’d steer clear of field ID. Even the pros (myself included) don’t have the best track record with that.

On the other hand, at my previous job at the Huron River Watershed Council in Ann Arbor (www.hrwc.org), we found a way to involve volunteers in identifying bugs at a separate indoor event – described in the issue of the Volunteer Monitor that Ellie mentioned. This type of event may not be feasible at a statewide scale, but your individual watershed groups might try it. The Michigan Clean Water Corps permits field or lab ID of bugs, as long as there’s a QC plan in place to check those IDs.

Good questions! I’m sure others have other perspectives…

-Jo

Jo A. Latimore, Ph.D.
Lake, Stream, & Watershed Outreach
Department of Fisheries and Wildlife
Michigan State University
13 Natural Resources
East Lansing, MI 48824-1222
(517) 432-1491
latimor1@msu.edu

 

Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 22:30:11 -0500
From: Kris Stepenuck
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] MD Stream Waders

Hi Sara

We have a fact sheet about online databases (as well as other types of databases) with links to numerous volunteer monitoring programs’ databases within it. It also includes tips from program coordinators across the country who replied to a request for feedback to share with others about planning and implementing such databases. Here’s a link to the fact sheet:
http://www.usawaterquality.org/volunteer/Outreach/Databases.pdf

There are also some relevant discussions from this listserv posted at:
http://www.usawaterquality.org/volunteer/Special/EPAListserv/index.html Scroll down to online databases – there are two discussions there that seem relevant.

Third, we also did a survey of volunteer monitoring programs across the country about their online databases. We used the information we learned in the fact sheet noted above, but results of the survey itself are also posted online. They’re available at:
http://www.usawaterquality.org/volunteer/DataReporting/index.html

Hopefully these will be of help to you.

As for identifying macroinvertebrates in the field. To what level? We have volunteers ID to order level on a regular basis (see our methods:
http://watermonitoring.uwex.edu/wav/monitoring/methods.html – choose biotic index, and data sheets:
http://watermonitoring.uwex.edu/wav/monitoring/sheets.html. But you may mean to family level?

Sincerely,

Kris Stepenuck

 

Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:52:49 -0400
From: Debra Gutenson
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] MD Stream Waders

Sara,

You may wish to contact Stacey Brown ( coordinator of VA SOS) re’ our volunteer monitoring and data reporting efforts in VA. This is an all volunteer statewide program, not run by any state agency.

Email : Stacey@vasos.org

Otto Gutenson ( OW, EPA- retired)

Question 2

Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 11:00:37 -0500
From: Mary Hegarty
Subject: Re: [CSREESVolMon] Good key for BMI?

Hi all,
Is there a good basic key out there for BMI identification?
We are looking for a basic one that shows the actual tiny size of the critters, color and how they move (how they look alive in the pan) and other easy ID features, that one can see with the eye or magnified glass (not how they look under a microscope). We want an ID key for alive specimens.

Any help- would be great.
Thanks,
Mary Hegarty

Mary Hegarty
Environmental Management Assistant

Rockland County
Division of Environmental Resources &
Soil and Water Conservation District
50 Sanatorium Rd., Bldg. P
Pomona, NY 10970
845-364-2669
(fax) 845-364-2671
www.rocklandgov.com

Responses to Question 2

Kris Stepenuck 4/4/2008 4:21 PM
Hi Mary

I’m not sure if you got replies on this? Anyhow, we have a key, but it’s
not fully what you describe. There are descriptions by the drawings about
how the orgs. move and what color they are, but it’s not in color. Here’s
a link to it: http://watermonitoring.uwex.edu/pdf/level1/riverkey.pdf

We also have a booklet that goes along with it. I can send you a copy if
you like what it looks like. You can check it out online at:
http://watermonitoring.uwex.edu/pdf/level1/WWWC.pdf

I’d be curious about other replies you may have received as well which I
can post on our listserv archives.

Thanks!

Kris

 

>>> Barbara Liukkonen 3/3/2008 11:56 AM >>>
Mary

Here’s a nice online version – mostly photographs, but nice
identification tips.
http://midge.cfans.umn.edu/

You can also view, and download, our print Guide to BMI in the Midwest.
See the link on the same page.

Barb Liukkonen
Water Resources Center, O of MN
173 McNeal Hall
1985 Buford Ave
St. Paul, MN 55108
liukk001@umn.edu

 

Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 11:06:32 -0400
From: Mary Hegarty
Subject: Fwd: Re: [CSREESVolMon] Good key for BMI?

>>> 3/3/2008 12:28 PM >>>
Hello Mary,

We have a citizen volunteer stream monitoring program here in Monroe
County….although it is somewhat dormant at the moment (i.e. budget cuts).
I have attached a copy of the Participants Manual….which includes an ID
card for BMIs….though it is not a key. It may be of interest. What sort
of program do you have in Rockland County for stream monitoring?

Thanks,
Todd

See attached file: CWW Participants Manual Updated 2004.pdf (2.5 MB pdf file)

 

>>> “Smolen, Michael” 3/3/2008 2:23 PM >>>
Dear Mary,
The following was supplied by Anndrea Navesky.
Mike Smolen

Michael D. Smolen
Professor and Water Quality Coordinator
218 Ag Hall
Oklahoma State University
Stillwater, OK 74078-6021
Phone: 405-744-8414
FAX: 405-744-6059
http://waterquality.okstate.edu
——————-

From: Navesky, Anndrea N
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 12:46 PM
To: csreesvolmon-bounces@lists.uwex.edu
Subject: Good key for BMI’s

Your e-mail was passed on to me with a suggestion to give you a link to
some basic ID cards for BMI. This site (if you haven’t already been
there) puts out free information for teachers, or anyone else that wants
to use the materials.

There are a few other things under their website that you may find
useful as well. They don’t have anything showing how these insects move
in the water, but this is one of the best basic ID cards I’ve come
across in my searches. They talk about how the inverts move, but
nothing too great in detail. I’ve printed these off two to a page and
laminated them to take into the field for the people I’m instructing.
It works pretty well.

Good luck!

Anndrea Navesky
Oklahoma State University
Department of Entomology
127 Noble Research Center
Stillwater, OK 74078

Office (405) 744-5303
Fax (405) 744-6039

Announcement 1

From: Leonard C. Ferrington Jr., Ph.D. [mailto:ferri016@tc.umn.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 3:11 PM
To: Volunteer Monitoring List Serve Members
Subject: New On-line resource for Citizen Volunteer Monitoring Programs.

I would like to take this opportunity to tell you about a new on-line resource for Citizen Volunteer Monitoring Programs, and to ask for your assistance in helping us notify and advertise it to appropriate groups that may be involved in water quality monitoring efforts throughout the United States.

A couple of years ago we published a spiral bound identification guide to help Citizen Volunteers perform accurate identifications of invertebrates collected as part of their volunteer water quality monitoring efforts. To date more than 2000 copies have been disseminated, and many additional copies have been downloaded from our on-line access site. This manual has been an astonishing success, and has facilitated improved accuracy of identifications by citizens who volunteer their personal time to help our collective efforts to improve water resources in our state. Information about the manual can be located online at:

http://midge.cfans.umn.edu/

Recently, we developed an Interactive Verification Program to complement the spiral bound manual, and allow citizens to check the accuracy of their own identifications. We refer to the software as VSM-IVP, and it can be accessed online.

I would like to request that you help us in advertising this on-line VSM-IVP resource by telling your constituents about it. The software went on-line in early December and several states are evaluating it for use in their respective citizen volunteer programs. For instance, West Virginia has already provided links to our software on their official state web pages for water quality programs, and towns in Maryland have asked us for permission to endorse it as part of their local programs. Although the software was
originally designed for use in Minnesota, we are very excited about this early trend in national use of our software, and hope that you will assist us in notifying other potential user groups.

