QUALITY ASSURANCE
PROJECT PLAN
by
Jessica Tausend Baccus
Edward A. Chadd
Natural Resources Division
Clallam County Department
of Community Development (DCD)
(360) 417-2281
Approvals:
____________________ ________ _________________ ________
Jessica
Tausend Baccus Date Edward A. Chadd Date
Project
Co-Manager Project
Co-Manager
_____________________ _______
_________________ ________
Bob
Martin Date Rob Plotnikoff Date
Clallam
RECOMMENDED
CITATION:
J. T. Baccus
and E. A. Chadd.
2000. Streamkeepers of Clallam
ADDITIONAL
COPIES:
For additional copies of this report, contact:
Streamkeepers of
Clallam County
Department of Community Development
360-417-2281
streamkeepers@co.clallam.wa.us
DISTRIBUTION LIST
|
Name |
|
Agency |
Telephone Number |
|
Rod |
Fleck |
City of |
(360) 374-5412 x 2 |
|
Brad |
Collins |
City of |
(360) 417-4806 |
|
Jim |
Bay |
City of |
(360) 683-4908 |
|
Joe |
Holtrop |
Clallam Conservation District |
(360) 452-1912 x 103 |
|
Andy |
Brastad |
Clallam |
(360) 417-2415 |
|
Joel |
Freudenthal |
Clallam |
(360) 417-2423 |
|
Cathy |
Lear |
Clallam |
(360) 417-2361 |
|
Ann |
Soule |
Clallam |
(360) 417-2424 |
|
Val |
|
Clallam |
(360) 417-2423 |
|
Cathy |
Lucero |
|
(360) 417-2442 |
|
Hansi |
Hals |
Environmental Consultant |
(360) 452-0557 |
|
Gretchen |
Hayslip |
EPA Region 10 |
(206) 553-1685 |
|
Sue |
McCarthy |
EPA Region 10 |
(206) 553-2598 |
|
Lyn |
Muench |
|
(360) 681-4631 |
|
Mike |
McHenry |
|
(360) 457-4012 x 14 |
|
Mike |
Haggerty |
Makah Tribe |
(360) 645-3151 |
|
John |
Cambalik |
North Olympic Peninsula Lead Entity Group |
(360) 417-2430 |
|
Aquatic
Ecologist |
C/o
Cat Hoffman |
Olympic
National Park |
(360)
452-0321 |
|
Katie |
Krueger |
Quileute Tribe |
(360) 374-5695 x27 |
|
James |
Karr |
SalmonWeb |
(206) 459-0788 |
|
Derek |
Booth |
UW Center for
Urban Water Resources. Mgmt |
(206) 543-7923 |
|
Chris
|
Hempleman |
Washington
Department of Ecology |
(360)
407-6329 |
|
Annie |
Phillips |
Washington
Department of Ecology |
(360)
407-6408 |
|
Rob
|
Plotnikoff |
Washington
Department of Ecology |
(360)
407-6687 |
|
Teresa |
Powell |
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife |
(360) 374-9440 |
|
Tim |
Rymer |
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife |
(360) 457-2719 |
PROJECT
ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITY
|
Name |
Affiliation |
Project Title |
Telephone Number |
|
Jessica Tausend Baccus |
Streamkeepers of |
Streamkeepers Co-Manager |
(360) 417-2281 |
|
Edward A Chadd |
Streamkeepers of |
Co-Manager & QA
Officer |
(360) 417-2281 |
|
Arthur Frost |
A.J. Frost, Insect
Identification |
Laboratory Services,
Macroinvertebrates |
(360) 457-4594 |
|
Tania Busch-Weak |
|
Laboratory Services,
fecal coliform, e coli & nitrates |
(360) 417-2328 |
|
Wease Bollman |
Rhithron Biological
Associates |
Laboratory Services,
Macroinvertebrates |
(406) 721-1977 |
PROBLEM
DEFINITION
While
numerous studies have been conducted on various streams, there is little
consistent baseline water quality data available that can be used to identify
specific ongoing problems or be used for planning purposes. In addition, many
restoration projects lack a monitoring component to track project success.
