watershed restoration division chesapeake & coastal ... · annapolis, maryland 21401 toll free...

Watershed Restoration DivisionChesapeake & Coastal Watershed ServicesMaryland Dept. of Natural ResourcesAnnapolis, MD


A MESSAGE TO MARYLAND CITIZENS

The Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR)seeks to preserve, protect and enhance the living resourcesof the state. Working in partnership with the citizens ofMaryland, this worthwhile goal will become a reality.Thispublication provides information that will increase yourunderstanding of how DNR strives to reach that goalthrough its many diverse programs.

Parris N. GlendeningGovernor

Kathleen K. TownsendLieutenant Governor

Sarah Taylor-RogersSecretary

Stanley K. ArthurDeputy Secretary

Maryland Department of Natural ResourcesTawes State Office Building580 Taylor AvenueAnnapolis, Maryland 21401

Toll free number: 1-(877) 620 8DNR x8810www.dnr.state.md.us

THE FACILITIES AND SERVICES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AREAVAILABLE TO ALL WITHOUT REGARD TO RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX,AGE, NATIONAL

ORIGIN, PHYSICAL OR MENTAL DISABILITY.

THIS DOCUMENT IS AVAILABLE IN ALTERNATIVE FORMAT UPON REQUEST FROM AQUALIFIED INDIVIDUAL WITH A DISABILITY.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION REGARDING THIS REPORT, PLEASE CALL 410-260-8810 ORTOLL FREE : 1 (877) 620-8DNR x 8810



Prepared by

Kenneth T. Yetman

This project was funded in part by a grant from U.S. EPA Section 319 Non-point Source Program.

September, 2001

Forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

1.1 Purpose Of Survey And Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31.2 Survey Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31.3 Background On Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41.4 Responsibilities Of Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61.5 Maryland Conservation Corps And Other Survey Volunteers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

2.0 Training, Safety And Respecting Private Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .92.1 Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .92.2 Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .92.3 Respecting Private Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

3.0 Preparing For A Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .113.1 Watershed Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .113.2 Partnering With Watershed Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .113.3 Maps And Geographical Information Systems (GIS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .113.4 Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .123.5 Logistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .133.6 Team Member Assignments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .133.7 Identifying And Notifying Property Owners In Survey Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

4.0 Conducting A Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .154.1 Identifying Environmental Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .154.2 Assigning A Site Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .154.3 Recording Problem Location On A Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .164.4 Photographing A Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .174.5 Filling Out Data Sheets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

4.5.1 Severity, Correctability And Access Ratings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .184.6 Data Sheet Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

4.6.1 Channel Alteration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .204.6.2 Erosion Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .234.6.3 Exposed Pipes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .264.6.4 Pipe Outfalls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .294.6.5 Fish Barrier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .314.6.6 Inadequate Buffer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .354.6.7 In/Near Stream Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .374.6.8 Trash Dumping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .384.6.9 Unusual Condition Or Comment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .404.6.10 Representative Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41

5.0 Data Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .435.1 Data Sheets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43

5.1.1 Data Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .435.1.2 Data Verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43

5.2 Cataloging Photographs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .435.3 Map Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44

5.3.1 GIS Data Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445.3.2 GIS Data Verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

5.4 Data Review And Modification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .446.0 Analysis And Prioritization Of Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49Appendix A. Examples Of Follow-Up Contact Letters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51Appendix B. Examples Of Property Owner Notification Letters . . . . . . . . . 53Appendix C. Data Sheets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FORWARD

Over the years, the focus of environmental managers has expanded from initially tryingto control discharges from sewage treatment plants and factories, to our present efforts tomanage non-points source pollution and restore degraded stream systems. As the focus ofenvironmental managers has expanded over the years, there has been a growing need toimprove survey methods and provide new tools to identify and assess a variety of environ-mental problems over fairly large geographic areas. In response to this need, the WatershedRestoration Division of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources developed theStream Corridor Assessment (SCA) survey as a tool that environmental managers can use toquickly identify a variety of environmental problems within a watershed’s stream network.The survey is not intended to be a detailed scientific survey nor will it replace the morestandard chemical and biological surveys. Instead, SCA is intended to provide a rapidmethod of examining an entire drainage network so future monitoring, managementand/or conservation efforts can be better targeted. This report provides background on thesurvey’s development and the methods that are used.

These protocols were developed over several years with the help of a number of indi-viduals. Special recognition is extended to Christine Buckley, Paul Sneeringer, MarkColosimo, Linda Morrison and Betsy Weisengoff who helped organize and implement someof the first SCA surveys. In addition special recognition is extended to Larry Lubbers andFrank Dawson who helped provide the necessary push and support to have these protocolsprinted. Special recognition is also extended to the Maryland Conservation Corp and itscorp members who have walked thousand of miles of streams over the years and who haveoften provide valuable input onto ways to improve the survey’s implementation.

The printing of these protocols were made possible through a grant from U.S. EPASection 319 Non-point Source Program.Although this project is funded in part by theEPA, it does not necessarily reflect the opinion or position of the EPA.

1.1 PURPOSE OF SURVEY AND PROTOCOLS

In the 1970s it became widely recognized that theaquatic resources of the Chesapeake Bay were indecline. Later studies found that pollution, especiallyexcessive loading of sediments and nutrients, were having a significant adverse impact on the Bay’s fisheriesand wildlife. Initially, clean up and restoration effortsconcentrated on point source discharges and resourceissues in the tidally influenced portions of the Bay.While significant progress has been made in addressingpoint source pollution problems, it is also recognizedthat greater attention needs to focus on non-point pollution sources and on the rivers and streams thatflow into the Bay. In order to accomplish this, a broaderecosystem-based approach is needed to manage, protectand restore Maryland’s natural resources.

The Stream Corridor Assessment (SCA) survey isdesigned to provide a method which can be used toboth rapidly assess the general physical condition of astream system and identify the location of a variety ofcommon environmental problems within the stream’scorridors. It is intended to be a tool that can helpresource managers identify not only the location ofenvironmental problems but also restoration opportuni-ties that exist within a drainage network. Potentialenvironmental problems identified as part of the SCAsurvey include:

■■ Erosion Sites■■ Inadequate Stream Buffers■■ Fish Migration Blockages■■ Exposed or Discharging Pipes■■ Channelized Stream Sections■■ Trash Dumping Sites■■ In or Near Stream Construction■■ Unusual Conditions

In addition, the survey also collects information onpotential wetlands creation/water quality retrofit sites, aswell as data on the general condition of both in-streamand riparian corridor habitats. The survey can also beused to assist in the identification of healthy stream sec-tions that may be in need of environmental protection.

The SCA survey has been used to survey both smalland large watersheds in Maryland during the last severalyears. A short history of the development of the SCAsurvey is provided in Section 1.3. Overall, the surveyhas proven to be very useful in obtaining an initial

overview of environmental conditions in a number ofMaryland watersheds and in prioritizing future restora-tion efforts. In the last several years, more than 2000miles of stream have been surveyed using SCA, and overone million dollars of restoration work have been tar-geted based on the surveys’ results.

The data sheets and methods used in the SCA sur-vey have been developed over several years. Duringthat period, some of the data sheets have changed inresponse to needs of the survey’s sponsors which haveusually been county and city government agencies.While these survey protocols represent the data sheetsand methods that are now being used, it is possible thatadditional changes will be made in the future. Any sug-gestions on additional information or methods thatcould be included in the SCA survey should be direct-ed to Ken Yetman at the Maryland Department ofNatural Resources in Annapolis, Maryland (e-mail:[email protected]).

This document was written to provide a set of stan-dard protocols for DNR surveys using the MarylandConservation Corps (MCC). Some of the terms suchas crew and crew chief refer directly to the way theMCC is organized in Maryland. We have found theMCC to be both an efficient and cost-effective groupto implement the SCA survey. For more informationon the MCC see Section 1.5. This does not mean thatthe methods described in this protocol document can-not be easily adapted for surveys by other groups inMaryland or in other parts of the country.

1.2 SURVEY OBJECTIVESThe SCA survey has four main objectives:

1.To provide a list of observable environmentalproblems present within a stream system andalong its riparian corridor.

2.To provide sufficient information on each prob-lem so that a preliminary determination of boththe severity and correctability of a problem canbe made.

3.To provide sufficient information so that restora-tion efforts can be prioritized.

4.To provide a quick assessment of both in-andnear-stream habitat conditions so that compara-tive assessments can be made of the condition ofdifferent stream segments.

SURVEY PROTOCOLS STREAM CORRIDOR ASSESSMENT SURVEY 3

1.0 INTRODUCTION

It is important to note that SCA is not intended tobe a detailed scientific survey of a stream system norwill it replace the more standard chemical and biologi-cal surveys. Instead SCA is intended to provide a rapidmethod of examining an entire drainage network sofuture monitoring, management and/or conservationefforts can be better targeted. The survey was devel-oped because most existing scientific surveys are timeconsuming, expensive to do on a wide scale and oftencollect information for a relatively small section ofstream at any one time. In contrast, the SCA survey isdesigned so that teams of two or three individuals willbe able to survey an average of two to three streammiles per day, at a relatively low cost.

1.3 BACKGROUND ON SURVEYDEVELOPMENT

The SCA survey is really not a new concept but arefinement and the systematic implementation of an oldapproach, which in its simplest form is often referred toas a stream walk survey. The survey is based on the factthat many of the common environmental problemsaffecting streams, such as excessive stream bank erosionor blockages to fish migration are fairly easy to identifyby an individual walking along a stream.With the prop-er training most people can identify these commonenvironmental problems.

There have been several attempts to standardize thisapproach over the years. Many earlier approaches suchas EPA’s “Streamwalk Manual” (EPA, 1992), MarylandSave our Stream’s “Conducting a Stream Survey,” (SOS,1970) and Maryland Public Interest ResearchFoundation “Streamwalk Manual” (Hosmer, 1988) weredesigned to be done by citizen volunteers with little orno training. While these surveys can be good guides forcitizens that are interested in looking at their communi-ty streams, the data collected during these surveys canvary significantly due to the limited training most citi-zen volunteers receive before doing the survey.

Other visual stream surveys, such as the NationalResources Conservation Service’s “Stream VisualAssessment Protocols” (NRCS, 1998), are designed tobe done by trained professionals looking at a very spe-cific stream reach, such as a stream passing through anindividual farmer’s property. While this survey can pro-vide useful information on a specific stream segment,they are usually not done on a watershed basis.

The Maryland SCA survey has been designed tobridge the gap between these two approaches. The sur-

vey is designed to be done by a small group of well-trained individuals that walk the entire stream networkin a watershed. While the individuals doing the surveyare usually not professional natural resource managers,they do receive several days of training before beginningthe survey. The intention of the survey is to identifyand collect some basic information about potentialenvironmental problems so that future restoration andmanagement activities can be better targeted.

The Maryland SCA survey is based on the streamwalk survey that was originally developed for DNR’sAdopt-A-Stream Program by Maryland Save-Our-Streams (SOS). The Maryland Adopt-A-StreamProgram was initiated by DNR in the late 1980s tohelp promote environmental stewardship in neighbor-hood communities throughout Maryland. The programis administered by Maryland Save-Our-Streams, a non-profit environmental organization that works withschools, community groups and individuals to protectand restore Maryland’s aquatic resources. The streamwalk survey is one of several activities in the MarylandAdopt-A-Stream Program designed to help Marylandresidents learn more about their community streamsand how to improve them. For more information onthe Maryland Adopt-A-Stream Program contact DNR’sEducation, Bay Policy & Growth Management Divisionat (410) 260-8710. For more information aboutMaryland Save-Our-Stream call (800) 448-5826.

While the stream walk survey had been part ofDNR’s community-based Adopt-A-Stream Program forseveral years, it was not until 1994 that the survey wasused in a more formal study by managers within DNR.In 1994, working with Harford County Government,U.S.Army Corps of Engineers, Maryland Departmentof the Environment, the City of Aberdeen andAberdeen Proving Grounds, a stream walk survey ofSwan Creek was done. Swan Creek is located in east-ern Harford County, Maryland, and its watershedencompasses 26.5 square miles. Unlike earlier streamwalk surveys that used community volunteers, the SwanCreek survey was done by 45 volunteers from the vari-ous local, state and federal agencies. In August 1994government agency volunteers gathered in a meetingroom at Aberdeen Proving Grounds and viewed a 45minute slide show presentation on how to do the sur-vey. After the slide presentation, agency volunteersbroke up into 17 survey teams. Over a 3-day periodthey walked 105 stream miles and recorded 580 poten-tial environmental problems.

4 STREAM CORRIDOR ASSESSMENT SURVEY SURVEY PROTOCOLS

The information collected during the survey wasentered into a database and site locations were enteredinto Harford County’s Geographical InformationSystem. Reviewing the data collected during the SwanCreek Survey provided a number of insights. First,there was a large degree of inconsistency in the datacollected by the various survey teams. For example,one team may have been lead by a forester and record-ed very good information on the buffer along thestream but tended to record limited information onproblems in the water. Another survey team that mayhave been lead by a fishery biologist who recordeddetailed information about fish barriers but only mini-mal information about problems in the stream corridoraway from the stream. Inconsistencies in the data wereattributed mainly to the limited training provided to alarge group of people in a very short period of time.