Sincerely,

Leonard Ferrington

Leonard C. Ferrington Jr., Ph.D.
Professor, Department of Entomology
University of Minnesota
219 Hodson Hall, 1980 Folwell Avenue
Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55108-6125
TELEPHONE: (612) 624-3265
FAX: (612) 625-5299

Announcement 2

Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 08:06:55 -0500
From: Tim Craddock
Subject: [CSREESVolMon] New aquatic invertebrate field guide on the WV Save Our
Streams web page

New on the WV Save Our Streams web page is a “Field Guide to Aquatic Invertebrates”. This PDF file uses illustrations and Internet links to familiarize the user with commonly encountered families of aquatic invertebrates. The illustrations are from the “Guide to Macroinvertebrates of the Upper Midwest” and are used with permission from the University of Minnesota.

Timothy Craddock, Citizens Monitoring Coordinator
West Virginia Save Our Streams Program
601 57th Street, SE
Charleston, WV 25304

Office: 304-926-0499 (1040)
Mobile: 304-389-7630
E-mail: tcraddock@wvdep.org

Question 3

Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 23:40:23 -0400
From: “Joanna A. Cornell”
Subject: [volmonitor] Crisp images of macroinvertebrates

Hello Everyone,

I am looking for crisp black and white images of macroinvertebrates. They need to remain crisp after photocopying by teachers. These will be used by a large school system, so the images can not be copyrighted.

I will also take this opportunity to ask for suggestions about excellent benthic macroinvertebrates or biological monitoring websites. There are a number that I like to recommend, but I’m sure there are many that I have not yet discovered.

Looking forward to your replies,

Joanna

Joanna A. Cornell
Watershed Specialist
Northern Virginia Soil and Water Conservation District
12055 Government Center Parkway, Suite 905
Fairfax, VA 22035
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/NVSWCD
joanna.cornell@fairfaxcounty.gov
703-324-1425 (w)
703-324-1421 (f)

And a related question (combined anwers are provided below):

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 09:50:14 -0400
From: “Joanna A. Cornell”
Subject: [volmonitor] Looking for images of benthic macroinvertebrates – for flashcards

Hello Everyone,

I am looking for high-resolution drawings of benthic macroinvertebrates that I could use for flashcards for our stream monitors. Our monitoring program uses the VASOS protocol, but we can’t use the images for any other purposes besides our ID cards and data cards. I’m happy to share the flashcards.

Thanks in advance,

Joanna

———————–

Joanna A. Cornell, Ph.D.

Watershed Specialist

Northern Virginia Soil and Water Conservation District

12055 Government Center Parkway, Suite 905 Fairfax, VA 22035

http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/NVSWCD

joanna.cornell@fairfaxcounty.gov

703.324.1425 (w)

703.324.1421 (f)

Responses to Question 3

Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 07:28:26 -0700
From: HANSON Steve
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Crisp images of macroinvertebrates

The Xerces page is good (http://www.xerces.org/). They have good aquatic pages.

Steve Hanson
Volunteer Monitoring Specialist
Oregon DEQ Laboratory

Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 09:35:48 -0500
From: Irwin Polls
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Crisp images of macroinvertebrates

JOANNA:

I would suggest you look at the website for the North American Benthological Society (www.benthos.org). The education and outreach section has slide shows of benthic macroinvertebrates.

IRWIN

Irwin Polls
ECOLOGICAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT

 

Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 13:35:25 -0700
From: Erick Burres
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Crisp images of macroinvertebrates

Joanna,

Feel you can find images within the California Streamside Biosurvey.
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/nps/docs/cwtguidance/351bsurvey.doc – 2515.5KB – Water Resources Control Board

Erick Burres
Citizen Monitoring Coordinator
SWRCB- Clean Water Team

 

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 09:56:22 -0500
From: “Miles, Karen”
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Looking for images of benthic macroinvertebrates –
for flashcards
To: Volunteer water monitoring

If you want photos of them, the EPA has some at:

http://www.epa.gov/bioiweb1/html/benthosclean.html

Karen Miles

 

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:07:27 -0400
From: David Kirschtel
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] Looking for images of benthic macroinvertebrates –
for flashcards

There are a number of relevant keys with line drawings listed at the EPA website “Biological Indicators of Watershed Health”: http://www.epa.gov/bioiweb1/html/benthosclean.html

In particular: Family-Level Key to the Stream Invertebrates of Maryland and
Surrounding Areas – MD-DNR

Guide to Aquatic Invertebrates – West Virginia Department of
Environmental Protection

Given that most of these are produced by state/local governments I expect that it would relatively easy to get permission, if any is needed at all, to reproduce the images.

Hope this helps,

David
======================================================================== ========
David Kirschtel, Ph.D.
National Ecological Observatory Network – National Project Office
1444 I St, NW, #200 – Washington, DC 20005
email: kirschte@msu.edu – dkirschtel@neoninc.org
tel: 202.628.1500×240

 

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 10:46:52 -0500
From: “Leonard C. Ferrington Jr., Ph.D.”
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] Looking for images of benthic macroinvertebrates –
for flashcards

Greetings Joanna and othe Volunteers,

We prepared an identification guide for Citizen Volunteers that has more than 200 high quality line drawings that might be of the type that you are seeking. The guide can be found on-line at www.entomology.umn.edu/ Mr. Will Bouchard made all the drawings.

I would recommend that you look at the drawings and determine if they are the type that will suite your needs. If they are, then please contact me and we can determine how to send high resolution copies for you to use.

We also have compiled verification software that has high resolution digital images and is available on-line at: http://midge.cfans.umn.edu/

Sincerely,

Len Ferrington

Leonard C. Ferrington Jr., Ph.D.
Professor, Department of Entomology
University of Minnesota
219 Hodson Hall, 1980 Folwell Avenue
Saint Paul, Minnesota USA 55108-6125
TELEPHONE: (612) 624-3265
FAX: (612) 625-5299

 

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 09:51:00 -0700
From: Eleanor Ely
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Looking for images of benthic macroinvertebrates – for flashcards

There is wonderful macroinvertebrate artwork, more three-dimensional and lifelike than the typical drawings found in identification keys, in the manual “Measuring the Health of California Streams and Rivers” by Jim Harrington and Monique Born. The illustrations are by Peter Ode and you can see one of them on the cover of the Summer 2005 issue of The Volunteer Monitor (www.epa.gov/owow/volunteer/vm_index.html) and another on page 20 of the same issue, in the left-hand column. I’m not sure how available these are for others to use, but if they look suitable for your purposes you can get more information by contacting Jim Harrington at slsi@cwnet.com.

In the same issue, the list of resources on pages 20-21 includes a number of guides and keys with illustrations, both drawings and photos. Some of these illustrations might be available to you.

Ellie

Eleanor Ely

Editor, The Volunteer Monitor Newsletter

50 Benton Avenue

San Francisco, CA 94112

 

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:44:37 -0400
From: “Schenk, Ann”
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Looking for images of benthic macroinvertebrates – for flashcards
To: Volunteer water monitoring
Reply-to: Volunteer water monitoring
Thread-topic: [volmonitor] Looking for images of benthic macroinvertebrates – for flashcards

There are a few Merrit and Cummins illustrations used in our”Family-Level Key to the Stream Invertebrates of Maryland and Surrounding Areas” that we had to get specific permission to use for
this publication only. Please do NOT use those marked illustrations.

If there are any other images in that publication you wish to use, I have higher resolution files than are in the web version of the document. It would be nice to give appropriate credit for any of our images.

Ann Schenk
Natural Resource Biologist III
Maryland Department of Natural Resources
580 Taylor Ave., C-2
Annapolis, MD 21401
phone: 410-260-8609

 

Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:03:55 -0500
From: Kris Stepenuck
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Looking for images of benthic macroinvertebrates –
for flashcards

Hi Joanna and all-

Wisconsin also has some line drawings of aquatic macroinvertebrates available through our clip art collection at: http://clean-water.uwex.edu/pubs/clipart/critters.pond.htm or http://clean-water.uwex.edu/pubs/clipart/critters.riv.htm.

Cheers,

Kris Stepenuck

Question 4

Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:00:19 -0500
From: Rita Jack
Subject: [volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams – how to not harm a stream?