Furthermore,
watershed management plans for
In
1996, the Eight Streams Project (a 3-year Washington State Centennial Clean
Water Fund grant program administered by Washington State University
Cooperative Extension) initiated a volunteer stream monitoring program on
streams in
Streamkeepers
of Clallam County’s volunteer monitoring program provides a suite of monitoring
protocols, and a body of trained data collectors, to document the baseline,
ambient, physical, chemical and biological conditions of surface water streams
in
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION
Introduction
Streamkeepers
of Clallam County is the County’s watershed public involvement program. Its
purpose is to involve residents in caring for watersheds by monitoring local
streams, providing credible and useful data that can help guide management
decisions and improve watershed stewardship.
The primary job of a
Streamkeepers volunteer is to perform quarterly monitoring at established sites
on the stream whose team they have joined. In addition, volunteers may choose
to join special project teams to help one of our partner agencies obtain stream
data, and/or perform an annual Streamwalk that takes a broader view of their
stream.
Data collected during quarterly
monitoring provides baseline information about stream conditions, helps track
changes over time, and provides additional information about the character of
The
data produced by this program will be entered and stored in a computerized
database established by Clallam County DCD. It will be shared with all of our
partners on request. Streamkeepers is not the primary end user for its data.
Rather, our intent is to collect the data and make it available to those who
can most use it. Streamkeepers staff,
together with volunteers and technical advisors, may analyze the data in
various ways, such as comparing it to state water quality standards. They will write and distribute an annual
report by June of each succeeding year. Quarterly data summaries will be
provided to partners and others on request following each monitoring session.
Monitoring Program Objectives
Streamkeepers’
primary aim is to provide meaningful, credible stream health data to
grant-funded programs, professional resource managers, local elected officials,
and citizens of
Streamkeepers’
monitoring objectives are:
·
Define
and document baseline physical, chemical and biological conditions of local
streams
·
Measure
spatial and temporal variability of stream attributes
·
Provide
information to assist in watershed planning, management, restoration and
adaptive management
Program Components
1) Long-term
Ambient Monitoring
·
Regularly
scheduled field sampling events to collect data on 23 parameters of physical,
chemical, and biological stream health at established monitoring reaches on
selected streams.
·
An
annual Streamwalk -- a qualitative assessment of numerous spots along any
stream of interest to a Streamkeepers volunteer
The
primary goal of Streamkeepers’ ambient monitoring component is to collect
long-term information to refine knowledge of stream conditions. A baseline of stream biological, chemical and
physical conditions helps local governments and watershed councils in
implementing water quality and stream habitat improvement programs. In addition, federal agencies and governments
can use stream biological, physical and chemical information to evaluate the
present condition of water resources within their jurisdictions and assist
management decisions to preserve existing fish and wildlife populations and to
restore water resources to their potential.
2) Special Project Work
·
Special
project work, generally applying one or more Streamkeepers protocols to one or
more sites or projects at the request of a partner entity.
The
primary goal of special project work is to meet the objectives specified for
the particular project and/or agency. Special
projects undertaken in a given year are identified in that year’s volunteer
workscope. Project goals, data quality
objectives, and any protocols outside the scope of Streamkeepers’ standard 23
parameters and protocols are identified in the most current Streamkeepers
program update.
Site Selection
1) Long-term
Ambient Monitoring
Streamkeepers’
monitoring focuses on wadeable streams, most of which arise in the foothills of
mountains and are of relatively short length—often just a few miles. In streams we monitor, we try to establish
three or more reaches: ideally, one at or near the mouth, one in a developed
area, and one above the developed areas.
This arrangement allows some comparison between stream characteristics
at different elevations and levels of human impact. The exact location of a monitoring reach will
depend on characteristics specific to each creek (including access, owner
permission, creek history, etc.) Because we are an ongoing program that wants
to meet our stated goals over a long period of time, and because one of our
primary aims is to be responsive to the monitoring needs of local streams, the
specific suite of parameters and sites may change over time. Specific streams
and reaches monitored are reviewed annually and may be adjusted each year,
according to the recommendations of Streamkeepers’ technical advisors and
availability of volunteers. When
streams, reaches and monitoring parameters are adjusted, Streamkeepers will
issue an update.