The second insight obtained from the initial SwanCreek survey was that while the survey identifiedpotential environmental problems, it usually did notprovide sufficient information to prioritize problems forfuture restoration activities. This in part is due to thefact that the survey was designed to be done by com-munity volunteers, who usually were trained and didthe survey all in one day. In many ways, the survey wasprimarily intended to be a community education activi-ty that alerted residents to the presence of potential pol-lution problems in their community stream.

The final important insight from the survey of SwanCreek was that despite the above problems, the surveydid provide a good general overview of the environ-mental problems in the stream corridor. A number offollow-up surveys were done by a much smaller groupover several months and a rating system was developedto rate the severity, correctability and accessability ofproblem sites. Once the follow-up surveys were com-pleted and all of the problem sites rated, a number ofrestoration projects were initiated to begin to addressthe problems identified along Swan Creek. Over thelast several years more than a million dollars of environ-mental restoration work has been done in the SwanCreek watershed. The paper entitled “Swan CreekRestoration Partnership,” published as part of the pro-ceedings of EPA’s Watershed 96 conference, providesadditional information on the Swan Creek survey andrestoration efforts (Yetman et al., 1996).

While the Swan Creek survey demonstrated theusefulness of a stream walk survey in identifying envi-ronmental problems within the stream corridor, experi-ence gained during the survey also found that changes

were needed in survey methodology. In 1996, workingwith Harford County and the Army Corps ofEngineers, the Watershed Restoration Division of DNRdeveloped a new survey called the Stream CorridorAssessment (SCA) and recruited the MarylandConservation Corps to help implement it. TheMaryland Conservation Corps is part of theAmeriCorps Program and managed by DNR’s Forestand Park Service. For more information on the MCC,see Section 1.5.

To avoid problems experienced during the SwanCreek survey, the new SCA survey has been designed tobe done by smaller specially trained groups who walkan entire steam network in a watershed collecting infor-mation on potential environmental problems. MCCsurvey crew members receive several days of training instream ecology and how to conduct an SCA survey. Aspart of this training, survey crew members learn how toidentify common problems, record the location of prob-lems on survey maps, and how to fill out data sheetsproperly. In addition, the data sheets have been modi-fied to record specific information about each problem.The new SCA survey also rates all problems in the fieldin three categories: problem severity, the correctabilityof the problem, and the accessability of the problemsite. Photographs are taken at all sites to documentexisting conditions and to aid in follow-up analysis.Finally, a representative site data sheet has been added tothe survey to collect information on habitat conditionsin the stream corridor.

The first watershed to undergo the new SCA sur-vey was Bynum Run in eastern Harford County,Maryland. In 1996 the MCC’s Bay Restoration Crewwalked more than 150 stream miles and identified 780potential environmental problems (Harford Co. DPW,1999). Harford County is now using the informationfrom the Bynum Run SCA survey to target futurestorm water management improvement in the water-shed. Harford County has also incorporated the SCAsurvey into their non-point source pollution NPDESprogram and plan to use the SCA survey to examine allthe streams in Harford County.

Since 1996, the SCA survey had been done in anumber of Maryland watersheds including:WintersRun in Harford County, Herring Run in BaltimoreCity and County, Fair Hills State Park in Cecil County,Carroll and Rock Creeks in Frederick City and Countyand the Upper Patuxent River in Howard andMontgomery Counties. The survey has proven to be avery useful tool in both assessing the general environ-


mental conditions of stream systems and in targetingfuture restoration and conservation efforts.

1.4 RESPONSIBILITIES OF SURVEYPARTICIPANTS

The duties and responsibilities of the main partici-pants in an SCA survey can be separated into six pri-mary areas. Depending on the size of the survey andthe expertise of the people involved, two or more ofthese duties may be done by a single individual orgroup. The primary areas of responsibility are:

Survey Sponsor - The survey sponsor is usually aFederal, State or local government agency, althoughthere is no reason why a watershed association or othercitizen group could not sponsor a SCA survey. Themain responsibilities of the survey sponsors are to helpfinance the survey, to work with the survey manager tonotify watershed residents of the survey and to workwith watershed stakeholders after the survey is complet-ed to address the problems identified.

Survey Manager - The survey manager is the indi-vidual that is responsible for making sure the SCA sur-vey is done properly and that information collectedduring the survey is compiled in a way that will be use-ful to the survey’s sponsor. The survey manager willoversee all aspects of the survey. The individual is usu-ally responsible for data analysis and producing a finalproduct for the survey’s sponsor.

Data Manager - The data manager is the individ-ual responsible for overseeing management of the datacollected during an SCA survey. While the survey crewwill usually be responsible for entering survey data intothe project database including scanning all photographsinto a digital photo album, it is the responsibility of thedata manager to insure that this work is done properly.The data manager is also responsible for making surethat the data, scanned photographs and maps have beenproperly verified and all the information entered intothe project digital databases are accurate. The data man-ager is also responsible for insuring that the originaldata sheets and maps are properly archived and that alldigital data is not only properly stored, but also backedup. In general, the data manager is responsible for over-seeing all data quality assurance work.

GIS Manager - The GIS manager is responsiblefor providing the map products for the initial field sur-vey work and for producing the finished maps that areused to analyze the data collected. At the beginning ofthe survey the GIS manager will usually produce a base

map of the entire watershed and a series of field surveymaps to be used by field teams during the survey. Afterthe field work has been completed and the informationentered into the project database, the GIS manager willmake sure that station location data is entered correctlyinto the GIS system and verified. The GIS managerwill then work with the survey manager to produce aseries of maps to display the information collected dur-ing the survey so that it can be analyzed and used bythe survey’s sponsor.

Survey Crew Chief - The survey crew chief (usu-ally the MCC crew chief) oversees the daily work ofthe field teams during the survey. The crew chief isresponsible for determining when and where the fieldteams will be working, making sure that the field teamshave all the equipment that they need and coordinatingtravel logistics. The crew chief is also responsible foroverseeing data entry and data verification. One of themain duties of the crew chief is to act as a conduitbetween the field teams and both the survey managerand sponsor to resolve any questions or problems thatmight arise during the survey.

Field Teams - Field teams are composed of two tofour trained individuals. Each field team will have ateam leader who will work with the survey crew chiefto coordinate the activities of their team with those ofthe other survey teams. Team leaders are responsible formaking sure that the team has everything that it needsbefore the survey begins each day and for reviewing thedata sheets and map at the end of the day to make surethey are complete.

1.5 MARYLAND CONSERVATIONCORPS AND OTHER SURVEYVOLUNTEERS

While almost any group of dedicated volunteers canbe trained to do an SCA survey, the MarylandConservation Corps (MCC) has proven to be an idealgroup to do this work in Maryland. The MarylandConservation Corps is part of the AmeriCorps Programwhich is a federal program started in the early 1990’s topromote greater involvement of young volunteers intheir communities and the environment. The MCCprogram is managed by the Forest and Park Servicewithin the Maryland Department of Natural Resources.Volunteers with the MCC are 17-25 years old and canhave educational backgrounds ranging from high schoolto graduate degrees. With the proper training andsupervision, these young, intelligent and motivated vol-


unteers are able to significantly contribute to the State’sefforts to inventory and evaluate water quality and habi-tat problems from a watershed perspective. In addition,once the locations of specific types of environmentalproblems are known, the MCC represents a resource tohelp correct some of these problems. For more infor-mation on the Maryland Conservation Corps call theirmain office in Annapolis at (410) 260-8166 or visittheir web site at: www.dnr.state.md.us/mcc.

In addition to the Maryland Conservation Corps, anumber of government and community based environ-mental groups have also received some training andhave participated in the SCA survey over the last fewyears. Usually this training has been done as part of aspecific watershed restoration effort. Depending on thecircumstances, government and/or community volun-teers have received from one hour to several days oftraining. The amount of training will depend on boththe volunteers’ level of participation in a survey andtheir previous experience. In most past cases, volunteershave received 1 to 2 hours of training to introducethem to the survey. The volunteers will then accompa-ny a fully-trained field team on the survey. This shortintroductory training, followed by the volunteers

accompanying an experienced field team, has workedvery well with community and government agencieswho are interested in participating in the SCA surveybut do not plan to do the survey on a regular basis bythemselves. For a group to be able to conduct the sur-vey on their own, more extensive training is usuallyneeded. MCC crew members receive several days oftraining, which is discussed in Section 2.1. Individualswho have a background in stream ecology and correct-ing environmental problems can usually be trained todo the survey in 1 or 2 days. It is important that evenafter an individual has been fully trained on how to dothe SCA survey, they initially accompany a more expe-rienced individual for several days so they gain experi-ence in consistently rating different types of environ-mental problems. In conducting an SCA survey it isalso very important to remember that collecting goodquality data is only the first step. The data collected aspart of this survey is of limited value unless the neces-sary work is also done to compile, examine, and com-municate results. Record keeping, data analysis, andreport writing are all unglamourous but very necessarysteps that are all needed to make the SCA survey trulyuseful.


THIS PAGE WAS LEFT BLANK


2.1 TRAININGAs discussed in Section 1.3, the SCA survey is based

on an earlier “Stream Survey,” developed for DNR’sAdopt-A-Stream program. The Adopt-A-Stream“Stream Survey,” was designed to be done by commu-nity-based watershed associations and training was usu-ally limited to viewing a 45 minute slide show justprior to going out into the field. While the surveyremains a good exercise to get citizens to go out andtake a critical look at their local stream, in most casesthe information provided is insufficient to fully charac-terize and prioritize future restoration activities.Citizen volunteers with limited training can learn torecognize that a certain environmental problem mayexist along a stream, but are usually unable to fullydescribe the problem or evaluate its severity.

To avoid the problems that can result from using alarge number of volunteers with limited training, theSCA survey is designed to be done by a smaller, well-trained groups. It is not necessary for those conductingan SCA survey to be an expert in stream ecologyand/or fluvial hydrology, and almost any dedicatedgroup of individuals can be trained to do the survey. Itis important, however, that as part of that training indi-viduals receive a basic understanding of how streamsfunction and the impact that human activity can haveon aquatic resources so that they can properly recorddata and rate different problems. Most of the largewatershed surveys that have been done over the last fewyears have been done by the Maryland ConservationCorps although other groups have participated in SCAsurveys (See Section 1.5).

For individuals with a limited background andunderstand of stream ecology, several days of trainingand practice is usually necessary prior to the beginningof an SCA survey. The training includes both insidelectures and outside field exercises. During the first dayof training , survey crew members learn about the biotathat lives in streams and what is important for their sur-vival. A morning lecture is followed by an afternoonfield visit to a healthy stream to examine the fish,macro-benthic invertebrates, and instream habitat. Onday two, the physical aspects of how streams functionare examined. During the afternoon of day two,trainees visit a stream in poor condition usually withsevere channel stability problems. On day three of thetraining, survey crew members review the survey proto-

cols and discuss the survey. On the fourth day, the classis broken up into several groups and trainees practiceconducting an SCA survey while being monitored bythe instructors. On the final day of formal training, theclass will practice organizing the data collected duringthe previous field day and learn how to enter surveydata into an Access database. A final review of the sur-vey field procedure will also be done at this time. Afterthe formal training is completed, less experienced per-sonnel will be paired with veteran surveyors and willcontinue their training in the field.Training alsoincludes an initial review of survey results after the sur-vey teams have been in the field for approximately 1 to2 weeks.

2.2 SAFETYWhen conducting this or any other field study it is

imperative that safety be the number one concern of allinvolved. The information collected during this surveyis not worth endangering either yourself or others. Thebasic rule you should always follow is: If you haveserious concerns about the safety of an activity -DON’T DO IT! If you have a question about yoursafety or the safety of others, you should immediatelytalk to your supervisor or the survey manager.

The SCA survey involves spending extended peri-ods of time walking, both in and along a stream, in avariety of different weather conditions. It is veryimportant, especially during cold weather periods, thatsurvey members wear the proper clothing and take theproper steps to insure that they are both safe and com-fortable. All survey crew members should have a goodpair of hip boots to wear while doing the survey. Hipboots are usually worn during most of the year; howev-er, some individuals may prefer to wear hiking bootsand long pants during the summer. Be especially care-ful when walking over wet rocks that are covered byalgae. Avoid standing on the top of the rocks and donot go into water greater than waist deep, especially ifthere is a strong current present.

Survey teams should always carry backpacks with afirst aid kit, drinking water and rain gear if there is apossibility that it may rain. During hunting season allsurvey team members must wear blaze orange and avoidany areas where there are indications that hunting isoccurring. Finally, survey teams should always be madeup of at least two crew members and should carry a

2.0 HEALTH, SAFETY AND RESPECTING PRIVATE PROPERTY


radio so that they can contact the survey crew chief incase of an emergency.

Not all safety concerns can be identified beforehand and it is very important that you use your bestjudgement. Remember, it is better to be safe thansorry! In conducting an SCA survey you shouldalways put safety first.