Hello Vol Mons,
I have a study area in a still-pretty-wild part of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, in the Yellow Dog Plains, where the streams are the cleanest I’ve ever seen. (It’s not unusual to see specific conductivity readings that are less than 40 uS.) The project is geared to collect baseline water quality data prior to sulfide mining permit applications, to help support decision-making and public comment-ability. We began the Yellow Dog Plains study over 18 months ago.
Some of the streams that we work on are literally only 15 or 18 inches wide. Some of our volunteers are very concerned that going in to do a bug survey twice a year could potentially wipe out some sensitive and/or rare organisms.
What are some of the methods used in other areas to safely do a stream bioassessment in a stream that’s only 15 or 18 inches wide?
~Rita
>>
Rita Jack
Water Sentinels Project
Sierra Club Mackinac Chapter
109 E. Grand River Ave.
Lansing, Michigan 48906
tel: 517-484-2372
www.michigan.sierraclub.org
www.sierraclub.org/watersentinels

Responses to Question 4

Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 13:07:25 -0700
From: “Horn, Barb”
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams – how to not harm a
stream?

There is a methodology that is similar to electroshocking fish that can be applied to macroinvertebrate sampling, the bugs recover and can be placed back into the river, identification has to occur in a timely manner and the bugs kept in a supportive environment–unless bugs id needs to involve dissection, the bugs all live.–might depend upon level of id needed. The upfront cost is that of the generator and probes-about $5000 –but will last a long, long time. If you want more information I can connect you. Studies have been performed comparing this method w/ traditional collection methods and for the usual list of metrics the method is valid.

Barb Horn
Biologist, Colorado Division of Wildlife
151 E. 16th Ave., Durango, CO 81301
vc: 970/382-6667 fx: 970/247-4785

 

Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 21:26:49 -0500 (EST)
From: boram@wilkes.edu
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams – how to not harm a stream?

It is important to note that the very low conductivity of the stream may
limit the capability of this or any other electrode method.

Brian Oram
Wilkes University
http://www.water-research.net

 

Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:22:16 -0500
From: Chris Sullivan
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams – how to not harm a stream?

What taxonomic level are you IDing your macros to? If only to family you should be able to do 90% of the critters on site in trays of water and simply return the critters that day. I know I have taken samples stored them overnite in the fridge with a bubbler for town fair table for kids etc and the majority of the critters make it to the net day and their return to the sample site.

Of course if you ID to genus or species this probably wont work, since counting the number of ocelli on a perlidae or any other smaller details will be next to impossible with the critters wiggling around your petri dish.

good luck

peace
Chris

Chris Sullivan
Project SEARCH Coordinator
(203) 734-2513
FAX 203-922-7833
Center for Environmental Research Education
Kellogg Environmental Center
500 Hawthorne Ave
Derby, CT 06418

 

Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:17:23 +0000
From: Ronald Wierenga
Subject: re:[volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams – how to not harm a stream?

Rita,
I think one of the more significant impacts to the stream is from disturbing the substrate while collecting the sample. Using atrificial substrate, such as rock baskets or plates, would help minimize your footprint on the system and still provide usefull information, although not always comparable. River Network’s Living Waters by Geoff Dates is a good reference for using artificial substrate. Check with your state’s biomonitoring group for comparability issues. The bug population should be able to take the loss of a few organisms. Good luck, sounds like a fun project.

Ron Wierenga
Water Resources Program
Clark County Vancouver WA 98666-9810
360-397-6118 x4264

 

Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 12:36:53 -0500
From: Danielle Donkersloot
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams – how to not harm a stream?

I did respond to the original email, stating that NJ volunteers will either collect and return to the same stream or preserve. It depends on the purpose of the monitoring project and the level of rigor they need
to achieve. I am always unsure of keeping the samples over night in some-kind of live well. My concern is that you are keeping a lot of organisms in one bucket, so would the carnivores of the sample have a field day eating the others? I tend to think of if as an All-You-Can-Eat-Buffet for them.
What are your thoughts?

 

Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:34:29 -0500
From: Jenny Birnbaum
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams – how to not harm a stream?

I definitely agree with Danielle’s concerns- when I was a grad student collecting benthic macroinvertebrate samples, we occasionally observed predation in the sample even before the insects succumbed (the insects in these samples were sacrificed). Additionally, at one point I raised a
dragonfly larva for an entomology class, and I kept it in a tank with mayflies, damselflies and even mosquitofish to sustain it… so keeping live organisms all together over night is definitely an all-you-can-eat buffet!

Jenny Birnbaum
Mystic Monitoring Network Director
Mystic River Watershed Association
20 Academy St., Suite 203
Arlington, MA 02476
(781) 316-3438
jenny@mysticriver.org
www.mysticriver.org

 

Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 15:12:28 -0800
From: Eleanor Ely
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams – how to not harm a stream?

Greetings — just returned from vacation to find this discussion. I wanted to mention an article in the Summer 2005 issue of The Volunteer Monitor titled “Catch-and-Release Bioassessment” (pages 14-15) — it contains several recommendations for gentle handling of insects to maximize their survival.
Ellie
Eleanor Ely
Editor, The Volunteer Monitor Newsletter
50 Benton Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94112

 

Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 11:03:44 -0500
From: Ginger North
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams – how to not harm a stream?

I, too, just got back from vacation to read about this issue. I was interested in all the various testing methods that different volunteer groups use per the Volunteer Monitoring issue that Ellie mentioned. I also heard about various methods at the Region III EPA conference in West Virginia and read couple of articles describing specific methods used by volunteer groups collecting data for government agencies. It seems that there is a huge variety in methodology and I hope that a discussion comparing the various methods might be considered at the National Water Monitoring Conference in May.
We have used a modified version of the Stroud Water Research methodology which involves perserving the collected organisms, but when studying very small first order streams we, too, are concerned that we are compromising the balance of the stream life. I am interested in hearing about other options that still give useful data.

Ginger North
Stream Watch Coordinator
Delaware Nature Society
302-239-2334×100
Fax 302-239-2473
ginger@delawarenaturesociety.org
www.delawarenaturesociety.org

 

Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 09:59:20 -0700
From: “Horn, Barb”
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams – how to not harm a stream?

Can’t have a discussion on method comparison w/out bringing in data objectives, study purpose/goals….there are a variety of methods for technical and waterbody differences reasons but also becuase different data objectives exist…..a valuable discussion would be to discuss the pro’/con’s w/ /the variety of methods to achieve the same goals/purpose/data objective….

Barb Horn
Biologist, Colorado Division of Wildlife
151 E. 16th Ave., Durango, CO 81301
vc: 970/382-6667 fx: 970/247-4785

 

Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 15:21:06 -0500
From: Joan Martin
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams – how to not harm a stream?

What an excellent point, Barb. The challenge for us is that volunteer monitoring groups have to demonstrate their ability to correctly collect and identify the macroinvertebrates, so catch and release doesn’t verify their identification. I would like to see suggestions that cover this need.
Thanks,
-Joan
(734) 769-5123, X.11

 

Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 15:38:13 -0500
From: Rita Jack
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams – how to not harm a stream?

Friends – I’m grateful for the continuation of this thread after the week away from the office and email, and I echo Joan’s point below.
Is one solution to have the volunteers identify and count everything, and then to keep and preserve one of each different kind to verify the id’s? I’ve heard of some groups who send teams to all their sites, and then they gather together at the end to identify and count, perhaps in a lab with microscopes – and then release all the still-living critters back to a convenient local stream. This, however, greatly concerns me because of the potential for moving exotic aquatics around a watershed. Yikes!
-Rita
>>
Rita Jack
Water Sentinels Project, Sierra Club Mackinac Chapter
tel: 517-484-2372

 

Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 16:04:27 -0500
From: Mayio.Alice@epamail.epa.gov
Subject: [volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams

The information below might be of general interest to those of you pursuing this topic — it comes from Ed Rankin of the Midwest Biodiversity Institute (and formerly of Ohio EPA).

–Alice Mayio

Ohio EPA has a website dedicated to very small (“primary”) headwater streams, generally less than 1 sq mi in drainage. They have detailed sampling protocols and a number of nice publications dealing with these streams that can be downloaded. The Web site is:

http://epa.ohio.gov/dsw/wqs/headwaters/index.aspx

Most of this generated out of their NE district office. Their methodology looks at macroinvertebrates, amphibians, and habitat. They do offer periodic training in this methdology in Ohio. As for the fear of oversampling, I think that should be minimal for several reasons. First, at best a macro sample would capture only a fraction of what is any reach of stream. Second, the biota of headwater streams especially, is adapted to various “natural” disturbances such as storms, winter ice, etc that result in relatively rapid recovery after a distrubance as long as the “natural infrastructure” (i.e., habitat, etc) is intact.