Ambient
monitoring reaches are selected using the following criteria:
·
Reasonable
and safe access by volunteers.
·
Publicly
owned land or permission of landowner to access and mark sites.
·
Giving
a representative view of the stream as a whole and typical for its location in
the watershed.
·
At
least 165’ upstream or 660’ downstream of bank alterations such as bridges, riprap, etc., if possible.
·
Containing
both pools and riffles, if possible.
·
Above
saltwater and tidal influence.
·
Located
at least one half-mile apart, if possible.
2) Special
Project Work
Special
project monitoring reaches are selected by the initiating partner agency, to
meet their program’s objectives.
Annual
Schedule
|
|
J |
F |
M |
A |
M |
J |
J |
A |
S |
O |
N |
D |
|
Volunteer
Recruitment & Training |
|
|
|
|
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
|
|
|
Regular
Ambient Monitoring |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
X |
X |
|
|
|
Grab
Sample Team Monitoring |
X |
|
|
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
Data
Entry |
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
X |
X |
|
|
Data
Summaries |
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
X |
X |
|
|
|
Macroinvertebrate
Sampling |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
X |
|
|
|
Lab
Analysis, macroinvertebrates |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
Lab
Analysis, grab samples |
X |
|
|
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
Program
Review and Workscope Development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
X |
X |
|
Special
Project Work |
--As
Needed: schedule worked out with project proponents -- |
|||||||||||
DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES
(Data Quality Objectives
Table)
Accuracy
Streamkeepers’ protocols were developed through extensive
consultation with published protocols as well as local and regional habitat
professionals and/or monitoring specialists.
All protocols will be followed as written to limit sources of bias. Measurement accuracy will be optimized
through the use of properly maintained and calibrated field equipment: Table 1
identifies special equipment used for monitoring. Triplicate readings will be taken for
turbidity, rounded to nearest whole number.
Air and water temperature will be read to the nearest 0.1 ° C; DO saturation to
nearest 1%; DO concentration to nearest 0.1 mg/L; conductivity to nearest whole
number. Water quality samples for fecal
coliform, e coli (and nitrates, when an accurate reading is needed) are analyzed
by a professional, accredited laboratory.
A professional taxonomist conducts macroinvertebrate identification in
order to maintain confidence in the data set.
Secondary identification is conducted by a professional laboratory.
Precision
Measurement
precision will be estimated through replicate chemical water quality
measurements (pH, DO, water temperature, nitrate-nitrogen, turbidity, and
conductivity) at one randomly selected site per stream per monitoring
session. For macroinvertebrate sampling,
three replicates are collected at each sample site. A professional laboratory
reidentifies 10% of all macroinvertebrate replicates. Water quality grab sample
teams collect one replicate per monitoring effort.
Representativeness
Monitoring
sites are selected to be representative of the stream (see site selection
criteria). Chemical water quality
samples will be collected at or near the center of the stream channel where
water is well mixed and most representative of ambient
conditions. Representativeness is further assured for
temperature, DO and conductivity by maintaining the probe in the stream until a
stable reading is achieved; for turbidity, three sub-samples are taken for
further representativeness. Permanent cross-section
monuments are established across a riffle, run or glide, preferably at a fairly
straight and even stretch of stream.
Substrate measurements are performed at a channel-spanning riffle or
run, at a point where the bottom appears relatively homogeneous. For
macroinvertebrate collection, volunteers collect 3 replicates per sample. We
sample in the middle of the channel in a riffle habitat. If riffles are not available, we use a glide
or the fastest part of the stream. The
purpose of riffle sampling is to collect a standard sample from a common and
easily identified habitat that can be compared to other riffle samples across
the region and state (Fore, Paulsen & O’Laughlin, in press; Karr 1999).