2.3 RESPECTING PRIVATE PROPERTYIn conducting the SCA survey it is extremely

important that everyone involved in the survey isrespectful of the private property of the people wholive along the stream. One very helpful way of doingthis is to notify by mail all of the property owners alongthe stream where a survey is being done. More infor-mation on notifying private property owners is given inSection 3.7.

While conducting an SCA survey, field teams willoften meet people who will want to know what youare doing. While you do not have the time to engage

in an extended conversation with them, you shouldalways take the time to briefly explain what you aredoing and why. If the person wishes to obtain addi-tional information, you should give them a copy of aletter that you will be provided by the survey sponsor.The letter will explain why you are doing the surveyand also provide a contact number of someone they cancall for additional information. Example of a contactletter is shown in Appendix A.

If you are approached by someone who is upset thatyou are out on the stream you should be respectful ofthe person and answer any of their questions. Youshould also provide them with the sponsor’s contact let-ter and apologize for any inconvenience the survey mayhave caused them. Under no circumstances willyou engage in an argument with the individual.If the property owner asks you to leave their propertyyou should do so immediately. If the property ownerasks to speak to your supervisor, you should contacthim or her immediately by radio.


3.1 SELECTING A WATERSHED TO SURVEY

Over the past several years, the SCA survey hasbeen done on fairly small stream systems, such as thestreams flowing through State Parks and on largerwatersheds which involved surveying more than 200miles of stream. While the SCA survey can be done onany size non-tidal waterway, it is important that when-ever possible, the survey be done on a watershed basis.One of the main goals of the survey is to develop a pri-oritized list of problems to be corrected throughout theentire watershed. When prioritizing stream restorationor recommending improved storm water management,it is important that the area be looked at as a completeecological system and that management activities be tar-geted at those areas where they can do the most good.

The main consideration in selecting a watershed foran SCA survey is whether there is a local sponsor thatcan help correct the problems identified in the survey.Almost all of the problems identified in the SCA surveyhave solutions. Implementation of those solutions,however, takes time and commitment.

Past SCA surveys in Maryland have usually beendone in a partnership with county governments. In afew small SCA surveys the sponsor has been theMaryland Park Service or a local environmental organi-zation. Whoever the local sponsor is, it is importantthat after the survey is completed, someone has beenidentified as taking the lead in working with watershedstakeholders to correct the problems identified.

3.2 PARTNERING WITH WATERSHEDSTAKEHOLDERS

In addition to working with a local sponsor, it isalso very important that a variety of government andnon-government groups be contacted during the plan-ning stages of the survey. The main purpose in contact-ing these groups is to let them know that an SCA sur-vey is being done and to solicit their assistance in cor-recting the environmental problems identified.

The groups to contact about an SCA survey willvary depending on the watershed and who are themajor stakeholders in that watershed. Some veryimportant partners in any SCA survey will be the localcounty, city and town governments. In most of DNR’spast surveys local governments have been the study’s

sponsors. It is very important that if local governmentsare not the survey’s sponsor that they at least be a veryactive participant in it.

In watersheds where agriculture is a dominant landuse, it is very helpful if the local Soil ConservationDistricts (SCD) are involved in the survey. SCD agentsoften know most of the farmers in the watershed andcan assist survey teams in gaining access to the streamsthat run through farms. In addition, SCDs are usuallythe lead agencies working with farmers to correct agri-cultural pollution problems. SCDs administer a numberof programs that can assist farmers in installing BestManagement Practices (BMPs) on their farms.

Other groups that may be contacted and/or havebeen involved in past SCA surveys in Maryland are:

Federal Government■■ U.S.Army Corp of Engineers■■ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service■■ U.S. Department of Agricultural■■ U.S. Department of Defense

State Government■■ Maryland Department of Natural Resources■■ Maryland Department of the Environment■■ Maryland Department of Agricultural■■ State Highway Administration

Local Government■■ County, City and Town Environmental,

Public Works and Planning Agencies

Environmental Groups■■ Watershed Associations■■ Maryland Save-Our-Streams■■ Trout Unlimited■■ Audubon Naturalist Society■■ Izaak Walton League■■ Chesapeake Bay Foundation■■ Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay

3.3 MAPS & GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS

During an SCA survey, field teams walk a water-shed’s entire stream network and record the location ofenvironmental problems on field survey maps.Information collected during the field surveys is laterentered into computer databases and the location ofsites entered into a Geographical Information System(GIS). Modern GIS systems have proven to be very

3.0 PREPARING FOR A SURVEY

important in not only producing a good set of field sur-vey maps at the beginning of the SCA survey, but alsofor displaying survey findings.

While a variety of different types of maps have beenused in past surveys, we have found that a series of 200scale (1 inch = 200 ft.) topographic maps printed on11” x 17” paper works the best. Using the GIS systemsthat are available in many of Maryland’s urban counties,a grid system is set up and a series of field survey mapsare produced for the entire watershed. Each map isgiven a unique 3-digit number and a master map is alsoproduced that shows the location of all the maps in themap grid system. In most surveys two sets of field sur-vey maps are produced and the maps are laminated forfield use. A Sharpie pen is used to record field informa-tion on the laminated maps.

While the information on the field survey maps willvary depending on the capabilities of the GIS systembeing used, it is important that only information thatwill be useful to the survey teams be printed on themaps. Maps with too much information are often diffi-cult to read. It is also helpful if the maps are printed incolor. However, color printing can be expensive, andblack and white maps in which the streams are high-lighted with a marker prior to being laminated havealso worked well.

When producing a series of 200 scale GIS maps isnot possible, enlarged versions of the United StatesGeological Service’s 7.5 minute quad maps have beenused. These maps can be produced using many GISsystems and commercially available map display pro-grams. It is important when altering the size of themap that a scale bar also be enlarged at the same timeand affixed to the map before laminating. Field surveyteams will often use the map scale when they have toestimate long distances.

3.4 SURVEY EQUIPMENTThe equipment used in the SCA survey is divided

into three categories: survey crew equipment, surveyteam equipment, and survey member equipment.Survey crew equipment is the equipment and suppliesthat are shared by all of the survey teams and will usual-ly be left in a vehicle while crew members are doing asurvey. Survey team equipment is the equipment andsupplies that are shared by the members of a survey

team and carried with them during the survey. Finally,survey member equipment is the equipment and sup-plies that are the responsibility of individual crew mem-bers. A list of equipment used by field teams in theSCA survey is shown in Table 3.4-1.

Table 3.4-1. SCA Field Equipment List.

Survey Crew Equipment■■ vehicles with 2-way radios■■ filled large water container■■ soap (wash hands after survey to reduce expo-

sure to poison ivy)■■ boot repair materials■■ road map of watershed

Survey Team Equipment■■ survey protocols■■ backpack■■ clip board with a compartment to store data

sheets■■ data sheets and a spare set of data sheets in a

sealed plastic bag■■ survey maps (laminated)■■ watch■■ waterproof pens■■ pencils■■ camera (internal light meter and clock)■■ extra film (400 ASA)■■ spare camera battery■■ site number board■■ tape measure■■ first aid kit■■ portable 2-way radio■■ brush clippers (to help get through multiflora

rose)■■ bug spray and tick repellant■■ boot repair material■■ compass

Survey Member Equipment■■ hip boots■■ proper clothing (always wear long sleeve shirts

and long pants)■■ rain gear■■ spare set of clothes in vehicle (optional)■■ lunch and other snacks■■ filled water bottle (especially in warm weather)■■ allergy and other medicines


3.5 LOGISTICSThe SCA survey works best if each survey team has

two vehicles. First, the survey team will identify whichstream segment will be surveyed that day and wherethey are going to enter and exit the stream. The entireteam will then go to the exit point and park one of thevehicles. Everyone will get into the second car andtravel to the stream entry point, where they will parkthe second car. The team will then survey the streamuntil they reach their exit point, where they will pickup the vehicle left there. The team will then travel backto the point where they entered the stream and retrievethe second vehicle.

While having two vehicles per survey team doeswork best, it is very rare that an MCC crew will havesufficient vehicles to place one at the entrance and exitfor each team. In fact, for most of the SCA surveysdone in Maryland the MCC has had three or moreteams surveying a stream and only one or two vehiclesto work with. Under this situation, one of the MCCcrew members will usually stay with a vehicle duringthe survey to pick-up and drop-off survey teams.Between the morning drop-offs and afternoon pick-upsthe crew member in the car will monitor the progressof the survey teams. This is done by both waiting atroad crossings survey teams will pass during their surveyand by contacting survey teams periodically usingradios.

3.6 TEAM MEMBER ASSIGNMENTSSurvey teams should be established at the beginning

of the survey and given a team identification numberbetween one and nine. The members of each surveyteam remain the same during the entire survey. Pastsurveys have found doing this to be very helpful whenorganizing photographs and resolving questions aboutthe data collected. When the survey methods were firstbeing developed, crew members rotated between surveyteams and organization of the data was put off until theend of the survey. Survey crew members found organi-zation of the photographs and correction of occasionaldiscrepancies on data sheets to be both difficult andtime consuming. In some cases, areas had to be resur-veyed because of unanswered questions about the data.By maintaining the same people on each survey team, itis much easier to identify who collected the data. It is

also important that the photographs be organized andthe data sheets entered into a database routinely duringthe survey. The sooner this is done after the data is col-lected, the fresher the memories of those involved willbe, and the greater the likelihood that any problems canbe resolved quickly.

In each team, one person will usually be assigned asthe team leader who will be responsible for makingsure that the team has all the equipment and suppliesthat it will need each day. The team leaders from eachteam will coordinate between themselves and the sur-vey crew chief to determine which sections of streamwill be surveyed each day and where individual teamswill enter and exit the stream.

3.7 IDENTIFYING AND NOTIFYING PROPERTY OWNERS IN SURVEY AREA

During the initial planning stage, a list of propertyowners along the streams to be surveyed should becompiled. This can be done fairly easily using aGeographical Information System (GIS) database ofState tax maps. Both the DNR’s GIS system and manycounty GIS systems have electronic files of the State’stax maps on their systems.

Once a list of property owners has been compiled, aletter should be sent to every property owner notifyingthem that the Stream Corridor Assessment (SCA) sur-vey is being done in their area. It is usually best if theletter is sent by the local government agency sponsoringthe survey. An example of a property owner notifica-tion letter used in a past survey is presented inAppendix B. Stream reaches on the property of anyonewho objects to having survey members cross theirproperty will be excluded from the survey. In addition,survey members will not cross fenced areas or enterareas marked “no trespassing” without obtaining per-mission from the land owners. These are the same pro-cedures that were used during the Swan Creek surveyin Harford County. Of the five hundred and sevenproperty owners that were notified prior to the survey,only six individuals notified the County that they didnot want survey teams on their land. The restriction oncrossing these areas was not a major impediment to per-forming the stream survey.


THIS PAGE WAS LEFT BLANK


4.1 IDENTIFYING ENVIRONMENTALPROBLEMS

One of the main objectives of the SCA survey is toidentify environmental problems present within thestream corridor that can be seen by walking along astream and being observant. As mentioned in the intro-duction (Section 1.0) the SCA survey is not intended tobe a detailed scientific investigation, but a quick surveyof the drainage network in a watershed. The problemsidentified in the SCA survey are, for the most part, fair-ly obvious. It does not require an advanced collegedegree to identify a stream reach that does not have anytrees along it, or a place where trash is being dumpednear a stream. For some problem categories such aserosion sites or fish barriers, there can be cases wherethere is a question whether a specific problem is presentand should be included in the survey. For example,erosion is a natural process and even on healthy streamsthere will be some evidence of erosion, especially in astream’s bends. It is not the purpose of the SCA surveyto map every site where natural stream erosion is occur-ring. Survey members must use their best professionaljudgement to determine if the bank erosion they see ona stream is an indication of an unstable stream channeland if it is an environmental problem. For the mostpart, these judgement calls only result when the prob-lem is considered borderline. In instances where thereis a significant environmental problem present, it is usu-ally very obvious.

While identifying an environmental problem is usu-ally not difficult, properly characterizing the severityand correctability of a problem does require some expe-rience. Survey crew members receive several days oftraining, which includes both slide presentations of thedifferent problems identified in the SCA survey andfield visits to problem sites. Whenever possible, experi-enced survey members are paired with less experiencedindividuals to receive additional training during the sur-vey. Because the level of experience can vary amongsurvey teams, it is important that the survey crew chiefmonitor the survey teams on a daily basis to be sure thesurvey is done in a consistent manner. The photographsthat are taken at each site can also help monitor thework of each team and adjustments to the ratings canbe made based on review of the photographs by thesurvey manager or other experts.