 

Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2006 16:18:59 -0500
From: Geoff Dates
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] bugs in tiny little streams – how to not harm a stream?

As Barb implies: the answer is . . . it depends.

Returning the critters to the stream will limit what you can do with the sample. That will affect your results, the type of metrics you can use, and quite possibly the use of your data. The basic question comes down to will the limits of an all-field approach limit the usefulness of the results?

If the impacts (or impairments) are obvious (e.g. nothing but worms and midges), then higher taxonomic level (family, or maybe even orders) field taxonomy is fine.

In most cases, the more taxonomy you do, the more information you get. Many of the data analyses (aka “metrics”) used become more meaningful. As anyone knows who’s tried it, field identification below family is VERY difficult (even family identification is difficult for some taxa). It’s particularly difficult when the organisms are small.

Once you throw the sample back, you’ve lost the ability to:

know for sure if you’ve misidentified something
do further taxonomy
quality check your results

Several options:

for your first collection, get samples from each site and preserve everything. Build a reference collection from these samples.
Videotape (under magnification) each organism that goes into your voucher collection while it is still alive. Movement is often an important clue.
each time you collect, preserve one of each type of organism, to the best of your ability.
bring the live samples back to the lab and use some sort of aquarium to keep them alive while you identify them under high magnification. Bring them back to where you collected them, if possible.

Thanks for raising the question.

Geoff Dates

River Watch Program Director
River Network
Home Office:
231 24D Heritage Condos
Woodstock, VT 05091
802-457-9808 w & h
email: gdates@rivernetwork.org
River Network Web Site: www.rivernetwork.org

Question 5

From: “J. Kelly Nolan, EST Coordinator”
Subject: [volmonitor] Preservative
To: VOLMONITOR

Hello- Does anyone happen to know a supplier/distributor for ethanol to be used for macroinvertebrate preservation? We would like to stop using denatured alcohol as it fumes quickly overpower our sampling identification sessions.

Regards,
J. Kelly Nolan
Capital Region Coordinator
Hudson Basin River Watch

Responses to Question 5

From: Kevin_Smith@B-F.com
Subject: [volmonitor] Re: Preservative
To: VOLMONITOR

Although it is a more expensive option and if you only need small amounts, you can use Everclear Brand spirit from your local liquor store. It is 95% ethanol and can be cut to the appropriate percentage for your needs. This will be “tax paid” and (legally) side-steps any of the regulatory requirements of purchasing ethanol for scientific purposes. You could also use vodka but this can generally only be found at concentrations of 50% ethanol or less which may not be sufficient for preservation.
Is your organization is working in association with a local University’s science department that is already authorized to purchase lab grade ethanol. They may be willing to provide limited quantities for your macroinvertebrate sampling.

Kevin Smith

 Question 6

From: “Vastine, Julie”
To: Volunteer water monitoring
Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 1:20 PM
Subject: [volmonitor] Online macroinvertebrate identification tools

Hello:

Can you please share your favorite online macro identification tools?  We are trying to add to our reference list for Pennsylvania volunteers.

Thank you!
Julie

–Julie Vastine, Director
Alliance for Aquatic Resource Monitoring (ALLARM)
Dickinson College – Environmental Studies Dept.
phone: 717.245.1135  fax: 717.245.1971
www.dickinson.edu/allarm

Responses to Question 6

From: Kelly Stettner
Date: Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 12:31 PM
Subject: [volmonitor] Online macroinvertebrate identification tools

Here’s my favorite online tool for “bug hunts”:
http://people.virginia.edu/~sos-iwla/Stream-Study/Key/MacroKeyIntro.HTML
Black River Action Team (BRAT)…be part of the solution!
101 Perley Gordon Road
Springfield, VT  05156
(802) 885-1533
http://www.BlackRiverActionTeam.org

From: Steve Kerlin
Date: Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 12:45 PM
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] Online macroinvertebrate identification tools

We use the River on the Web (ROW) website resources for teachers. It has a number of keys and guides for lessons and stream studies. More are currently being added.
http://row.nku.edu/

We also use the WaterQuality app for iPads and iPhones during our stream studies. The app has a digital key for identifying macros and calculates the PTI.
Here is the link to find it in the iTunes App Store:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/water-quality/id569193509?mt=8

Steve Kerlin, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Science & Environmental Education
Director of the Center for Environmental Education
Northern Kentucky University
272 MP
859-572-6380

 

From: Craddock, Timothy D
Date: Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 1:12 PM
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Online macroinvertebrate identification tools

There is a page within the WV Save Our Streams website that provides a complication of resources related to macroinvertebrates (1).  Some are specific to WV Save Our Streams (2) and others are examples from across the country.

1.       http://www.dep.wv.gov/WWE/getinvolved/sos/Pages/Macros.aspx

2.       http://www.dep.wv.gov/WWE/getinvolved/sos/Pages/Benthics.aspx

There are a wide variety of resources here that touch on identification as well as many reference materials.
Tim Craddock, Nonpoint Program Coordinator
WV Dept. of Environmental Protection
601 57th Street, SE
Charleston, WV  25304

Office: (304) 926-0499 ext. 1040; Mobile: (304) 389-7630
E-mail: timothy.d.craddock@wv.gov
Website: http://www.dep.wv.gov/nonpoint  
“UNLESS someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.”, the Lorax

 

From: Chris Riggert
Date: Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 9:10 AM
Subject: RE:[volmonitor] Online macroinvertebrate identification tools

Hi Julie,

I have seen some excellent resources that others have submitted.  Here are a couple that we have available for our VWQM folks here:

–          Blue Bug Card: http://www.mostreamteam.org/Documents/VWQM/BugCard1.10.pdf

–          Key to Macro River Life: http://www.mostreamteam.org/Documents/VWQM/LifeInRiverKey.pdf

–          Invert Chart: http://www.mostreamteam.org/Documents/VWQM/BugChart2.pdf

–          Preservation: http://www.mostreamteam.org/Documents/VWQM/Specimen%20Preservation.pdf

–          Net Racks: http://www.mostreamteam.org/Documents/how_to/pvcrack.pdf

–          Vial Rack: http://www.mostreamteam.org/Documents/how_to/woodenrack.pdf

–          Net Stand: http://www.mostreamteam.org/Documents/how_to/selfsupportingkicknet.pdf

–          Net Support: http://www.mostreamteam.org/Documents/how_to/Plans%20for%20Freestanding%20Kicknet%20Support.pdf

–          Bug Photos: http://www.mostreamteam.org/inverts.asp

One of the staff here also does a “What’s that Bug” feature on our Facebook page.  Amy, since I know NOTHING about Facebook, could you elaborate a bit for the group?

Thanks!
Chris

Christopher M. Riggert
Stream Team Program
Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program Coordinator
Missouri Department of Conservation
P.O. Box 180

2901 W. Truman Blvd.
Jefferson City, MO  65102-0180
Phone: (573) 522-4115 ext. 3167
Fax: (573) 526-0990
Chris.Riggert@mdc.mo.gov
www.mostreamteam.org

 

From:
Date: Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 10:12 AM
Subject: RE:[volmonitor] Online macroinvertebrate identification tools

Hi everyone
check out this link:

http://midge.cfans.umn.edu/vsmivp/

It’s an electronic version based on a published text developed here in MN. It goes to the Family level.

Mary Karius
Hennepin County Environmental Services
701 Fourth Ave South, Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN 55415-1600
612-596-9129
mary.karius@co.hennepin.mn.us

 

From: Amy Meier
Date: Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 2:00 PM
Subject: RE:[volmonitor] Online macroinvertebrate identification tools

The “What’s that Bug” feature on Facebook (when time allows) is just a fun way to post photos of water quality indicators and let the general Facebook public take a crack at identifying it. We can get some pretty creative responses at times. I haven’t done one in a while, so if anyone would like to contribute photos, please feel free to send them to me or post them directly to our Facebook wall at www.facebook.com/mostreamteams with the tag “What’s that Bug?”.