Each replicate is comprised of 3 sub-replicates, which are combined to be more
generally reflective of the entire riffle and to strive for a minimum of 500
macroinvertebrates per replicate.
Comparability
This
program will ensure comparability with similar projects by adhering to commonly
accepted protocols and procedures wherever possible and by freely sharing the
specific field procedures we have developed.
In developing our list of 23 parameters and then choosing the field
collection procedures, we worked closely with the local experts who have a
vested interest in comparing our project results with other programs both local
and state-wide. The macroinvertebrate
protocol is designed specifically for comparability with other monitoring
projects across the region (Karr 1998).
See Data Quality Objectives Table for a complete list of parameters
monitored, methods used and original sources of protocols.
Completeness
There
are no legal or compliance uses anticipated for Streamkeepers data. In addition, there is no fraction of the
planned data that must be collected to fulfill a statistical
criteria. We aim to fulfill at
least 90% of the site visits projected unless unanticipated weather events or
safety issues prevent sampling. Occasionally volunteers are unavailable to
monitor their assigned streams; whenever possible, staff will assign alternate
teams and/or individuals to complete the data collection. Custodial sample loss
will be minimized with sturdy sample storage vessels and adequate labeling of
each vessel. Sample vessel type and
labeling information are described in the field procedures section of the
Manual. If the validity of the
information for the sample is in question, the sample may be excluded from
analysis.
Data
Quality Levels correspond with Washington Department of Ecology’s Levels
described below (taken from Freshwater Monitoring Considerations, Ecology
Publication #96-2014-WQ&FA):
|
DQ Level |
QA/QC protocols required
by Ecology |
Examples of Activities |
Use of Data |
|
1 |
No
formal QA/QC plan required |
General
field observations, including the number and diversity of organisms |
Anecdotal,
educational, general awareness |
|
2 |
Basic
written plan |
Field
sampling; analysis using field kits; observing categorical abundance of
organisms and identifying them to the order level |
Educational;
watershed characterization; red flag or early warning |
|
3 |
Formal
QA plan; all testing needing lab analysis done at an accredited lab |
Using
calibrated meters for field measurements or following the protocols in a
current APHA Standard Methods;
collecting and analyzing water samples; identifying benthics to the family
level |
Watershed
& restoration planning; screening; baseline; problem tracking;
restoration monitoring; Best Management Practices (BMP) evaluation; water
quantity/flow data |
|
4 |
Follows
formal QA plan and documents exactly how it is implemented; sample chain of
custody |
Toxic
substance sampling; sampling for enforcement purposes; bioassays; identifying
benthics to the genus/species level |
Baseline,
impact and ambient assessments; action planning/policy development |
All
data will be gathered and handled in accordance with the field procedures
described in the Volunteer Handbook.
TRAINING REQUIREMENTS
Incoming
volunteers participate in a 24-hour training conducted by staff and other
natural resource professionals. Volunteers receive an orientation to watersheds
in general and to the factors limiting salmon restoration in
From
time to time, volunteers will join stream teams between annual trainings. In such cases, the new volunteer learns the
protocols by reading the volunteer handbook, watching a video produced during
the annual training, and working with the stream team in the field. Normally the new volunteer begins by serving
in the role of data recorder while the other team members do the sampling;
then, as s/he becomes more comfortable with the procedures, s/he slowly takes
on more responsibility, under the supervision of the team leader and program
staff. The new volunteer is required to
attend the next annual training.
The
Grab Sample Team which collects water quality samples for laboratory analysis
receives a separate, mandatory 4-hour training.
In
addition to annual training, Streamkeepers holds optional continuing education
seminars. Retraining in specific protocols,
assessment of data sets, and revision of problems with specific protocols are
all potential seminar topics; specific content, timing and frequency is
determined by volunteers’ expressed interests or needs and by availability of
staff time.
See
the Appendix for a sample volunteer training schedule.
DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS
Streamkeepers
has a unique field-sampling sheet for each monitoring session. Volunteers fill
out each data sheet completely. Data sheets are completed on site each time
sampling occurs. Volunteers record
stream name, reach number, date, time and name of each team member. The field
kit number is included on each field sheet and the initials
of the volunteer(s) performing each protocol is recorded. Copies of the
data sheets are attached.
Volunteers
return the data sheets to the Streamkeepers office along with the field kit and
any applicable samples. Field sheets and laboratory record sheets for
macroinvertebrate and water quality samples are maintained in the Streamkeepers
office for at least three years. All
data collected, along with applicable metadata, is entered into Streamkeepers’
computer database. Hard copies of all data reports are maintained by
Streamkeepers;
All
photos taken include a signboard with date, stream, reach number or site
location, samplers’ names, subject of photo, and vantage point. Photos are archived in either paper or
electronic form in the Streamkeepers office and maintained for at least three
years.
SAMPLING PROCESS DESIGN
1)
Long-term ambient
monitoring
Long-term
ambient-monitoring sampling frequency is summarized in our annual schedule.
2)
Special Project Work
Each
special project is designed with the initiating partner agency. We design a
sampling schedule to suit their project objectives.
Monitoring
reaches are identified by stream name and reach number. Team Leaders coordinate
with their teammates to schedule their stream monitoring during each
session. If volunteers cannot conduct
the scheduled sampling, they are instructed to contact the Team Leader as soon
as possible, so that an alternative can be found (generally a volunteer from
another stream team). Volunteers work in
teams of at least two trained people.
Three trained team members are recommended for the macroinvertebrate
sampling. Untrained volunteers may
accompany teams to receive on-the-job training (see above). The Team Leader is
responsible for ensuring that all protocols are followed as written.
As
part of final site selection, permission to access the stream is obtained from
all property owners. All constraints and
safety procedures are detailed in the Streamkeepers Volunteer Handbook
SAMPLING METHODS
REQUIREMENTS
Streamkeepers’
Volunteer Handbook, attached to this document, contains detailed information on
all sampling protocols and equipment. The
Data Quality Objectives Table summarizes a portion of the sampling methods
information.
SAMPLE HANDLING AND
CUSTODY REQUIREMENTS
Macroinvertebrates
All
macroinvertebrate replicates are labeled in the field, and the sampling is
documented on field sheets. In the
field, replicates are the responsibility of, and stay with, the Team
Leader. Once replicates have been
collected, they are returned to the Streamkeepers office for temporary
storage. Subsequent sample handling is
documented on a tracking sheet. The date
of arrival is recorded and initialed by the staff. The replicates remain at the Streamkeepers
office until they are collected by Arthur Frost for identification, at which
time staff dates and initials the tracking form. When replicates are analyzed, Mr. Frost
records the date; then replicates are returned to the Streamkeepers office,
where they are checked back in on the tracking form. 10% of the replicates are sent to a second
laboratory for QC, following the same check-out and check-in procedure on the
tracking form. All replicates are stored
at the Streamkeepers office for a minimum of three years.
Sample
macroinvertebrate tracking form.
Water
Quality for fecal coliform, e. coli, nitrates
All
water quality samples collected by the Grab Sample Team are labeled in the
field. Samples are the responsibility
of, and stay with, the Team Leader or his/her designee. Once samples have been
collected, they are returned to the Environmental Health Laboratory at
INSERT CALENDAR.DOC
ANALYTICAL METHODS
REQUIREMENTS
Each
protocol is detailed in the Field Procedures section of the Streamkeepers
Volunteer Handbook, attached to this document.
Laboratory
procedures for water quality follow the standard methods, as identified in the
Data Quality Objectives table.
Macroinvertebrate identification follows standard SalmonWeb laboratory
procedures. Taxa are identified at least to the level required by the
ten-metric Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity.
For taxa not belonging to the phylum Arthropoda, the critical level
is usually the class (within the class Pelecypoda [= Bivalvia] identifications are taken to the family
level). Taxa belonging to the phylum Arthropoda
(except for the class Insecta)
are determined to the order level.