4.2 ASSIGNING A SITE NUMBERIt is very important that before beginning an SCA

survey, a system is established to assign field identifica-tion numbers to problem and representative sites. Inorder to enter the information into a database, each sur-vey site must be given a unique number that will distin-guish it from all other sites in the survey. Several num-bering schemes have been used over the years and mosthave worked fairly well. At present, a 6-digit number isbeing used in most of the SCA surveys done by theMaryland DNR. In our present numbering system, thefirst three numbers of the field identification numberare the map numbers. Prior to beginning the surveyone or more complete sets of maps of an area’s drainagenetwork are produced and each map is given a Map IDnumber (Section 3.3). The fourth number in the fieldidentification number is the team number which isgiven to each team at the beginning of the survey(Section 3.6). The last two digits are the site numberswhich are assigned to each field site starting with thenumber 01 on each map (Figure 4.2-1). We have foundthat this numbering system has several advantages. First,survey teams do not have to remember the last site

number that they used, but can begin with site 01 oneach map. Second, if two teams are using the same map to cover different stream segments, the field identi-fication number will be different because the teamnumbers (4th digit) will be different.

Some problems such as erosion or inadequatestream buffer can extend over fairly long reaches of astream. In assigning field identification numbers tothese problems and noting their location on field maps,it is important that the site ends where it joins with

Figure 4.2-1. Photograph showing site number board at a site with an inadequate stream buffer.

4.0 CONDUCTING A SURVEY

another stream. For example, if surveying a small tribu-tary that has an erosion problem and you come to thepoint where it enters a larger stream, you should endthe erosion site at the tributary’s mouth even if there isan additional erosion problem downstream. The erosionproblem in the larger stream would be given a separatefield identification number because the erosion problemmay not only extend downstream but also upstream ofwhere the smaller tributary enters the larger stream(Figure 4.2-2). This does not mean, however, that when

surveying a stream that has an inadequate buffer or ero-sion problem along the stream mainstem that you muststop and assign a new field identification number whereeach small tributary enters the stream. In this case, anew field identification number would only be neededwhere two similar size streams come together and bothstreams have the same problem.

While each site must have a unique site number, itis not uncommon to identify two or more environmen-tal problems at one site. For example, a survey teammay find an area with an inadequate stream buffer, anerosion problem and a fish barrier all along the samestream reach. As long as all the problems are within thesame limited area, it is not necessary to give each prob-lem its own field identification number. A single fieldidentification number will be sufficient for the site withseparate data sheets filled out for each problem. It ispossible to assign two or more different problems to thesame field identification number because each problemis given a two-letter problem identification code whenit is entered into the database. The problem identifica-tion codes can be seen on the upper right-hand cornerof the data sheets (Appendix C).The combination ofthe field identification number and problem identifica-tion code provide a unique identification code for eachidentified problem in the database.

When assigning two or more problems the samefield identification number, each problem should belocated within the same limited area. For example, atrash dumping site that also has a discharge pipe presentat the same location could be given the same field iden-tification number. If however one of the problems,such as erosion, extends over a long reach of stream andwithin that stream reach there is a fish barrier, the fishbarrier should be given a separate field identificationnumber. This is because in follow up investigations, sur-veyors need to be able to relocate problem sites quicklyand should not have to search over a long stream reachto find a previously identified problem.

While two or more different problems can have thesame field identification number, if there are two ormore of the same problems at a site then each problemmust be given its own field identification number. Forinstance, in urban areas there occasionally may be twoor more pipe outfall discharging to the same site.When this occurs, each pipe outfall must be given itsown individual field identification number.

In addition to assigning field identification numbersto problem sites, the same numbering system will beused for representative sites. Representative sites(Section 4.6.11) are used to document general condi-tions of both in-stream and riparian corridor habitat.The sites are premarked on survey maps at the begin-ning of the study and spaced at approximately 1/4to1/2 mile interval along the stream. When surveyteams reach a predesignated representative site theyshould assign the next field identification number tothat site. If any other environmental problems are pres-ent, they can also be given the same field identificationnumber.

4.3 RECORDING PROBLEM LOCATION ON A MAP

It is very important that survey members accuratelyrecord the location of all environmental problems ontheir survey maps so that follow up studies will be ableto locate problem sites. Problems such as pipe outfalls,trash dumping, exposed pipes, fish barrier, and represen-tative sites are usually represented on the survey map bya large dot. Next to the large dot the field identifica-tion number and two letter problem code should bewritten on the field map. Other problems such aschannel alteration, erosion sites, and inadequate buffers(which can extend over fairly long stream reaches) areusually represented by a line on the map showing


Figure 4.2-2. Example showing how field maps should be notated when tributaryand mainstem have the same problem.

where the problem is located. Next to the line, boththe field identification number and two letter problemcodes should be clearly written. In some cases theproblem will extend from one map onto an adjacentmap. When this occurs, you should not change thefield identification number simply because the mapnumber has changed. The field identification numberwill be the same on both maps and should be clearlywritten on both maps.

4.4 PHOTOGRAPHING A SITEAt all problem sites one or more photographs

should be taken. Photographers should keep in mindthat the photographs will be reviewed by the surveymanager and other experts, and should clearly show theproblems at the site. At all representative sites photographsshould be taken looking both up and downstream. Ingeneral, these photographs should be long view photosthat show the general condition of the stream and adjacentriparian zone. In all photographs, a number board shouldbe present that clearly shows the site’s field identificationnumber. It is important, especially when photographinglong view shots, that the number board be closeenough to the camera so that the numbers on the boardare clearly visible. Past studies have found that when anumber board was not used, photo identification andsorting was much more difficult. In addition to a num-bering board, it is helpful if a person or measuring stickis also present in the photograph to help provide a senseof scale to the photograph. If asked to stand in a pho-tograph to help provide a sense of scale, look at thecamera and act professionally. Please remember thatthese photographs will be reviewed by several peopleand may be included in both talks and publications.

The camera used to photograph problems and rep-resentative sites must have an accurate internal lightmeter. It is also helpful if the camera is fairly small,light weight, water resistant and has an internal clock.The majority of the photographs taken during a normalSCA survey will be under poor light conditions. Earlierattempts to use disposal cameras which do not havelight metering systems produced very poor quality pic-tures. Because of the usual poor lighting conditions,400 ASA print film should always be used. Try to avoidaiming the camera directly into the sun or at highlyreflective surfaces. Finally, it is helpful if the camera hasan internal clock and is able to print the date on thephotograph. Having the date printed on the photo-graph has proven to be very helpful in sorting photo-graphs. Of course, the date should be checked at the

beginning of the survey each day to make sure it isaccurate.

One or more photographs are taken at all problemsites and two photographs (one looking upstream andanother looking downstream) are taken at all represen-tative sites. You should take as many photographs asyou need to properly document a problem or set ofproblems without wasting film. After the photographsare taken you should indicate the film exposure num-bers on the data sheets (Appendix C).

4.5 FILLING OUT DATA SHEETSAll data sheets should be filled out completely using

either a pencil or waterproof pen. Do not use regularpens because the ink will run if the data sheets get wet.The data sheets have been designed to provide a selec-tion of most likely answers whenever possible. If anappropriate choice is not given, you should circle“Other” and write in an appropriate answer to thatquestion. On questions that do not provide a selectionof possible answers, simple write in the appropriateanswer. If you do not know the answer to a questionyou should write “Unknown” in the appropriate spaceand at the end of the day talk to the survey crew chieffor clarification on what the correct response should be.If a correction to the data sheet is needed, it should bedone as soon as possible.

When asked to provide a length or height measure-ment, the number you write down on the data sheetshould be the most accurate value you can providewithout spending an inordinate amount of time collect-ing the data. A tape measure or ruler should be used tomake most measurements. For moderately long dis-tances it may be necessary to pace off the stream lengthto provide an accurate distance estimate. If very longdistances are involved, you can use you field maps toestimate the length of stream affected by the problem.Please remember, you want to provide the most accu-rate data possible; however, SCA is not a detailed surveyand accurate estimates of some measurements are per-missible.

All measurements done during an SCA survey willbe in standard English units. On the data sheets theappropriate unit will be shown to the right of the spaceprovided for the data. The data must be provided in theunits indicated to be properly entered into the database.For example, if asked to measure the diameter of a pipewith a 4 feet wide opening in inches, you should alwayswrite 48 inches, not 4 feet. All pipe diameter measure-


ments will be done in inches and the measurementrequired is the inside diameter. In some cases, such aswhen recording an exposed pipe, you will not be ableto measure the inside diameter of the pipe directly. Inthese cases you should measure the outside width of thepipe if possible and estimate the internal diameter.Bank height and length are always measured in feet. Inthe case of bank height, the measurement is taken fromthe base flow water level to the top of the bank. If theheight of the bank involves a fraction of a foot, thevalue should be recorded in 10ths of feet. For example,a stream bank that was 1 foot 6 inches high would berecorded on the data sheets as 1.5 feet.

4.5.1 SEVERITY, CORRECTABILITYAND ACCESS RATINGS

To help prioritize future restoration work, all prob-lem sites are evaluated and scored by field crews on ascale of one to five for three separate areas: problemseverity, correctability and accessability. These scores aresubjective and based on the field crew’s evaluation atthe time of the survey. While the MarylandConservation Corps members receive a week of train-ing on how to do the survey, the overall experience ofindividual Corps members is usually limited. Oftenthey do not have the background to provide a definitiveevaluation of the severity or correctability of a particu-lar problem. The rating should therefore be viewed asthe field team’s opinion of the worst problem within aspecific problem category and which problems theybelieved would be the easiest to correct. The scoresprovide a starting point for more detailed follow upevaluations by individuals that are more experienceddealing with specific problem categories. This is initial-ly done by reviewing the data and photographs collect-ed by the field teams and can involve follow-up fieldvisits as well. As additional information about a specificproblem site is obtained, the site’s severity, correctabilityand/or accessability ratings can change.

While the criteria for rating problem severity, cor-rectability and access can vary among different problemcategories, the general guidelines used by survey teamsto assign these values are as follows:

Severity RatingThe severity rating is a rating on how bad a specific

problem is relative to other problems in the same prob-lem category. It is used to answer questions such as,where did field crews believe the worst erosion prob-

lems were, or where was the largest section of streamwith an inadequate buffer? In general, the scoring isbased on the overall impression of the survey team ofthe severity of the problem.

Rating of 1 is for the most severe problemsthat appear to have a direct and wide reaching impacton the stream’s aquatic resources. Within a specificproblem category, a 1 rating indicates that the problemis among the worst that the field teams have seen orwould expect to see. Rating is based on comparison togood and bad reference sites seen during training.Examples would include a discharge from a pipe thatwas discoloring the water over a long stream reach(greater than 1/2 mile) or a long section of stream(greater than 1/2 mile) that had incised several feet withunstable banks that are showing signs of eroding at afast rate.

Rating of 3 is for moderately severe problemsthat appear to be having some adverse impacts at a spe-cific site. While a rating of 3 would indicate that fieldcrews did believe it was a significant problem, it alsoindicates that they have either seen or would expect tosee much worse problems in that specific category.Examples would include: a small fish blockage that maybe passable by strong swimming fish like trout, but wasa barrier to resident species such as sculpins; or a sitewhere several hundred feet of stream has an inadequateforest buffer but the banks do have vegetation on themand are stable.

Rating of 5 is for minor problems that do notappear to be having a significant impact on stream andaquatic resources. A rating of 5 indicates that a problemwas present but compared to other problems in thesame category it would be considered minor. Anexample would include an outfall pipe from a stormwater management structure that is not dischargingduring dry weather, and does not have any erosionproblem either at the outfall or immediately downstream.

Correctability RatingCorrectability ratings provide a relative measure on

how easily the field teams believe it would be to correcta specific problem. The correctability rating can behelpful in determining which problems to initiallyexamine when developing a restoration plan for adrainage basin. One restoration strategy would be toinitially target the severest problems that are the easiestto fix. The correctability rating can also be useful inidentifying simple projects that can be done by


volunteers, as opposed to projects that require more sig-nificant engineering efforts.

Rating of 1 is for minor problems that couldbe corrected quickly and easily using hand labor, with aminimum amount of planning. These types of projectswould usually not need any Federal, State or localgovernment permits. It is a job that a small group ofvolunteers (10 people or less) could fix in less than aday without using heavy equipment. Examples would beremoving debris from a blocked culvert pipe, removingless than two truck loads of trash from an easily accessiblearea or planting trees along a short stretch of stream.

Rating of 3 is for moderate size problems thatmay require a small piece of equipment, such as a backhoe,and some planning to correct. This would not be thetype of project that volunteers would do by themselves,although volunteers could assist in some aspects of theproject, such as final landscaping. This type of projectwould usually require several days to complete. Theproject may require some local, State or Federal govern-ment notification or permits, however, environmentaldisturbance would be small and approval should be easyto obtain.

Rating of 5 is for major restoration problemswhich would require a large expensive effort to correct.These projects would usually require heavy equipment,significant amount of funding ($100,000.00 or more),and construction could take a month or more. Theamount of disturbance would be large, and the projectwould need to obtain a variety of Federal, State and/orlocal permits. Examples would include a potentialrestoration area where the stream has deeply incisedseveral feet over a long distance (i.e., several thousandfeet) or a fish blockage at a large dam.

Accessibility RatingAccessability rating is a relative measure of how dif-

ficult it is to reach a specific problem site. The rating ismade by the field survey team standing at a site, usingtheir field map and field observations. While factorssuch as land ownership and surrounding land use canenter into the field judgement of accessibility, the ratingassumes that some access to the site could be obtained ifrequested.