Amy

Amy K. Meier
Stream Team Biologist
Missouri Department of Conservation
P.O. Box 180
2901 W. Truman Blvd
Jefferson City, MO 65109
(573) 522-4115 x3166
Amy.Meier@mdc.mo.gov
StreamTeam@mdc.mo.gov

 

Categories
Listserv

Low Order Stream Monitoring

Question

Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 16:30:08 +0000
From: Lucile Paquette
Subject: [volmonitor] best protocols and equipment

Hello,
I am looking for groups that are monitoring low-order streams near the Appalachian Trail. Specifically, I want to gather information about the protocols and test equipment or kits that are being used for these types of waterbodies in the Eastern higher elevations. All perspectives on these things are useful. I would like to hear what works and what does not, and why.
My ideal goal is to create or to find an existing protocol that is simple for volunteers to use (easily teachable and learnable), and equipment that is fairly robust (low maintenance) and accurate, yet portable and the lowest cost possible for these characteristics. In short, what has worked best for you?
Thank you for your feedback,
Lucile Paquette
Intern, Appalachian Trail Conservancy

Responses

Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 08:47:33 -0500
From: “Boward, Dan”
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] best protocols and equipment

Hi Lucile,
We here at MD DNR have been working with volunteers to collect stream
quality data since 2000. You can learn about our MD Stream Waders
Program here: http://dnr.maryland.gov/streams/streamwaders.asp .
We’ve collected some samples in the vicinity of the Trail in MD. Feel
free to come to one of our trainings next February to learn more. I’ll
put your email address on our list.
Regards,
Dan Boward
Maryland Department of Natural Resources
Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division
580 Taylor Ave.; C-2
Annapolis, Maryland 21401
410-260-8605 (voice)
410-260-8620 (fax)
dboward@dnr.state.md.us
http://www.dnr.state.md.us

 

Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 11:16:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Revital Katznelson

Lucile,
Here in California we have watershed groups that monitor a variety of waters, from the snow-melt of the Sierra to the brine of Salton Sea. As a member of the California State Water Resources Control Board’s 2000-2006 Clean Water Team I was able to develop a protocol system that accommodates this variety. If you want to select the monitoring methods that best fit your environment and resources, the Information Papers posted in the Clean Water Team guidance compendium may be helpful. For example, check out IP-3.1.4 to find out about the various methods to measure pH, and SOP-3.1.4.3 for specific guidance on Pocket pH meters.
The entire compendium is at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/swamp/cwt_guidance.shtml

CWT Guidance documents, or ‘how-to’ manuals, include Fact Sheets (presenting ecological significance and regulatory benchmark), Standard Operating Procedure (SOPs; step by step instructions), and Information Paper (method “menus” and principles). They all have an identifier (number ID) that corresponds to the section number in the compendium.
Good Luck,
Revital
==================
Revital Katznelson, Ph.D.
Environmental Scientist
Berkeley, California
revitalk@sbcglobal.net
510 406 8514

Categories
Listserv

Understanding Data Results

Question 1: What do the data from several drainage ways mean?  How can I evaluate it?

Question 2: What are the implications of biological impairment (beyond wildlife and stream biology itself)?

Question 3: Any comments regarding relating biological metrics to stressors would be greatly appreciated.

Question 1

I have several years of data from several drainage ways in the City of Arlington Texas. What does the data mean? How can I evaluate it? What is good water quality? Should I change my monitoring program to collect more or less data?

Where is a good guide to evaluating the data collected with a volunteer monitoring program? Evaluating the data in terms of is the water quality good or bad improving or declining etc.

Responses to Question 1

Hello Robert:

I thought I would address a few of your questions regarding the drainage way data your have. Obviously without having the data itself all I can do is direct you to resources for helping you evaluate the information you have.

I’m sure you have already done this, but the first step would be to look at the water quality standards as identified by Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/permitting/waterperm/wqstand/index.html#copies). These are generally in a narrative form, but do provide some numbers for dissolved oxygen for you to compare your data against. These standards will also help you to determine if your monitoring program is focusing on those parameters for which there are criteria, and if not, perhaps you can consider adding some of these parameters.

The best source for identifying water quality criteria on the federal level is USEPA (http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/standards/). This site will give you access to criteria for a wide range of parameters including biological, chemical and microbiological. Also look for the Texas nutrient criteria information at (http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/permitting/waterperm/wqstand/ncdawg.html).

Three other sources for assessing volunteer generated stream data are the USEPA Volunteer Stream Monitoring Manual (available on-line at http://www.epa.gov/owow/monitoring/volunteer/), River Network’s Living Waters document (http://www.rivernetwork.org/lw/) and Washington (State) Dept of Ecology’s A Citizen’s Guide to Understanding and Monitoring Lakes and Streams (http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/plants/management/joysmanual/index.html).

In terms of your monitoring program – the biggest question is to ask what your goals are, and whether the program is meeting those? Our factsheet Designing Your Monitoring Strategy… (http://www.uwex.edu/ces/csreesvolmon/Outreach/DesigningYourStrategy.pdf) may help you to determine that, as well as direct you to other resources.

If you have any questions after reviewing these sources, I would recommend contacting the TNRC and/or water quality experts at Texas Cooperative Extension. Also we would be happy to take another stab at answering some specific questions about the data or your monitoring program. Good luck!

 

Elizabeth Herron

Program Coordinator

URI Watershed Watch

Phone: 401-874-4552

Fax: 401-874-4561

Web: http://www.uri.edu/ce/wq/

Question 2

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:25:43 -0500
From: John Murphy
Subject: [volmonitor] Biological Impairment – So What?

November 16, 2008
Dear Fellow Monitors and Monitoring Program Coordinators,
Our program here in Central Virginia is six years old, and we’ve achieved a high level of credibility in our community. Few doubt the accuracy of our data or the veracity of our finding that most local streams fail to meet the Virginia benthic standard. But the question arising now is “what are the implications of biological impairment (beyond wildlife and stream biology itself)?”. Some quarters of the community want to know whether there are human economic or health implications.
I have not formally researched this question, and, in a sense, this post to EPA Volmon is an initiation of research. But I have a working familiarity with at least some of the literature, and my sense so far is that the correlations between biological impairment and direct, “first order” human health and economic costs are moderate, not strong. Streams that are badly biologically impaired, for instance, may often be non-swimmable, but streams that are moderately biologically impaired are often A-OK for recreation. Similarly, I am unaware of findings that show a strong correlation between biological condition and water treatment costs.
In our community, most streams are moderately biologically impaired, and some sectors of the community don’t find this alarming. If you would care to comment or direct me to literature addressing this issue, I would be grateful.

John Murphy
Director, StreamWatch
Office 434-923-8642
Cell 434-242-1145
johnmurphy@streamwatch.org
www.streamwatch.org

Responses to Question 2

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:20:00 -0600
From: Danelle Haake
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] Biological Impairment – So What?

John,
The implications of biological impairments are as varied as the streams that we monitor. To really know the human health implications, the economic losses to the community (recreational value, fishing), or the economics of remediating the system, we must know what is causing the biological impairment (or at least have a good idea). Possibly a fish kill several years ago removed resident fish species and a dam or culvert is preventing repopulation. Excess road salt may have washed into the stream, causing chronically or acutely toxic conditions. Excessive erosion from agricultural fields or construction sites may have filled pools and interstitial spaces, removing vital habitat. These examples would have minimal human health impacts, though they may decimate the aquatic community. Or the causes could be toxic conditions (e.g., excessive pesticides, human releases of hormones and pharmaceuticals, heavy metals) or pathogens. These could have human health implications. I’ve used the EPA Stressor Identification protocol (an adapted version) to identify causes of impairments in Iowa streams. There will be an upcoming issue of the journal Human and Ecological Risk Assessment (HERA) dedicated to stressor ID case studies. Let me know if you would like furter information.