Members of the class Insecta are usually taken to genus, with the following
exceptions: the families Capniidae and Leuctridae of the order Plecoptera; some families
belonging to the order Coleoptera
(of which we have seen Dytiscidae);
some families or subfamilies from the order Diptera (of which we have seen Ceratopogoninae
of Ceratopogonidae,
Chironomidae,
Dolichopodidae,
Ephydridae
and Syrphidae). In some cases the taxonomic raw data table
goes deeper than the levels listed above; when this is true formulas in the
metrics table(s) have been written to ignore the affected rows. A sample macroinvertebrate data sheet.
QUALITY CONTROL
REQUIREMENTS
Replicate
samples for all chemical water quality parameters are taken at one reach
(randomly selected) per team per session.
10%
of the macroinvertebrate replicates are sent to an independent laboratory and
reidentified. If sampler or taxonomic
identification problems are found, the data is either
modified, qualified, reidentified, or
discarded, depending on the degree of the problem. Such adjustments will be made under the
direction of Leska Fore, a professional statistician
on the board of SalmonWeb.
INSTRUMENT/EQUIPMENT
TESTING, INSPECTION, MAINTENANCE AND CALIBRATION REQUIREMENTS
The
Streamkeepers office maintains all field equipment as well as a resupply
cabinet. Field kits are shared between the stream teams. To ensure data of consistently high quality,
routine inspection and preventive maintenance is performed prior to each use of
a field kit. At the start of each monitoring session, all equipment is
thoroughly inventoried, inspected , maintained, or resupplied as needed.
Volunteers are trained to inventory, inspect, and restock their field
kits before and after taking them out in the field. During the monitoring
session, volunteers inspect and restock their field kits when checking them in
and out of the office. Any maintenance or replacement needs are brought to the
attention of streamkeepers staff.
Streamkeepers
staff also inventories and checks the kits periodically during each monitoring
session, to ensure that all equipment is present and in good working
order. Streamkeepers staff maintains a
separate maintenance and calibration log book on each piece of electronic
equipment (flow meter, turbidity meter, YSI multi-meter). Documentation
includes description of calibrations performed, adjustments made and parts
replaced. Each entry is signed and dated.
Electronic
equipment is calibrated according to manufacturer’s instructions, using
prepared standards. (Maintenance and
calibration procedures for the flow meter, turbidimeter and YSI multimeters.) A
portion of the calibration information is summarized in the Data Quality
Objectives table.
INSPECTION/ACCEPTANCE
REQUIREMENTS FOR SUPPLIES
Equipment
used in each protocol is detailed in the Field Procedures section of the
Streamkeepers Volunteer Handbook. All supplies and equipment are purchased
under the supervision of program staff and inspected upon arrival at the
office. Any item that does not meet
program standards is returned to the supplier for replacement.
DATA ACQUISITION
REQUIREMENTS
USGS
7.5 minute topographic maps and
DATA MANAGEMENT
Field
data sheets are inspected and initialed by the Team Leader before leaving the
site. Volunteers are instructed to
submit field sheets to program staff for review within 72 hours of
monitoring. Program staff initials
receipt of the field form, reviews the field sheet for completeness, and
contacts the team leader if any field sheet contains obvious errors or
omissions.
For
laboratory samples, the lab manager reviews sample labels for water quality and
macroinvertebrate samples and removes from the data set any that cannot be
attributed to specific samplers, have not been properly preserved, or that
exceed the maximum holding time.
All
data will be entered into an Excel-based “Universal Data Entry Sheet,” a
computerized spreadsheet program designed for Streamkeepers and compatible with
hardware and software used by both county and state water resource
agencies. As a QC check, at least 25% of
entered data will be checked against the field sheet and initialed on the field
sheet and computer file.
ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE
ACTIONS
Review
of Streamkeepers field activities is the responsibility of program staff in
conjunction with Team Leaders. Each
Team Leader is responsible for observing the data collection techniques of his
or her team members and ensuring that data is collected conscientiously,
carefully, and in compliance with the written protocols. Team Leaders are
responsible for reporting concerns about individual volunteers or particular
protocols to program staff. Each team
will be accompanied and evaluated in the field by staff once a year, if
possible. Volunteers in need of
performance improvement will be retrained on-site during the evaluation if
possible. They may also be requested to review the training films Streamkeepers
has in its library (including the professionally-produced SalmonWeb video for macroinvertebrate
collection and a home-video of the field training), to accompany more
proficient volunteers on their monitoring, or to attend the next field
training. If errors in sampling
techniques are consistently identified, retraining may be scheduled more
frequently. All field and laboratory
activities may be reviewed by state and EPA quality assurance officers as
requested. Systems and data quality
audits are performed by the QA Officer yearly. Any identified procedural
problems will be corrected based on recommendations from the QA Officer.
REPORTS
Streamkeepers
produces and distributes data summaries within six weeks of each quarterly
monitoring session. A year-end report will be produced and distributed
subsequent to receipt of finalized macroinvertebrate data the following
year. Project staff is responsible for
all report production and distribution.
Reports are forwarded to the County, State, regional EPA office, other
members of the Technical Advisory Committee, and others on request. At a minimum, these reports will consist of
data results. Additional sections may
include interpretation of data, information on project status and use of
program data by other entities, volunteer highlights, results of QC audits and
internal assessments, and the workscope for the
present year. The content of each year’s report will be at the discretion of
program staff and determined in part by data needs expressed by our known
end-users.
DATA REVIEW, VALIDATION,
AND VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
All
field and laboratory data is reviewed annually by one of the program
co-managers to determine if the data meet QAPP objectives. Personnel from each partner agency on special
projects are requested to review data relating to their special project on a
quarterly basis. Decisions to reject or qualify data are made by staff.
VALIDATION AND
VERIFICATION METHODS
Expected
ranges for water quality are identified on a handout in the field kit. As part
of the sampling protocol, volunteers report any sample readings out of the
expected range to the Team Leader in the field. A second sample is taken as
soon as possible to verify the condition.
10% of the macroinvertebrate samples are reidentified
and > 10% of the water quality samples are
replicated as a method of verifying data and ensuring data quality. If variation greater than 5% is found, steps
will be taken as necessary to adjust, qualify, discard, or retake the data as
needed.
When
field sheets are returned to the Streamkeepers office, they are reviewed for
completeness, outliers, or inconsistencies, and initialed by the
reviewer(s). The completeness review can
be conducted by any volunteer or staff member; review for outliers or
inconsistencies needs to be completed by program staff or a volunteer who has
been trained to recognize outliers and inconsistencies. Once the data is
entered into the Universal Data Entry spreadsheet, a team of two (staff or
volunteers) will proofread it against the original data sheets. Errors in data entry will be corrected and
the field form and spreadsheet will be initialed by both reviewers. Problems with data quality will be discussed
in the annual reports.
RECONCILIATION WITH DATA
QUALITY OBJECTIVES
As
soon as possible after each sampling event, calculations and determination for
precision, completeness and accuracy will be made, and corrective action
implemented if needed. If data quality
indicators do not meet the project’s specifications, data may be discarded and
resampling may occur. The cause of
failure will be evaluated. If the cause
is found to be equipment failure, calibration and maintenance techniques will
be reassessed and improved. If the
problem is found to be sampling team error, team members will be retrained. Any
limitations on data use will be detailed in the annual report. If failure to meet project specifications is
found to be unrelated to equipment, methods or sample error, the sampling
protocol in question may be revised for the next sampling season. Revisions
will be submitted to state and EPA quality assurance officers for approval.
REFERENCES
American Public Health Association, American Water Works
Association & Water Environment Federation. 1995. Standard
methods for the examination of water and wastewater. ISBN
0-87553-223-3. American Public Health Association.
Booth, Derek & Karen Comings.
City of
Clallam County Department of Community Development, 1995.
Dungeness Watershed
Management Committee and Clallam County Department of Community Development,
1993.
Fore.
L.S. 1999.