Rating of 1 is for a site that is easily accessibleboth by car or on foot. Examples would include aproblem in an open area inside a public park wherethere is sufficient room to park safely near the site. Ifheavy equipment was needed, it could easily access thesite using existing roads or trails.

Rating of 3 is for sites that are easily accessi-ble by foot but not easily accessible by a vehicle.Examples would include a stream section that could bereached by crossing a large field or a site that was acces-sible only by 4-wheel drive vehicles.

Rating of 5 is for sites that are difficult toreach both on foot and by a vehicle. Exampleswould include a site on private land where there are noroads or trails nearby. To reach the site it would be nec-essary to hike over a mile. If equipment were neededto do the restoration work, an access road would needto be built over a long distance through rough terrain.

4.6 DATA SHEET DESCRIPTIONSThe data sheets for the SCA survey are provided in

Appendix C and are designed to record basic informa-tion about a problem that can be collected quickly.These data sheets have been developed over severalyears and have been modified several times. There are atotal of 10 separate data sheets used in this survey.There are 9 problem data sheets including an UnusualCondition/Comment data sheet, which can be used torecord information on problems not addressed by theother data sheets. The last data sheet is the representa-tive site data sheet which is filled out at 1/4 to1/2 mileintervals during the survey to help document the gen-eral condition of both in-stream habitat and the condi-tion of the adjacent stream corridor.

The data sheets presented in the protocols representa core set used in the Maryland’s SCA survey; however,additional data sheets may be added to a survey when aparticular problem is known to exist in the area andcollecting data on the problem is of special interest tothe survey’s sponsor. For example, in a survey of NeffRun in western Maryland, acid mine drainage wasknown to be a problem in the area. While an acidmine seep could be reported as an Unusual Condition,a special data sheet was developed and survey crewsused litmus paper to measure the pH of the stream anddischarges during the survey. Adding special data sheetsto address problems that may be unique to an area doeshelp to refine the information that is collected by sur-vey teams. When developing new data sheets, it is


important to remember that the SCA survey is notintended to be a detailed scientific investigation. Instead,the SCA survey is designed to quickly identify potentialenvironmental problems along a stream corridor.

4.6.1 CHANNEL ALTERATIONChannelization refers to the once common practice

of dredging, straightening and/or widening streamchannels in an attempt to reduce flooding or to lowerthe ground water table. The use of channelization tocontrol flooding has been historically referred to as“stream improvement.” It was given this name becausethe engineers who designed these projects wereattempting to improve the hydraulic capacity of thestream to transport flood waters through an area. Thiswas done using a number of different approaches,including: widening the stream channel so it wouldhold more water, building berms along the edges to thestream to hold the flood flow in the channel, straighten-ing the stream to increase the slope of the water tomove it faster through an area and/or reducing theroughness of the stream channel by constructing asmooth channel out of concrete. A channelized streamsection is shown in Figure 4.6.1-1. In addition to floodcontrol projects, channelization has also been done insome areas to help lower the ground water table todrain adjacent wetlands and crop land.

While channelization can be partially effective atreducing flooding or lowering the ground water tablein an area, it can also have a variety of negative environ-mental impacts. Channelized steams often have poorinstream habitat for aquatic organisms. They can be abarrier to fish migrations, and in areas where the ripari-an buffer has been removed, the water in the stream canbe heated by the sun during the day reducing its oxy-gen holding capacity and raising water temperatures

above the tolerance limits of some fish species. In addi-tion, while channelization may be able to reduce flood-ing in one specific stream reach, often it increases flood-ing downstream.

In the past, channelization was a common practicein many areas. For example, in one Maryland countythere is estimated to be more than100 miles of streamthat have been replaced with concrete trapezoid chan-nels. Fortunately, because of the high cost, limited ben-efits, and significant environmental impacts, widespreadstream channelization is not done any more. In fact, inrecent years there have even been several projects inMaryland to remove concrete channels and restorethem to a more natural stream shape.

While widespread stream channelization does notoccur anymore, small projects to relocate a section ofstream as part of a highway or development project stilloccur. These projects, however, do receive a significantamount of oversite by State and Federal governmentagencies that issue waterway construction and wetlandspermits for this work. New techniques also have beendeveloped that can help minimize adverse environmen-tal impacts of these projects.

Survey teams should look not only for streamreaches that are in concrete channels but for any areaswhere the stream has been significantly altered. A goodindication of this is an unusually straight stream channelfor a fairly long stretch. Unless the area has a lot oflarge rock (bedrock, boulders or large cobble) and/orthe stream is moving down a fairly steep slope (usually> 4%), the stream should have some meander pattern orsinuosity.

Channelized stream reaches are sections of streamswhere most of the stream’s channel is affected over asignificant length (greater than 50 feet) of the stream.In conducting an SCA survey it is important that sur-vey teams concentrate on identifying and recordingimportant stream problems. It is common when doinga stream survey to find short sections of stream wherestone has been placed along the stream’s banks to stabi-lize an area. This is often done to stabilize the portionof the stream’s banks disturbed during construction of apipeline that passes under a stream. In most cases, ifonly one side of the stream is impacted and/or thelength of stream affected is less than 50 feet with noother environmental problems present, then there is noneed to fill out a channel alteration data sheet. For thepurposes of this study, channel alteration does notinclude road crossing unless a significant amount ofstream channelization has occurred either up or down


Figure 4.6.1-1. Photograph of a channel alteration site.

stream of the road crossing. Channel alteration alsodoes not include tributaries where storm drains wereplaced in the stream channel and the entire tributary isnow piped underground. While these stream sectionshave been significantly altered, it is not possible to tellby walking the stream corridor precisely where this wasdone. Finally, the term channel alteration would nor-mally not apply to some of the more recent streamrestoration projects that have been built in the last fewyears. In areas where a stream restoration project hasbeen recently done, the team should fill out an UnusualCondition/Comment data sheet briefly describing thearea as well as estimating the length of stream that wasrestored.

DATA SHEET FOR CHANNEL ALTERATIONMap,Team, Site, Date and Photo Numbers:

Fill in the appropriate site identification informationon the top of the data sheet and on the field maps.Also, record the date and film exposure numbers for thephotographs taken at the site.

Type:

Indicate on the data sheet if the channelized streamsection is constructed of concrete, rip-rap, gabion bas-kets or an earthen channel.These are the most commontypes of channelized stream sections that will beencountered. If the channel is constructed by someother means or using a combination of constructionmaterials, then indicate it in the space provided. Alsofill out an unusual condition/comment sheet and giveadditional information on the channel design.

Bottom Width:

Measure the width of the stream channel in inches.If the channel varies in width then indicate the averageor best representative width for the portion of streamthat is channelized. If the channelized stream reach isdivided into two sections of significantly differentwidths, then you may need to fill out two or moreChannel Alteration data sheets and possibly an UnusualCondition/Comment data sheet.

Length:

Indicate the length of stream that has been affectedby channel alteration in feet. One value that is usuallycalculated in the final report is the total number ofstream miles that have been altered. It is important thatthis number be as accurate as possible. Whenever possi-ble, you should measure the length of stream impacted

using a tape measure. If very long distances areinvolved, you should estimate the distance by pacing itoff or measuring the distance on your field surveymaps.

Sediment Deposition:

Indicate if there is a significant amount of sedimentdeposition in the channelized stream section. A signifi-cant amount of sediment deposition occurs in areaswhere the stream has been over widened and the streamis attempting to go back to a smaller more naturalchannel. Large stable bars inside the channelized streamreach would be an indication of sediment deposition.

Vegetation in the Channel:

Indicate if the bars inside the channelized streamreach have stable vegetation on them. The vegetationmust be inside the channel and not simply along thechannel’s banks. The vegetation can be either woodyvegetation such as shrubs and trees, a large amount ofgrass or emergent wetland vegetation such as cattails. Ifonly a few wildly scattered clumps of grass are present,then indicate “no” on the data sheet, because a smallamount of grass on channel bars is usually only tempo-rary and will probably be washed away during the nextlarge storm event. Indicating whether stable vegetationis present is important. It is an indication that thestream is in the process of restoring itself by reestablish-ing a more natural stream channel inside the overlywidened channelized stream reach.

Is it part of a road crossing?

Channel alteration is very common above andbelow road crossings. The channel alteration is done inan attempt to stabilize the stream channel near the road,preventing erosion that could threaten the road and tohelp move the water quickly under the road crossing toavoid flooding. Indicate on the data sheets if the chan-nel alteration is part of a road crossing and how muchof the stream is channelized above and below the road.

SeverityThe severity rating of a channelized stream section

will depend on the amount of stream affected and thesignificance of the impact. Factors that should be takeninto consideration in assigning your severity rating are:

■■ The condition and amount of good instreamhabitat for fish and macroinvertebrates.

■■ Is the water depth so shallow that it blocks thepassage of some fish?

■■ Length of stream channelized.


■■ Is the channelized stream well-shaded or does itcontribute to significant temperature increases inthe stream?

Following are several examples of this rating system.

Severe rating (1): A concrete channel where water isvery shallow (less than an inch deep) with no naturalsediments present in the channel, and a significant sec-tion of stream (i.e., >1000 ft.) has been channelized.An example of a severe Channel Alteration problem isshown in Figure 4.6.1-2.

Moderate rating (3): A stream channel where a moderatelength of stream (i.e., > 500 ft.) has been channelized,but the channel has stabilized over time and is begin-ning to show signs that it is functioning as a naturalstream channel. Bars may have formed in the channeland vegetation may be present on the bars. An exampleof a moderate channel alteration problem is shown inFigure 4.6.1-3.

Minor rating (5): An earthen channel of less than 100feet with good water depth, a natural sediment bottomand with a channel size and shape similar to theunchannelized stream reaches above and below theimpacted area.

CorrectabilityOnce a stream has been channelized, it can be both

difficult and expensive to correct the problem. Inrecent years there have been a few cases where smallconcrete channels have been removed and a more natural stream channel established. Photographs takenof a restored stream channel before and after restorationwork was done are shown in Figure 4.6.1-4. Therehave also been a few cases where gabion basket or rip-rap channels have been partially restored by sedimentcovering the artificial channel and a more naturalstream bottom formed inside the channelized reach.Factors that should be taken into consideration inassigning your Correctability rating are:


Figure 4.6.1-2. Severe Channel Alteration

Figure 4.6.1-3. Moderate Channel Alteration Problem Figure 4.6.1-4. Channelized stream before and after restoration

■■ The length of stream impacted.■■ The adjacent land use and whether construction

staging or access would be a problem.■■ The need for heavy equipment.■■ How much earth, stone or other material would

have to be moved?■■ How much funding would be needed to do this

project?■■ Would permits, detailed surveys and detailed

construction plans be needed?

Following are examples of this rating system.

Best Correctability (1): A short stream reach (< 100 ft.)that is already beginning to revert into a natural stablechannel and only a small amount of work is needed.The new stream channel should have a similar sinuosityand channel dimensions as natural stream reaches upand down stream.

Moderate Correctability (3): A short section of eitherconcrete or stone channel that could be removed oraltered fairly quickly using a backhoe, or a longer sec-tion of earthen channel that could also be modifiedfairly quickly using a backhoe. Unless the channel isoverly widened and sediment deposition is naturallycorrecting the problem, the correctability rating willusually be 3 or above.

Worst Correctability (5): A long concrete trapezoidchannel with limit space for any restoration work.

AccessThe ratings for access are discussed for all problems

in section 4.5.1.

4.6.2 EROSION SITEErosion is a natural process and necessary to main-

tain good aquatic habitat in a stream.Too much erosion,however, can have the opposite effect, destabilizingstream banks, destroying in-stream habitat and causingsignificant sediment pollution problems downstream. Aphotograph of a stream section with a stream bank ero-sion problem is shown in Figure 4.6.2-1. Severe ero-sion problems occur when either a stream’s hydrologyand/or sediment supply have been significantly altered.This often occurs when land use in a watershedchanges. As a watershed becomes more urbanized, for-est and agricultural fields are developed into residentialhousing complexes and commercial properties. As aresult, the amount of impervious surfaces in a drainagebasin increases, which in turn causes the amount of

runoff entering a stream to also increase. The streamchannel will adjust over time to the new flows by erod-ing the stream bed and banks to increase its size. Thischannel readjustment can extend over decades duringwhich excessive amounts of sediment from unstableeroding stream banks can have very detrimental impactson the stream’s aquatic resources.

While a very unstable stream channel with a severeerosion problem is fairly easy to recognize, it is notunusual when conducting an SCA survey to find manyareas where only minor or moderate bank erosion isoccurring. It is not the purpose of the survey to identi-fy the location of every stream bend where minor bankerosion is occurring. Erosion is a natural process. Evenin the most undisturbed watershed you can find 3 to 4foot high banks on the outside bend of a stream. Thisis especially true when the stream channel has naturallymigrated to the edge of its flood plain and the stream isbeginning to erode into an abandoned terrace. Whenconducting an SCA survey, you are primarily interestedin identifying unstable stream reaches that are experi-encing a significant amount of erosion along thestream’s banks.