Danelle Haake
Deer Creek Consulting, LLC
www.deercreekconsultingllc.com
River des Peres Watershed Coalition
www.riverdesperes.org

 

Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:42:14 -0600
From: “Clayton, Christopher R – DNR”

John and All,
Here’s a link to a review of recent research linking economic cost and eutrophication of surface waters nationwide:
Economic damages from nutrient pollution create a “toxic debt”
A U.S. analysis of nutrient pollution in freshwater reveals annual losses of at least $4 billion, mostly from dips in lakefront property values and loss of recreational use.
http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/sample.cgi/esthag/asap/html/es803044n.html
Click on the second link in the review text to get a copy of the study. By the way, the study addresses several costs, including the treatment of drinking water.
Chris

Chris Clayton
Coordinator
Citizen Based Stream Monitoring
River Alliance of Wisconsin and WDNR
306 E. Wilson, 2W
Madison, WI 53703
608/257-2424 x120

 

Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 10:31:42 -0500
From: Simon Gruber
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Biological Impairment – So What?

This is a very important topic and question. I don’t have any specific information at hand. I believe that while it may not be well documented in controlled scientific studies, it is prudent and rational to base management and restoration policies on an assumption that there is a direct link between the health of stream biota and of people who live with and near these resources, and of people who live downstream. This approach follows the precautionary principle, which is apparently a guiding framework in other countries (especially parts of Europe) but less so in the US. This principle places the burden of proof on claims that something is safe, rather than requiring a demonstration of harm before taking action. This viewpoint should also apply to economic values and impacts. Initiatives to monitor and protect ambient water quality will definitely be strengthened and their usefulness improved through stronger links between the water quality sector and organizations and people working on public health issues. If anyone has any information or contacts on existing partnerships along these lines please share.

Simon Gruber

 

Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:49:42 +1300
From: Phil
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] Biological Impairment – So What?

I’ve hesitated to respond to this but there are important concepts involved.
We protect the environment to protect ourselves, not due to a sense of altruism or good nature. Declining environmental quality is indicated by biological impairment in streams, although the ultimate source can be industry, agriculture, storm water or other source of contaminants. But when we see deterioration in streams, we are getting proof of system decline. This proof is needed to get action from the vested interests causing the problem. Without proof of impact, the people behind the sources can’t really be forced to clean up.

Phil Ross
New Zealand

 

Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 07:51:38 -0500
From: John Murphy

Dear VolMon Colleagues,

A few weeks back I submitted a post entitled “Biological Impairment – So What?” in which I noted that our monitoring program in Central Virginia is prompting some community members to ask about the implications of biological degradation. (Full text of my post is pasted to the end of this email). I asked VolMon members to comment on or give examples of economic and health correlates of biological impairment. I received a number of interesting responses; the digest below captures representative examples. I have slotted the excerpts into two categories: “QUANTITATIVE” and “QUALITTIVE”. One respondent provided some references which are also pasted below.

The VolMon authors didn’t necessarily send their posts to the whole listserv, so I don’t give their names here.

Thank you for your thoughts and information!

John Murphy
StreamWatch
Charlottesville, Virginia

*****************

QUANTITATIVE

1) An often cited example, which comes from the Chichilnisky and Heal 1998 paper (see REFERENCES below) is the comparison between the cost of technological replacements for the provision of clean, safe drinking water in one watershed (Catskill watershed, New York). Costs for water treatment were estimated at US$6-8 billion, leading municipalities to purchase the entire watershed to perform this ecosystem service for US$1-1.5 billion instead.

2) Lands in permanent vegetative cover have been estimated to reduce the cost of filtering sediment in municipal drinking water by $5.60 per hectare per year, and phosphorus reduction costs by $23.30 per hectare per year.

3) Economic damages from nutrient pollution create a “toxic debt”
A U.S. analysis of nutrient pollution in freshwater reveals annual losses of at least $4 billion, mostly from dips in lakefront property values and loss of recreational use.
http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/sample.cgi/esthag/asap/html/es803044n.html

Click on the link in the review text to get a copy of the study. By the way, the study addresses several costs, including the treatment of drinking water.

*********************

QUALITATIVE

1) The implications of biological impairments are as varied as the streams that we monitor. To really know the human health implications, the economic losses to the community (recreational value, fishing), or the economics of remediating the system, we must know what is causing the biological impairment (or at least have a good idea). Possibly a fish kill several years ago removed resident fish species and a dam or culvert is preventing repopulation. Excess road salt may have washed into the stream, causing chronically or acutely toxic conditions. Excessive erosion from agricultural fields or construction sites may have filled pools and interstitial spaces, removing vital habitat. These examples would have minimal human health impacts, though they may decimate the aquatic community. Or the causes could be toxic conditions (e.g., excessive pesticides, human releases of hormones and pharmaceuticals, heavy metals) or pathogens. These could have human health implications.

2) . . . it is prudent and rational to base management and restoration policies on an assumption that there is a direct link between the health of stream biota and of people who live with and near these resources, and of people who live downstream. This approach follows the precautionary principle, which is apparently a guiding framework in other countries (especially parts of Europe) but less so in the US. This principle places the burden of proof on claims that something is safe, rather than requiring a demonstration of harm before taking action. This viewpoint should also apply to economic values and impacts.
*************

REFERENCES
Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R.S., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg,K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P., van den Belt, M. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253-260.

Daily, G.C. (Ed.), 1997. Nature’s Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, DC.

Daily, G.C., T. Soderquist, S. Aniyar, K. Arrow, P. Dasgupta, P.R. Ehrlich, C. Folke, A.M. Jansson, B.O. Jansson, N. Kautsky, S. Levin, J. Lubchenco, K.G. Maler, S. David,D. Starrett, D. Tilman, and B. Walker. 2000. The value of nature and the nature of value. Science 289:395-396.

Chichilnisky, G. and G. Heal. 1998. Economic returns from the biosphere. Nature 391:629-630.


John Murphy
Director, StreamWatch
Office 434-923-8642
Cell 434-242-1145
johnmurphy@streamwatch.org
www.streamwatch.org

 

Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 11:02:39 -0500
From: Simon Gruber

John, Thanks for compiling these responses. One clarification: the Catskill watershed example cited, which is part of NY City’s water supply system, is indeed a major example of watershed protection as an alternative to filtration. But while this watershed protection program does include outright acquisition of significant land areas (only from willing sellers, on a voluntary basis), the majority of the land area in the watershed is still privately owned. The watershed protection and filtration avoidance program has many other components designed to protect water quality, with land acquisition being just one. Based on progress during the first 10 years, EPA recently renewed and extended the filtration avoidance determination for another 10 years. The dollar figure you listed, somewhere over $1B, is the cost of all the measures implemented by the City, state and other entities for land acquisition, upgrade of wastewater systems, stormwater management, come economic development assistance in the watershed, agricultural best practices, and other measures. Simon Gruber

Question 3

Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 11:24:56 -0400
From: John Murphy
Subject: [volmonitor] relating biological metrics to specific stressors

Colleagues-

Our stream monitoring program in central Virginia is looking into the feasibility of employing benthic data to indicate presence and effect intensity of specific stressors (e.g. sediment). Karr and others allude to biomonitoring’s application in this vein, but I have not encountered a guidance document. We are aware of some of the general theoretical relationships between taxa and stressors (e.g.hydropsychidae and excess fine particulate organic matter), but, again, we are not aware of published literature we can pull off the shelf and use to guide an analysis. We’ll be exploring the literature, but I thought it would also make sense to post the question here.

Any comments or suggestions would be appreciated.

Sincerely,

John Murphy

John Murphy, Director
StreamWatch
streamwatch@cstone.net
office: (434) 923-8642
cell: (434) 242-1145
www.streamwatch.org

Responses to Question 3

Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 14:02:28 -0400
From: “J. Kelly Nolan, Capital Region Coordinator”
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] relating biological metrics to specific stressors

Hello John- NYS DEC uses a community similarity method called Impact Source Determination (ISD) to determine the most likely stressor that may be occurring at a site. They have developed several models which help determine the most likely stressor that may be occurring at a site. One of the stressors is siltation. I now determine ISD for all my biomonitoring surveys.