Measuring the effects of urbanization on
Fore,
L.S., K. Paulsen, and K. O’Laughlin. In press. Assessing the Performance of
Volunteers in Monitoring Streams. Freshwater Biology.
Fore,
Leska. Statistical Consultant and Board Member of SalmonWeb. Personal communication, June 1999 – June 2000
Freudenthal,
Joel. Planning
Biologist, Clallam County Department of Community Development. Personal communication, June 1999 – June 2000
Karr,
J.R. and E.W.
Chu. 1998. Restoring Life in Running Waters: Better Biological Monitoring. Island Press,
Karr,
J.R. 1998. Rivers as sentinels: using the biology of rivers to guide landscape
management. Springer, NY River Ecology and Management: Lessons from the
Pacific Coastal Ecosystem (Eds. R.J. Naiman and R.E. Bilby),
pp 502-528
Karr, J.R. 1999. Defining and measuring river health. Freshwater Biology 41: 221-234
Kondolf,
G.M., 1997. Application of the Pebble
Count: notes on purpose, method and variants. Journal of the American Water
Resources Association 33(1):79-87.
Murdoch, T., M. Cheo, & K. O’Laughlin, 1996. Streamkeepers Field Guide.
Pleus , A.E. 1999. TFW Monitoring Program method manual for the wadeable
stream discharge method. Prepared for the Washington State
Department of Natural Resources under the Timber, Fish and Wildlife Agreement. TFW-AM9-99-009. DNR#111. June.
Pleus, A.E., and D. Schuett-Hames. 1998. TFW
Monitoring Program method manual for stream segment identification.
Prepared for the Washington State Department of Natural Resources under the
Timber, Fish and Wildlife Agreement. TFW-AM9-98-001. DNR#103. May.
Pleus, A.E., and D. Schuett-Hames. 1998. TFW
Monitoring Program method manual for the reference point survey. Prepared for the Washington State Department
of Natural Resources under the Timber, Fish and Wildlife Agreement. TFW-AM9-98-002. DNR#104. May.
Pleus, A.E., D. Schuett-Hames, and L. Bullchild. 1999. TFW Monitoring Program method manual for the
habitat unit survey. Prepared for
the Washington State Department of Natural Resources under the Timber, Fish and
Wildlife Agreement. TFW-AM9-99-003. DNR#105.
June.
Scholz, J.G. and D.B. Booth, 1999. Stream habitat assessment protocols: an evaluation of urbanizing
watersheds in the
Schuett-Hames, D., A. Pleus and L. Bullchild, 1994. Habitat Unit Survey Module. Timber-Fish-Wildlife
Ambient Monitoring Program Manual Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission. (Ed.s D.
Schuett-Hames, A. Pleus, L. Bullchild & S. Hall)
Schuett-Hames, D., A.E. Pleus, J. Ward, M. Fox, and J. Light. 1999. TFW Monitoring Program method manual for the
large woody debris survey. Prepared
for the Washington State Department of Natural Resources under the Timber, Fish
and Wildlife Agreement. TFW-AM9-99-004. DNR#106. March.
USDA, 1998. Stream
Visual Assessment Protocol, fifth draft. US Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Aquatic Assessment
Workgroup. March, 1998.
USEPA, 1994. Streamwalk Manual. EPA 910-B-94-002,
July 1994. US Environmental Protection Agency Region 10, Water Division,
USEPA, 1996. The Volunteer Monitor’s Guide
to Quality Assurance Project Plans.
EPA 841-B-96-003, September, 1996.
US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands,
Oceans and Watersheds. 4503F.
USEPA, 1997. Volunteer
Stream Monitoring: a methods manual. EPA 841-B-97-003, November 1997. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water 4503F.
APPENDIX
·
Macroinvertebrate
tracking form (BugTrack.xls)
·
Volunteer
training schedule (Schedule.doc)
·
Maintenance
and calibration procedures for the flow meter, turbidimeter and YSI multimeter
·
Laboratory
Analytical Methods, fecal coliform testing
·
Macroinvertebrate
Analysis Spreadsheet