DATA SHEET FOR EROSION SITEMap,Team, Site, Date and Photo Numbers:


Type:

When a stream channel becomes unstable it willnormally undergo a period of readjustment. Duringthis readjustment period, which can last for severaldecades, the stream channel may deepen and widen to


Figure 4.6.2-1. Photograph of a stream erosion site.

accommodate the change in flow or sediment inputthat has occurred in the watershed. In some cases, thestream may also show signs of headcutting whichappears as an abrupt drop in the bed of the stream.Headcutting will often occur in a stream system’s tribu-taries when the mainstem of the stream has erodeddownward and the bed of the tributaries no longermeet the mainstem’s stream bed at an even grade.Under these conditions the stream will often form aheadcut on the lower end of the tributary and overtime the headcut will work its way up the tributary.

It is often very difficult to know exactly where anunstable stream is in the readjustment process withoutmonitoring the stream at several points over an extend-ed period of time. During the SCA survey you willonly have a brief look at the unstable stream channel, soyou will need to depend on your training, experienceand best professional judgement to indicate if you thinkthe stream is still downcutting, widening or headcut-ting. We realize that this is a judgment call and thateven with the most experienced individual some followup monitoring would be necessary to verify any answer.

Cause:

It is often very difficult to know exactly what iscausing an erosion problem in a stream, especially if theproblem is caused by a change in hydrology or sedi-ment input from another part of the watershed. Atother times, however, a cause of an erosion problemmay be obvious. An example would include livestockin the stream or erosion at the end of a discharge pipe.Indicate if there is some obvious cause to the erosionproblem. If there is no obvious cause for the erosionproblem, indicate that the cause of the problem is“Unknown.”

Length:

Indicate the length of stream in feet that appears tobe unstable and has an erosion problem. This veryimportant measurement will be used in the final reportto calculate the total length of stream that has an ero-sion problem. Whenever possible measure the length ofstream impacted using a tape measure. If very long dis-tances are involved, you should estimate the distance bypacing it off or measuring the distance on your map.

Average Exposed Bank Height:

Exposed bank height refers to the height of theexposed stream bank above the water line during baseflow conditions. Bank height is measured from thewater line to the top of the bank. To estimate averageexposed bank height, several quick measurements should

be taken of the height of the bank within the erosionsite and a rough estimate of the average bank heightmade. Extensive time should not be taken to obtain thisvalue. Measurement should be recorded in feet.

Land Use:

Indicate the dominant (> 50%) land use in thestream’s corridor on both the left and right sides of thestream. The left and right sides of a stream are deter-mined when you are facing downstream. Land usechoices on the data sheets include “Crop fields, Pasture,Lawn, Paved, Shrubs and Small Trees, Forest, MultifloraRose.” In making your determination, the area closestto the stream (ie., within 50 feet) is the area of greatestinterest. If more than one land use type is present onthe bank, choose the one that best describes the area’soverall land use. Pick only one land use categorybecause the database will only accept one land useentry for each side of the stream. If none of the listedcategories accurately describes the land use near thestream, circle “Other” and enter an appropriate answer.

Is infrastructure threatened?

Indicate if infrastructure is or will be threatened bystream bank erosion at the site. For the purpose of thisstudy, the term infrastructure refers to both publicworks systems such as roads and pipe lines, as well asany man made structure, such as a shed or a fence thatcould be affected by continued erosion at the site in thenear future (within 10 years). If you answer yes, makesure you take a photograph of the infrastructure ele-ment that is being threatened and describe it in thespace provided on the data sheet.

SeverityAccurately rating the severity of an erosion site can

be one of the more difficult parts of the SCA survey forindividuals who have not walked many streams. Thereis a tendency for inexperienced individuals to overratemoderate erosion problems and to totally ignore minorerosion problems. It is important during the SCAtraining that survey members visit several sites withvarying levels of erosion problems. In many cases, indi-viduals need to see and walk a severely eroding streamto see how bad an erosion problem can be. Please keepin mind that if you rate the severity of an erosion prob-lem as either a 1 or 2, it is very likely that someone willdo a follow-up visit to the site. Reducing sedimentinputs to the Chesapeake Bay is one of the mainrestoration goals of the Chesapeake Bay program.There is a lot of interest in identifying severe stream


erosion problems so that these areas can be targeted forpossible stream restoration and/or improved stormwater management.

The severity rating for erosion sites will depend onthe length of stream that appears to be unstable andhow significant the erosion problem is in the stream.The most severe erosion problems occur in areas wherethere are soft unconsolidated sediments and the streamhas downcut several feet forming an incised streamchannel. Factors that should be taken into considera-tion in assigning your severity rating are:

■■ What is the length of stream impacted?■■ What is the height of stream banks?■■ Does erosion appear to be a problem in both

the bend and run sections of the stream?■■ Is there evidence of high erosion rates along the

stream’s banks?■■ Is there evidence that the stream channel is

unstable and readjusting?■■ Is there unconsolidated gravel, sands and silts in

the banks?■■ Are the soils in the banks stratified?■■ Has the stream channel eroded below the root

zone of the vegetation along its banks?

Examples are:

Severe rating (1): A long section of stream (> 1000 ft.)that had incised several feet, with banks on both sides ofthe stream that are unstable and eroding at a fast rate.Usually this occurs in areas where there are soft uncon-solidated sediments (gravel, sand and/or silts) and thestream has eroded below the root zone of the bank veg-etation. An example of a very severe stream bank ero-sion problem is shown in Figure 4.6.2-2.

Moderate rating (3): Either a long section of stream (> 1000 ft.) that has a moderate erosion problem, or ashorter stream reach (between 1000 and 300 ft.) withvery high banks (> 4 ft.), and evidence that the streamis eroding at a fast rate.

Minor rating (5): A short section of stream (< 300 ft.)where the erosion is limited to one or two meanderbends or a site where an erosion problem is beingcaused by a pipe outfall and the area affected is fairlylimited. An example of a minor erosion problem isshown in Figure 4.6.2-3.

CorrectabilityMinor erosion problems in open areas can often be

corrected using some fairly simple bioengineering tech-niques. This is especially true in areas where the insta-bility of the stream channel is caused by livestock hav-ing unlimited access to the stream. In order for mostbioengineering approaches to be successful, the erodedarea will need to be unshaded during most of the day.The need for substantial light levels at bioengineeringsites stems from the fact that most of the vegetationused in these projects, such as willows, need high lightlevels to survive. While some shade tolerant species likemountain laurel can be used for some projects, theseplants are usually slow growing.

Areas with minor erosion problems on public land,or with fairly easy access, that could be corrected usinga bioengineering approach should be highlighted in thesurvey by filling out an unusual condition/commentdata sheet in addition to an erosion site data sheet. Theseareas are important because they are excellent sites forcommunity-based stream bank stabilization efforts.

The erosion problems you will see during an SCAsurvey in Maryland are often due to a general instability


Figure 4.6.2-2. Severe eroding stream bank.

Figure 4.6.2-3. Example of a minor eroding stream bank problem.


of the stream channel resulting from land use changes inthe watershed. In these cases, long reaches of stream areoften affected. New techniques have been recentlydeveloped to analyze a stream’s erosion patterns andcorrect the problem by reconstructing the stream chan-nel into a stable form. Photographs of a stream channelbefore and after stream restoration work was done isshown in Figure 4.6.2-4. These tend to be very com-plicated restoration efforts costing hundreds of dollarsper linear foot of stream. Factors that should be takeninto consideration in assigning your correctability ratingare:

■■ The length of stream impacted.■■ The adjacent land use, and whether construction

staging or access is a problem.■■ Will heavy equipment be needed?■■ How much earth, stone, or other material needs

to be moved?■■ How much funding would be needed for the

project?

■■ Would permits, detailed survey, and detailedconstruction plans be needed?

Examples of this rating system are:

Best Correctability (1): A short stream reach (< 200 ft.)where the erosion problem can be corrected by simplebioengineering techniques using volunteers in one ortwo days.

Moderate Correctability (3): An erosion problem thatcould be corrected by a work crew over several weeks,using primarily a backhoe or other small piece of con-struction equipment. The project may involve usingsome small rock (< 100 lbs.) to stabilize the toe of astream bank but most of the work would rely on vege-tation and biodegradable material to stabilize the streambanks.

Worst Correctability (5): A long reach of stream (i.e.,several thousand feet) that had deeply incised severalfeet and any attempt to actively restore the stream chan-nel would require not only significant funding (i.e., sev-eral hundred thousand dollars) but would also involve alarge amount of earth moving and disturbance to theriparian corridor.

AccessSee section 4.5.1.

4.6.3 EXPOSED PIPESExposed pipes are any pipes that are either in the

stream or along the stream’s immediate banks that couldbe damaged by a high flow event. An example of anexposed pipe is shown in Figure 4.6.3-1. It does notinclude pipe outfalls where only the open end of thepipe is exposed. Exposed pipes do include: 1) manholestacks in or along the edge of the stream channel; 2)pipes that are exposed along the stream’s banks; 3) pipesthat run under the stream’s bed and have been exposedby stream down-cutting; and 4) pipes that are built overa stream but are low enough that they could be affectedby occasional high storm flows. Pipes that are placedalong the support beams of bridges or suspended highenough above the stream to not be affected by verylarge storm events should not be included in this surveyunless they are leaking.

In urban areas it is very common for pipelines andother utilities to be located in the stream corridor. Thisis especially true for gravity sewer lines which dependon the continuous downward slope of the pipeline tomove sewage to a pumping station or treatment plant.

Figure 4.6.2-4. Severely eroding bank prior to and after stabilization.

Since streams are located at the lowest points in the locallandscape, engineers often build sewer lines parallel tostreams to collect sewage from adjacent neighborhoods.While the pipelines are stationary, streams can migrateand over time can expose previously buried pipelines.When this occurs, the pipeline becomes vulnerable tobeing punctured by debris in the stream. Fluids in thepipelines can then be discharged into the stream causinga serious water quality problem.

DATA SHEET FOR EXPOSED PIPESMap,Team, Site, Date and Photo Numbers:


Pipe is:

Indicate if the exposed pipe is across the bottom ofthe stream, along the stream banks or an exposed man-hole stack. If these selections do not properly describethe exposed pipe’s location, circle “Other” and describethe location.

Type of Pipe:

Indicate if the pipe is made out of concrete, smoothmetal, corrugated metal or plastic. If the pipe is made fromsome other material, or the pipe is incased in concreteand you do not know what type of pipe it is, circle“Other,” and describe the pipe in the space provided.

Pipe Diameter:

Pipe diameter refers to the inside diameter of thepipe and in the United States the measurement is usual-ly in inches. In some exposed pipe situations you maynot be able to directly measure the inside diameter ofthe pipe, but should be able to guess fairly closely by

observing or measuring the outside diameter of theexposed pipe. Large pipes are usually made in 1/2 footsizes (12 inches, 18 inches, 24 inches, etc.)

Length Exposed:

Indicate the length of pipe that is exposed in feet.

Evidence of Discharge?

Indicate whether there is any evidence that the pipeis cracked or leaking. If there is evidence of a dischargedescribe the color and/or odor. A strong odor, even ifyou do not see any discharge coming out of the pipe, isan indication of a discharge. If the discharge appears tobe a significant health or environmental problem, youshould contact your supervisor or survey manager assoon as possible.

Color & Odor:

Indicate the color and/or odor of any discharge.The choices provided are the same used by several stateand county governments when investigating unknowndischarges. Circle the most appropriate answer. If noneof the choices accurately describe what you are seeingor smelling, then circle “Other” and describe the dis-charge in your own words.

SeverityThe severity rating for an exposed pipe will depend

on the amount of pipe that is exposed, where the pipeis located in the stream, how badly the erosion problemthreatens the structural stability of the pipe, andwhether or not the pipe is leaking. The primary con-cern is that the pipe will either break or be punctured,allowing whatever is in the pipe to leak into the stream.Exposed pipes can also create barriers to fish migration,and when this occurs a fish migration data sheet shouldalso be completed. Factors that should be taken intoconsideration in assigning the severity rating are:

■■ What is the length of pipe exposed and where isit located?

■■ Has the pipe been reinforced with concrete?■■ Is there evidence of leaking from the pipe?■■ How likely is it that the pipe will either collapse

or be punctured?

Examples of this rating system are as follows:

Severe rating (1): Any pipe that is leaking will usuallybe given a severity rating of 1 or 2 depending on theamount and type of fluid that is coming out of thepipe. Other exposed pipe problems that could receive a1 or 2 severity rating include: a section of pipe that isbeing undermined by erosion and could collapse in the


Figure 4.6.3-1. Example of an exposed pipe.

near future; a pipe running across the bed of the streamwhere part of the pipe is suspended above the stream bed:a long section along the edge of the stream where nearlythe entire side of the pipe is exposed: and a manholestack that is located in the center of the stream channeland there is evidence that the stack is beginning tocrack and/or break apart. An example of a very severeexposed pipe problem is shown in Figure 4.6.3-2.