There is a book titled Biological Response Signatures and the EPA has a written discussion on it at this web site:
http://www.epa.gov/bioindicators/html/brsig.html

You can also find the book at Amazon.com

I hope this helps and perhaps we can talk more about this at the macroinvertebrate workshop in February.

Kelly

 

Alice Mayio
Volunteer water monitoring
10/11/2005 10:15

John,

EPA’s Office of Science and Technology published a guidance document a few years ago, the Stressor Identification Guidance Document (EPA 822-B-00-025).

It’s available on the web at http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/biocriteria/stressors/stressorid.html

(this page has a fact sheet and a link to the pdf file) and (if it seems to be what you need) you should also be able to order a hard copy from EPA’s Water Resource Center at center.water-resouce@epa.gov.

This would appear to be what you’re looking for.

Alice Mayio
USEPA (4503T)
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 566-1184

Street Address for visitors/deliveries:
EPA West
1301 Constitution Avenue, NW
Room 7424B
Washington, DC 20004

 

Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:22:23 -0400
From: Toth.David@epamail.epa.gov
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] relating biological metrics to specific stressors

Dear Alice,

The document “Stressor Identification Guidance Document”, 822/B-00/025
can also be ordered from www.epa.gov/nscep.

David Toth

 

From: ANNE MILLER

Below is the link to the USGS publication regarding aquatic
macroinvertebrates and nutrients.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/pp1722/

In case the link doesn’t work, the publication is “Nutrient Concentrations and Their Relations to the Biotic Integrity of Wadeable Streams in Wisconsin” by Dale M. Robertson1, David J. Graczyk, Paul J. Garrison, Lizhu Wang, Gina LaLiberte, and Roger Bannerman. USGS Publication 1772.

Anne

Categories
Listserv

Homemade Water Monitoring Equipment

Question 1: Would any of you have knowledge of how to make a homemade Kemmerer type sampler for lowering off of bridges and the like?

Question 2: We are looking to construct integrated water samplers for lakes, or if there are inexpensive commercially available integrated samplers.

Question 3: Do any of you have good or bad experience with basket samplers? Suggestions for design of the samplers, or anything we should watch out for? How have your volunteers reacted to them?

Question 4: Does anyone have good instructions for building a macroinvertebrate aquarium?

Question 1

Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 11:02:30 -0400
From: “Jan (Hosier) Sneddon”
Subject: [volmonitor] Fwd: seeking homemade water sampler

Greetings, handy water samplers!

Would any of you have knowledge of how to make a homemade Kemmerer type sampler for lowering off of bridges and the like?

Blueprints would be welcome! 🙂

jan

Responses to Question 1

Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 08:32:27 -0700
From: Eleanor Ely
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Fwd: seeking homemade water sampler

See “Low-Cost Van Dorn Water Sampler” on page 23 of the Fall 1994 issue (vol 6 no 2) of The Volunteer Monitor, and also the second sampler described under “Collecting an Integrated Sample” on page 17 of the Fall 2000 issue (vol 12 no 2). (Back issues are available electronically at www.epa.gov/owow/volunteer/vm_index.html. Online versions of issues before 2002 have a weird layout because they are not PDFs, but you should still be able to find the information.)

A request: Could anyone replying directly to Jan rather than the whole listserv please copy me on their message?

Thank you.

Ellie

Eleanor Ely
Editor, The Volunteer Monitor Newsletter
50 Benton Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94112

 

Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 12:39:06 -0400
From: “Schenk, Ann”
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Fwd: seeking homemade water sampler

With regard to skewing the DO measurement by using a bucket/ surface water sample, wouldn’t you aerate the sample as soon as you emptied the sampler into another container for DO measurement? Not knowing your DO measurement method (Clark cell, optical probe, Winkler titration), it is hard to say if the collection method would have an impact greater than the measuring method’s accuracy. You’d have to do a lot of splashing and sloshing to exceed the Clark cell accuracy of most meters (anywhere from 0.2 mg/L to 0.5 mg/L for the better cells). Don’t remember off the top of my head the Winkler accuracy and precision. What I do remember is that the quality of the reagents and lighting to see the color change is important to that method.

If you have to have non-surface DO, then, yes, a collection bottle is needed.
I just hope they rinse the bucket in stream water if they are also collecting nutrient chemistry samples.

Just my 2 cents. 🙂
Ann Schenk
Natural Resource Biologist III
Maryland Department of Natural Resources
580 Taylor Ave., C-2
Annapolis, MD 21401
phone: 410-260-8609

 

Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 13:19:12 -0400
From: Jeffrey Schloss
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] Fwd: seeking homemade water sampler

With regard to collecting a proper DO sample for titration. If you carefully deploy a bucket that is fitted with a spout and tubing that allows you to fill a BOD bottle (specially designed not to trap air bubbles when closed) from the bottom up- and you count how long it takes to fill the bottle up and allow for 2 to 3 full volumes of water to flush through you should have a reasonably uninfluenced/disturbed sample to work with. Just remember that this sample only represents the surface water conditions if you are dealing with a system that has any temperature, current, or density (do to dissolved solids/salts) stratifications. So it would be fine for a mixed system.

Jeff Schloss
Director, NH Lakes Lay Monitoring Program
University of New Hampshire
Center for Freshwater Biology
and UNH Cooperative Extension

 

Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 00:33:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kimberly Rinard
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] Fwd: seeking homemade water sampler

Here is a relatively inexpensive unit available thru Ben Meadows. There are a few others on their website also.
I would think that at $67 for the sampler it would actually be cheaper to buy the sampler until than to try to make one (unless
it does not suit your needs)

http://www.benmeadows.com/store/Water_Testing_and_Sampling/Water_Sampling/Water_Samplers_and_Accessories/2380/224195/?isredirect=true

Good luck
Kim Rinard
Granby,Mass

Question 2

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 10:37:04 -0700
From: “Williams, Gene”
Subject: [volmonitor] Integrated Water Sampler

We are looking for plans/designs for constructing integrated water samplers for lakes. Or, if there are commercially available integrated samplers that are inexpensive, we would also be interested in that.

Also, if you have used integrated samplers and have opinions on how well the instruments worked, I would appreciate that.

Thanks.

Gene Williams
Snohomish County Public Works
Surface Water Management
3000 Rockefeller Avenue, M/S 607
Everett, WA 98201-4046
(425) 388-3464 x4563
gene.williams@co.snohomish.wa.us or
gene.williams@snoco.org

Responses to Question 2

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:24:23 -0500
From: “Thorpe, Anthony Paul”
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Integrated Water Sampler

Gene,

We participated in the EPA Lake Survey last year, and they (EPA) gave us these PVC samplers
that worked fairly well. I made a rough sketch, but you’ll need some PVC (I think it might have
been 3 inch…), a connector piece, a rubber stopper and a stopcock valve that can attach to the PVC
pipe you use. EPA gave us a 6 foot sampler, but we cut it in half and added threaded connectors in
the middle for easier transport and for sampling turbid water bodies.

http://www.lmvp.org/Misc/integratedsampler.gif

You lower it into the water with the valve open, cap the top when it’s in the water, then raise it
until the valve us just under the surface. Then close the valve and bring it on board your boat.

Open the valve and the water will trickle rapidly into your sample container. Remove the stopper and
the water falls out very quickly.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask. I can even take a couple of snapshots if you’d like.

Tony

 

PS: I also found this while searching Google Images: http://dnr.wi.gov/lakes/CLMN/equipment.html
Tony Thorpe

Coordinator, Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program
302 ABNR University of Missouri-Columbia
Columbia, MO 65211
Phone: 1-800-895-2260
Fax: 573-884-5070
www.lmvp.org

 

Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 06:21:02 -0400
From: Jo Latimore
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Integrated Water Sampler

Gene,

Here in Michigan we developed an integrated sampler that we use for volunteer chlorophyll
monitoring in our statewide Cooperative Lakes Monitoring Program. It can be built at reasonable
cost and is easy for volunteers to operate effectively. I will send you the plans separately as an
attachment (and would be happy to share with others who are interested – Editor’s note, these are included below).