Moderate rating (3): A moderately long section of pipeis partially exposed but there is no immediate threat thatthe pipe will be undermined and break in the immediatefuture. The primary concern is that the pipe may bepunctured by large debris during a large storm event.

Minor rating (5): Minor exposed pipe problemsinclude the following: a small section of the top of apipe is exposed and the stream bank near the pipeappears to be stable; the pipe is across the bottom of thestream but only a small portion of the top of the pipe isexposed; the pipe is exposed but has been reinforcedwith concrete and it is not causing a blockage toupstream fish movement; a manhole stack that is at theedge of the stream and does not extend very far outinto the active stream channel.

CorrectabilityOnce a portion of a pipe is exposed in a stream

channel, there is a real threat that the pipe will bebreached and whatever is in the pipe will contaminatethe stream. Correction of exposed pipe problems usuallyinvolves either reinforcing the area around the pipewith concrete or stone to prevent the pipe from beingpunctured, moving the pipe or diverting the streamaway from the pipe. Photographs of an exposed pipetaken before and after the stream was diverted to pro-

tect the pipe are shown in Figure 4.6.3-3. These proj-ects are usually very expensive, involving the use ofheavy equipment. Factors that should be taken intoconsideration in assigning your Correctability rating are:

■■ What length of stream would be impacted bythe work?

■■ What is the adjacent land use and would con-struction staging or access be a problem?

■■ Will heavy equipment be needed?■■ How much earth, stone or other material would

have to be moved?■■ How much funding would be needed to do this

project?■■ Would permits, detailed survey and detailed


Examples of this rating scheme follow:

Best Correctability (1): A short stream reach whereonly a small portion of the pipe has been exposed. Thestream in this area appears to have fairly stable banksand is in a place where a small amount of stone couldbe used to cover the exposed pipe and direct high flowsin the stream away from the pipe.


Figure 4.6.3-2. Example of a sever exposed pipe problem.

Figure 4.6.3-3. Exposed pipe before and after stream restoration project.

Moderate Correctability (3): A section of pipe that isexposed and can be fixed by placing rock or othermaterial around the pipe. The exposed pipe is in anarea with fairly easy access. The stream is wide and hasfairly low banks, so material placed in the stream toprotect the pipe will not seriously effect the passage ofstorm flows through the site.

Worst Correctability (5): A long section of pipe isexposed in numerous areas and the bed of the streamhas eroded down close to or below the bottom of thepipe. The most likely options to correct the problemwould be either a major stream restoration effort tomove the stream away from the pipe or relocate at leasta section of the pipeline.


4.6.4 PIPE OUTFALLSPipe outfalls include any pipes or small manmade

channels that discharge into the stream through thestream corridor. An example of a typical pipe outfallsite is shown in Figure 4.6.4-1. Pipe outfalls are con-sidered a potential environmental problem in the surveybecause they can carry uncontrolled runoff and pollu-tants such as oil, heavy metals, and nutrients to a streamsystem. State and local governments have becomeinterested in pipe outfalls, as they are required by recentrevisions of the Clean Water Act to address non-pointsource pollution sources.

Any pipes or manmade channels that are designedto discharge into the stream are considered pipe outfallsand must be included in the survey. This includes pipeswith openings outside of the immediate stream corri-dor, but which discharge into a channel which eventu-ally enters the stream.

The team should especially be on the lookout forany pipe outfalls that have a discharge coming out of it.Do not touch the discharge and try to avoid getting anyof the discharge on your skin or clothes since you can-not always be sure what may be in the discharge. Onyour data sheets, indicate the color and smell of thedischarge. Any pipe outfall discharge with a colorand/or smell should be especially noted by the surveyteam. At the end of the day, notify your supervisorand/or the survey manager of the discharge, so thatimmediate follow up action can be taken if warranted.Use the Unusual Condition/Comment data sheet to

better describe the discharge if you feel that the PipeOutfall data sheets are insufficient.

If you are surveying the stream while it is raining,shortly after it has rained or while snow is melting, thenyou will not be able to determine it the pipe outfall hasa dry weather discharge. If you are not sure if a dischargeis coming out of a pipe outfall you should indicate“Unknown” on your data sheets.

In many cases you will not be able to determine thereason for a discharging pipe outfall during the SCAsurvey. You should simply indicate that a potentialproblem does exist so that follow up investigations canbe done.

DATA SHEET FOR PIPE OUTFALLMap,Team, Site, Date, and Photo Numbers:


Type of Outfall:

As you gain experience doing the SCA survey, youshould begin to recognize the different types of outfallsthat are commonly seen along a stream. The mostcommon are storm water outfalls. The storm waterpipes usually have fairly large diameter pipes (i.e., 24inches or greater) and are usually made of concrete.Other outfall pipes you may see include sewage plantdischarges, industrial discharges, overflow pipes, andagricultural drainage pipes. If you do not know thepurpose of the outfall pipe, circle “Unknown.” If youthink you know the purpose of the outfall but it is notlisted as a possible choice, circle “Other” and fill in theappropriate answer in the space provided.


Figure 4.6.4-1. Photograph of a pipe outfall.

Type of Pipe:

Indicate whether the pipe outfall is an earth chan-nel, concrete channel, concrete pipe, smooth metal pipe,corrugated metal pipe or plastic pipe. If the pipe outfallis made from some other material than the choices list-ed, circle “Other” and record the appropriate answer inthe space provided.

Location (facing downstream):

Indicate whether the pipe outfall is located on theleft stream bank, right stream bank or at the head ofstream channel. If the three above choices do not ade-quately describe the location of the pipe outfall, thencircle “Other” and fill in the appropriate answer in thespace provided.

Pipe Diameter:

Measure the inside diameter of the pipe outfall andrecord the information in inches in the space provided.In the SCA survey, pipe diameter always refers to theinside diameter of the pipe opening.

Channel Width:

If the pipe outfall is not a pipe but an open chan-nel, measure the width of the channel and record theinformation in feet. Do not use inches. The channelwidth is measured across the bottom of the channel. Ifit is an uneven earth channel, estimate the averagewidth of the bottom of the channel.

Evidence of Discharge:

Indicate whether there is any evidence that the pipeis cracked or leaking. If there is evidence of a dis-charge, record the color and if there is an odor. Astrong odor, even if you do not see any discharge com-ing out of the pipe, is an indication of a discharge. Ifthe discharge appears to be a significant health or envi-ronmental problem, contact your supervisor or surveymanager as soon as possible.

Color & Odor:

Record the color and/or odor of any discharge.The choices provided are the same used by several stateand county governments when investigating unknowndischarges. Circle the most appropriate answer. If noneof the choices describe what you are seeing and/orsmelling accurately, then circle “Other” and describe thedischarge in your own words.

SeverityWhen determining the severity rating for a pipe

outfall, you should only be considering the immediate

environmental problems that a specific outfall pipe iscreating. The rating should be independent of whetherthere are other outfall pipes on the stream or whetherthe stream has an erosion problem. If there is an ero-sion problem at the outfall you should fill out an ero-sion site sheet. The severity rating for pipe outfalls willprimarily depend on whether there is a discharge fromthe pipe outfall, how much of a discharge, the dischargecolor or smell and how much of an impact the dis-charge appears to be having on the stream. Factors thatshould be taken into consideration when assigning theseverity rating are:

■■ Is there a discharge coming from the pipe outfall?■■ Does the discharge appear to be just water or does

it have a color and/or smell associated with it?■■ How large is the discharge compared to the

stream’s usual base flow?■■ Is the discharge discoloring the stream and how

far can it be seen downstream?■■ Is the discharge affecting the stream’s biota?

Examples of the rating system are as follows:

Severe rating (1): A pipe outfall that has a strong dis-charge with a distinct color and/or a strong smell. Theamount of discharge is large compared to the amountof normal flow in the stream that is receiving it, and thedischarge appears to be having a significant impactdownstream. An example of a severe pipe outfall isshown in Figure 4.6.4-2.

Moderate rating (3): A pipe outfall that has a smalldischarge coming out of it but the discharge is usuallyclear and has no odor associated with it. If the dischargehas a color and/or odor, the amount of discharge isvery small compared to the stream’s base flow and anyimpact appears to be minor and localized.


Figure 4.6.4-2. Example of a severe pipe outfall.

Minor rating (5): Storm water outfall pipes or otherchannels and/or pipes that appear to be designed tocarry storm water runoff and does not have dry weatherdischarge nor does it appear to be causing any erosionproblems. An example of a minor pipe outfall is shownin Figure 4.6.4-3.

CorrectabilityIn assigning a severity and correctability rating for

pipe outfalls, look at a single pipe outfall and the imme-diate problems that outfall may be causing. You shouldnot take into consideration how many other outfallpipes there are along the stream or whether the streamhas an erosion problem. Erosion problems are evaluatedseparately using the Erosion Site data sheets.

Pipe outfalls with no discharge and/or smell, orpipe outfalls with minor discharges of clear water willusually be given the best correctability rating. In mostcases, these pipe outfalls are not considered environmentproblems by themselves and nothing needs to be doneat the site. Pipe outfalls with significant discharges thathave a color and/or smell associated with it will get ahigh correctability rating. Any work to correct prob-lems involving storm drain systems, or discharges fromsewage or industrial sites, are usually a major engineer-ing undertaking involving significant funding. Factorsthat should be taken into consideration in assigningyour Correctability rating are:

■■ Is there a discharge coming from the outfallpipe and is it an environmental problem?

■■ If excavation needs to be done, will local landuse be a problem?

■■ Would construction staging or access be a problem?

■■ How much funding would be needed to do thisproject?

■■ Would permits, detailed survey and detailedconstruction plans be needed?


Best Correctability (1): A pipe outfall that does nothave a dry weather discharge or odor will usually have acorrectability rating of 1. If there is a discharge but thedischarge is small and appears to be only water, give it acorrectability rating of 2.

Moderate Correctability (3): A pipe outfall that doeshave a discharge, but the cause of the discharge isknown and can be fixed by a public works crew in afew days.

Worst Correctability (5): A significant discharge thathas a color and/or odor associated with it from a stormwater or other discharge pipe. You may not know theexact source of the discharge, but you assume that anyattempt to correct the problem will require both engi-neering designs and a significant amount of funding.


4.6.5 FISH BARRIERFish migration barriers are anything in the stream

that significantly interferes with the upstream move-ment of fish. An example of a fish migration barrier isshown in Figure 4.6.5-1. Unimpeded fish passage isespecially important for anadromous fish which livemuch of their lives in tidal waters but must move intonon-tidal rivers and streams to spawn. Anadromous fishspecies, including American shad, white perch, yellowperch, blueback herring and alewife migrate from theChesapeake Bay into Maryland rivers and streams inearly spring to spawn. Unimpeded upstream movementis also important for resident fish species, many ofwhich also move both up and down stream during dif-ferent parts of their life cycle. Without free fish passage,some sections in a stream network can become isolated.If a disturbance occurs in an isolated stretch of stream,such as a sewage spill on a small tributary, some or allfish species may be eliminated from that isolated sectionof stream. With a fish blockage present and no naturalway for a fish to repopulate the isolated stream section,the diversity of the fish community in an area will bereduced and the remaining biological community maybe out of natural balance.

Fish blockages can be caused by man-made structuressuch as dams or road culverts, and by natural features


Figure 4.6.4-3. Minor pipe outfall site.

such as waterfalls or beaver dams. Fish blockages occurfor three main reasons. First, there is a vertical waterdrop such as a dam that it is too high for fish to swimover. A vertical drop of 6 inches may cause fish passageproblems for some resident fish species, while anadromousfish can usually move through water drops of up to 1foot, providing there is sufficient flow and water depth.The second reason a structure may be a fish passageproblem is because the water is too shallow. This canoften occur in channelized stream sections or at roadcrossings where the water from a small stream has beenspread over a large flat area and the water is not deepenough for fish. Finally, a structure may be a fishblockage if the water is moving too fast. This can occurat road crossings where the culvert pipe has been placedat a steep angle and the water moving through the pipehas a velocity higher than a fish’s swimming ability.

DATA SHEETMap,Team, Site, Date and Photo Numbers:

Fill in the appropriate site identification informationand on the top of the data sheet and on the field map.Also, record the date and film exposure numbers for thephotographs taken at the site.

Fish Blockage:

Indicate on the data sheet whether you believe thestructure is a Total, Partial or Temporary fish barrier. Indetermining if a structure is a total fish barrier, ignorethe migration abilities of the American eel. American

eels can migrate over large dams and even through wetgrass at night. There are few, if any, structures inMaryland considered a migration barrier to theAmerican eel. A total fish barrier is a barrier that pre-vents almost all fish species, except American eels, frommoving upstream. Usually, if the structure has a waterdrop of greater than 1 foot it is considered a total fishblockage in Maryland. A partial fish barrier may be anarea with shallow water that is deep enough for smallfish to move through but which would impede themigration of larger fish. A partial fish barrier may pre-vent fish from migrating through the structure duringbase flow conditions, but will usually be deep enoughfor fish to pass through after a small rain event. Whendesignating a structure a partial fish barrier, you mustconsider not only what the water depth may be duringelevated flows but also the velocity of the water movingthrough a structure during the higher flows. Finally, atemporary fish blockage is usually either a beaver damor debris dam. While these structures may totally orpartially block the upstream movement of the fish, thestructure is only temporary and should be gone in afew years. Tree falls across streams are usually not fishbarriers because very often the fish can move throughwater flowing both under and over the tree.