CLMP_Chlrophyll_Equipment_Instructions (9 KB pdf file)

CLMP_Chlorophyll_Equipment_Assembly (205 KB pdf file)

CLMP Chlorophyll Sampler Image(33 KB pdf file)

Chlorophyll Procedures 2008 (53 KB pdf file)

(Editor’s note: You can also visit the CLMP site for more information: http://www.micorps.net/ and look at this section: lake monitoring/CLMP documents)

Cheers,

Jo

Jo A. Latimore, Ph.D.
Lake, Stream, & Watershed Outreach
Department of Fisheries and Wildlife
Michigan State University
13 Natural Resources
East Lansing, MI 48824-1222
(517) 432-1491
latimor1@msu.edu

Question 3

From: Charles River Watershed Assoc. [mailto:charles@crwa.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:33 AM
To: Volunteer water monitoring
Cc: ‘Julie Wood’
Subject: [volmonitor] Experiences with basket samplers?

Hello all,

Charles River Watershed Association has a seventy-person volunteer monthly river water quality monitoring program. We currently use buckets to take samples (mostly off bridges), which are transferred into sample bottles. However, we are in process of switching over to basket samplers so that the water can be collected directly, without the potential for contamination from the bucket.

We have some ideas about the design of these basket samplers, but are still determining exactly what they will look like and be made of – we will be constructing them ourselves. Do any of you have good or bad experience with basket samplers? Suggestions for design of the samplers, or anything we should watch out for? How have your volunteers reacted to them?

Any input would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks,

Rebecca

Rebecca Scibek Wickham
Outreach Coordinator/Office Manager
Charles River Watershed Association
190 Park Road
Weston, MA 02493
Phone 781-788-0007 x200
Fax 781-788-0057
www.charlesriver.org

Responses to Question 3

From: Danielle Donkersloot [mailto:Danielle.Donkersloot@dep.state.nj.us]
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 1:06 PM
To: charles@crwa.org
Cc: jwood@crwa.org; eburres@waterboards.ca.gov
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] Experiences with basket samplers?

Hello: In 2006 at the National Water Quality Monitoring Conference
I saw this bucket that the CA SWAMP teams use for monitoring and I was
amazed. They are simple to make, easy to use and they work. I have cc’ed
Erick, Regional Citizen Montioring Coordinator, because he was kind enough
to bring his equipment to the conference and I attached some photos. Hope this helps.

Danielle

Bucket Sampler 2Bucket Sampler 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: Erick Burres [mailto:eburres@waterboards.ca.gov]

Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 4:41 PM
To: charles@crwa.org; Danielle Donkersloot
Cc: jwood@crwa.org
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] Experiences with basket samplers?

The Clean Water Team drafted an article on how to make the bucket sampler
but the newsletter was never created. During lunch I put together this
draft SOP (196 KB pdf file). The bucket is out on loan so I had to use some old pictures I
found. If this is helpful please let me know. Perhaps it can be made
better and included on the CWT Website.

Erick Burres
Citizen Monitoring Coordinator
SWRCB-SWAMP-Clean Water Team

eburres@waterboards.ca.gov

Desk (213) 576-6788
Cell (213) 712-6862
Fax (213) 576-6686

Clean Water Team c/o LARWQCB
320 W 4th Street
Suite200
Los Angeles, CA 90013

 

From: Erick Burres [mailto:eburres@waterboards.ca.gov]
Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 10:30 PM
To: charles@crwa.org; Danielle.Donkersloot@dep.state.nj.us
Cc: jwood@crwa.org
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] Experiences with basket samplers?

If you would like to view the entire SWAMP Field Methods Course or refer
people to a video, here is the Course’s link,
http://water101.waterboards.ca.gov/swamp/qapp_advisor/FieldMethods/start.htm
l
.

We would like to update the CD but is has been of a low priority and there
just aren’t any funds to do so. It hasalso been a struggle to get the Course
online and advertised. Fortunately it was included in the SWAMP QA Advisor.
The Advisor can also help your group prepare QAPPs, its inclusion of the
Course has been kept quite.

Sincerely,

Erick Burres
Citizen Monitoring Coordinator
SWRCB- Clean Water Team

 

From: Charles River Watershed Assoc. [mailto:charles@crwa.org]
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 3:26 PM
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] Experiences with basket samplers?

We’ve created a different type of sampler using a metal basket, based on a MassDEP prototype. I’ve also
attached a photo of the sampler we are currently piloting.

Thanks,
Rebecca Scibek Wickham

Bucket Sampler

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 4

Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 12:32:24 -0600
From: VBojic@lc.edu
Subject: [volmonitor] stream aquarium

Does anyone have good instructions for building a macroinvertebrate aquarium? If so, please send them my way.

Thanks!

Vera Bojic, RiverWatch Program Coordinator
National Great Rivers Research & Education Center
Lewis and Clark Community College

Responses to Question 4

Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 15:13:50 -0500
From: “Cooke, Ken (EPPC DEP DOW)”
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] stream aquarium

One product I have seen in place that creates an aquarium environment for benthic macroinvertebrates are Mike Strohm’s Creeklab.

http://www.teachwater.com/CreekLab.html

He has some educational materials that go with the product as well.

Thanks

Ken Cooke

KY Water Watch

 

Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 15:53:04 -0500
From: Mayio.Alice@epamail.epa.gov
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] stream aquarium

There are some simple instructions from the IL Natural History Survey for setting up a classroom-type macroinvertebrate aquarium (including adding a submersible undergravel filter to simulate streamflow) at
http://www.inhs.uiuc.edu/chf/outreach/downloads/Macroinvertebrate%20Aquarium.pdf

but I don’t think it says anything about keeping the water cold once you introduce the macros, so I wonder how long they’d last. Assuming they weren’t eating each other anyway.

Alice Mayio
USEPA (4503T)
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 566-1184

Street Address for visitors/deliveries:
EPA West, Room 7424B
1301 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20004

 

Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 16:38:19 -0500
From: David Kirschtel
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] stream aquarium

I’ve been playing around for the past few years with an circular table-top stream (technical term: re-entrant flume) using an angled airlift tube to drive the current.

Basic design is a large clear acrylic ice bucket (straight-sided). The airlift tube is a section of flexible pvc tubing (to fit the curve of the outside wall), angle should be about 45deg., stick it onto the side of the tank with small suction cups.

In the center of the tank silicone a 2L soda bottle – top cut off and small holes in the bottom and top to allow water to flow through. This is to channelize the flow and keep the velocity up also, velocity would drop to zero at the center anyway.

In the warm weather you can place a 1L soda bottle filled with water and frozen in the center as “refrigeration” to keep the temp down.

Add slimy rocks in the bottom of the tank. Illuminate with desktop halogen lamp. You’re good to go.

Been able to keep a few mayflies to hatch. Also, in both tanks that I’ve set up, I’ve wound up with healthy populations of freshwater hydra.

I think that I’ve got some photos at home that I can post tomorrow, as well as some video of inverts (mostly mayflies) , if anyone is interested.

-David
======================================================================== ========
David Kirschtel, Ph.D.
National Ecological Observatory Network – National Project Office
1444 I St, NW, #200 – Washington, DC 20005
email: kirschte@msu.edu – tel: 202.628.1500×240

 

Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:55:33 -0500
From: David Kirschtel
Subject: Re: [volmonitor] stream aquarium

Just tried to send a set of images to the list but the message was rejected by the listserv because it contained attachments. For the time being I’ll have to send them directly to individuals, until I can find some web space.

Send me an email message and I’ll send a set of images to you, zipped. I have image sets of both the tank and some closeups of some of some of the insect larvae. Also have a short QT movie of two
planaria attacking a first instar mayfly (1.6MB)

So far Karen Anderson and Chris Andersen have requested images — I’ll send those out right after this message.

 

– David

======================================================================== ========
David Kirschtel, Ph.D.
National Ecological Observatory Network – National Project Office
1444 I St, NW, #200 – Washington, DC 20005
email: kirschte@msu.edu – tel: 202.628.1500×240

 

Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 15:50:55 -0600
From: Kris Stepenuck
Subject: RE: [volmonitor] stream aquarium

Hi

There’s one I am aware of called Carry Creek. Here’s a web link to it: http://www.carrycreek.com/

Cheers,

Kris Stepenuck