If you are not sure if a structure is a Total, Partial orTemporary fish barrier, make an educated guess as towhich category best describes the fish barrier. Onlycircle the “Unknown” choice if you cannot even guessif it is a Total, Partial or Temporary fish barrier.

Type of Barrier:

Record on the data sheet if the fish barrier is aDam, Road Crossing, Pipe Crossing, Natural Falls,Beaver Dam, or Channelized stream section. If the fishbarrier is present due to a structure other than the oneslisted, circle “Other” and record the appropriate answerin the space provided.

Blockage Because:

Indicate on the data sheet that a fish barrier exists atthis site because the water drop is too high, the water istoo shallow or the water is moving too fast. Only circleone answer. If a structure is a fish blockage for morethan one of the three choices, circle the one you believeis the most important.

Water Drop:

If a fish barrier is present because there is a structurewith a water drop too high for the fish to swimthrough, record the height, in inches, of the water dropon the data sheets. Height of the water drop is meas-


Figure 4.6.5-1. Perched culvert causing fish migration blockage.

ured from the top of the downstream water surface tothe top of the structure the water is flowing over.

Water depth:

If a fish barrier is present because the water movingthrough the structure is too shallow for the fish, firstlook at the entire structure and determine where theshallowest cross-section is. Measure in inches the waterdepth at the deepest point in the shallowest cross-section.What you are attempting to do is find the shallowestpoint that a fish would have to swim through if it wastrying to swim up the deepest part of the channel.

SeverityThe severity rating for fish barriers will depend on

the location of the barrier in the stream network andwhether it is a total, partial or temporary barrier toupstream fish migrations. Fish barriers that couldpotentially interfere with the migration of anadromousfish to their spawning ground are usually given priorityin restoration efforts in Maryland. A fish barrier on alarge stream or river (e.g., 3rd order or greater) thattotally blocks the upstream movement of anadromousfish would usually get a severity rating of 1 or 2, unlessa functioning fish passage device is present. If a func-tioning fish passage device is present, the severity ratingmay be downgraded to 2 or 3. The structure wouldusually still be given a fairly significant severity ratingbecause most fish passage devices are designed to passonly certain fish species. Also, many devices are main-tained only during the anadromous fish runs in thespring. Total fish blockages on smaller first and secondorder streams should also receive a severe to moderateseverity rating (i.e., less than 3) if fish blockages are iso-lating a significant portion of a tributary (> 1000 ft.)from contact with the rest of the stream’s fish commu-nity. Identifying small tributaries where fish populationsare isolated from the main fish community is importantbecause the isolated fish populations can become eco-logically unbalanced. This can occur when there is adisturbance such as an oil spill or sediment pollutionevent on an isolated tributary which eliminates some orall fish species from the tributary. A severity rating of 4or 5 will normally be given to temporary fish block-ages, such as beaver dams, or in the case of fish barrierslocated in areas where there is very little fish habitatabove the barrier. Factors that should be taken intoconsideration in assigning your severity rating are:

■■ Is the structure a total, partial or temporary fishbarrier?

■■ Could the structure effect anadromous fishmigrations? Is the structure the most downstreambarrier to anadromous fish?

■■ Does the structure isolate a tributary’s fishcommunity from the rest of the fish in thestream network?

■■ How long a stream reach is being isolated andwhat is the condition of the habitat in the iso-lated reach?

Examples of the rating system follow:

Severe rating (1): A structure such as a dam or perchedroad culvert on a large stream or river (e.g., 3rd orderor greater) that would totally block the upstream move-ment of anadromous fish and there is no fish passagedevice present. An example of a sever fish blockage isshown in Figure 4.6.5-2.

Moderate rating (3): A total fish blockage on a tribu-tary that would isolate a significant reach of stream or a

partial blockage that could interfere with the migrationof anadromous fish during their spring migrations.

Minor rating (5): A temporary fish barrier such as abeaver dam or a fish blockage at the very head of astream with very little viable fish habitat above it.Natural fish barriers such as waterfalls are also given aminor severity rating. A minor fish blockage is shownin Figure 4.6.5-3.

CorrectabilityThe correctability rating for fish barriers will

depend on how hard it will be to either remove ormodify a structure to allow the free upstream migrationof both anadromous and resident fish species.Whenever possible the preferred option is usually toremove a fish barrier and return the area to a natural


Figure 4.6.5-2. Dam causing a severe fish blockage.

stream condition. Photographs of a perched road culvertthat was replaced by a small bottomless arch to providenatural fish passage is shown in Figure 4.6.5-4. Ifremoval of a fish barrier is not a practical option, thestructure can sometimes be modified to allow for thepassage of at least some fish species. Removal or modi-fication of a dam or road crossing to allow fish passagewill usually involve an engineering review. That isbecause anything that is done to improve fish passage ata dam or road crossing also has the potential of affectingup and downstream flooding. In addition to engineer-ing review, projects at dams and road crossings usuallyrequire permits and substantial funding. For these rea-sons, most fish blockages at road crossings and dams willhave a worst (ie., 4 or 5) correctability rating. The bestcorrectability rating (ie., 1 or 2) will usually be given attemporary fish barriers such as beaver dams or partialfish barriers that do not involve road crossings, or wherea small modification to the channel could improve fishpassage conditions.

Some fish barriers such as a debris jam at a roadcrossing are not only an environmental problem, butcan also threaten the road itself. Debris clogging ofroad culverts is one of the main causes of road failureduring large rain evens. If the water in the stream can-not pass through the culvert under the road, it will usu-ally begin to flow over the top of the road, possiblycausing the road to wash out. If you see a road crossingwith a significant blockage in it, please notify yoursupervisor or the survey manager at the end of the day.They will notify either a county public works depart-ment or the State Highway Administration of the flowblockage at the road crossing so that it can be correctedquickly. Factors that should be taken into considerationin assigning your Correctability rating are:

■■ Would construction staging or access be a problem?■■ Will heavy equipment be needed?■■ How much earth, stone or other material would

need to be moved?■■ How much funding would be needed to do this

project?■■ Would permits, detailed survey and detailed



Best Correctability (1): A temporary fish barrier suchas a beaver dam or a debris jam at a road culvert. Ateam of volunteers in a few hours could remove theblockage if it was determined that removal was warranted.

Moderate Correctability (3): A total or partial fish bar-rier that could be corrected with a small team in aweek or less. Removal of a check dam or a small damthat is already partially breached could be assigned amoderate correctability rating.

Worst Correctability (5): A total fish barrier at a damor road crossing where no fish passage device is alreadypresent. These are usually major engineering undertak-ing requiring substantial work and funding.



Figure 4.6.5-3. Small beaver dam creating both a minor and temporary fish blockage.

Figure 4.6.5-4. Perched culvert before and after restoration project.

4.6.6 INADEQUATE BUFFERForested stream buffers are very important for main-

taining healthy Maryland streams. Forest buffers helpshade the stream, preventing excessive solar heating, andthe roots stabilize the stream banks. Forest buffersremove nutrients, sediment and other pollutants fromrunoff, while the leaves of trees are a major componentof the stream’s food web. Because of the importance ofstream buffers, not only in maintaining healthy streams,but also in reducing nutrient loadings to theChesapeake Bay, Maryland has committed to recreatingforest buffers along at least 1,200 miles of stream by theyear 2010 (MD-DNR, 1998). DNR is actively lookingfor good areas for planting forest buffers and will usethe SCA survey results to help identify those areas.

There is no single minimum standard for how widea stream buffer should be in Maryland. For the purposesof this study, a buffer is generally considered inadequateif it is less than 50 feet wide from the edge of the stream.

DATA SHEET FOR INADEQUATEBUFFERMap,Team, Site, Date and Photo Numbers:

Fill in the appropriate site identification informationon the top of the data sheet and on the field map. Also,record the date and film exposure numbers for the pho-tographs taken at the site.

Inadequate Buffer:

Indicate whether the buffer is inadequate on theleft, right or both sides of the stream. Left and rightstream banks are always determined facing downstream.

Unshaded Stream:

A natural stream buffer usually will have trees alongthe edge of the stream’s banks that help shade thestream from excessive solar heating. In prioritizingfuture buffer planting, emphasis is given to streamreaches without trees along the edge of the stream.Indicate on the data sheet if the stream is unshaded andwhether it is due to a lack of trees along the left bank,right bank or both stream banks. Left and right streambanks are determined facing downstream. On largerstreams and rivers it is common for the trees’ canopy tocover only part of the stream channel with the centerportion of the stream channel to be unshaded. This is anatural condition and is not considered an environmen-tal problem. If there are large trees on both sides of thestream then the stream is considered shaded even if thetree’s branches do not completely shade the entire stream.

Buffer Width:

Determine as accurately as possible, the width of theexisting stream buffer on both the left and right sides ofthe stream. Record your answer in feet. If the existingforest buffer on either side of the stream is greater that50 ft., then you should simply enter > 50 ft. Left andright stream banks are determined looking downstream.

Length:

Determine as accurately as possible the length ofstream along both the left and right stream banks thathas an inadequate buffer.

Land Use:

Indicate what the general land use in the stream’scorridor is on both the left and right sides of thestream. The left and right sides of a stream are deter-mined by facing downstream. Land use choices on thedata sheets include “Crop fields, Pasture, Lawn, Paved,Shrubs & Small Trees, Forest, Multiflora Rose.” Inmaking your determination, the area closest to thestream is the area of greatest interest. If more than oneland use type is present on a bank, choose the one thatbest describes the area’s land use overall. The databasewill only accept one land use entry for each side of thestream. If none of the listed categories accuratelydescribes the land use near the stream, circle “Other”and enter an appropriate answer.

Has a buffer recently been established?

If the area has an inadequate buffer but it is obviousthat a buffer has been planted or is being allowed togrow, circle Yes. Otherwise circle No.

Are livestock present?

Indicate if livestock have regular access to the buffer.You do not have to see livestock in the buffer to answerYes, you only need to see evidence that they are usingthe area. If the area is being used by livestock, indicatethe type of livestock operation. Circle Cattle, Horses,Pigs or Other. If you circle Other you should alsowrite in the type of livestock operation.

SeverityThe severity rating for inadequate buffers will

depend on the condition of the vegetation along thestreams banks and the length of stream with an inade-quate buffer. Factors that should be taken into consid-eration in assigning your severity rating are:

■■ What are the land use and type of vegetation inthe area with an inadequate buffer?


■■ Is there evidence that a tree buffer is beginningto form in the inadequate buffer area?

■■ Is the inadequate buffer on one or both sides ofthe stream?

■■ Is the stream unshaded?■■ How long is the reach of stream with an inade-

quate buffer?

Examples of this rating follow:

Severe rating (1): A significant length of stream (> 1000 ft.) that is completely open with no trees oneither side of the stream. Both sides of the stream aremaintained as either lawn, pasture or some other condi-tion that excludes trees from the stream’s banks. Anexample of a severe inadequate buffer is shown inFigure 4.6.6-1.

Moderate rating (3): A moderate length of streamwithout trees on one side of the stream, but an ade-quate forest buffer on the other side.

Minor rating (5): A section of stream with trees onboth sides of the stream, but on one side the streambuffer is less than 50 feet wide.

CorrectabilityThe correctability of a stream reach with an inade-

quate buffer will depend primarily on the land use inthe area. In most of Maryland, if the land is left alone,trees will quickly begin to grow and a forest will even-tually develop. Open areas without trees exist becausethey are activity maintained that way. Figure 4.6.6-2shows an inadequate buffer in 1990 and the same area 9years later. In determining the correctability of aninadequate buffer area, first determine the practicality ofestablishing a buffer in the area. Do not assume it isimpossible to get permission from a private land ownerto establish a forest buffer along the stream. You canassume, however, that it is easier to get permission to

establish a buffer on public than on private land.Factors that should be taken into consideration inassigning your Correctability rating are:

■■ What is the length and width of the inadequatestream buffer?

■■ What is the present land use?■■ How much funding would be needed to do this

project?


Best Correctability (1): A small stream reach on publicland where the land along the stream does not appearto be used for any specific purpose.

Moderate Correctability (3): A significant reach ofstream on either public or private land that is presentlyused for a specific purpose, where it should be possibleto accomplish the same thing on an adjacent parcel ofland. For example, a large pasture with a stream run-ning through it that is kept open so that livestock candrink water from the stream. With landowner coopera-tion, it would not be difficult for the NRCS (NationalResources Conservation Service) to establish alternativewatering areas and fence the livestock out of the stream.


Figure 4.6.6-1. Photograph of an inadequate stream buffer.

Figure 4.6.6-2. Inadequate buffer before and after stream restoration project.

Worst Correctability (5): A significant reach of streamwhere roads and buildings have been built along thestream banks and there is no place for trees to grow.


Wetlands PotentialAt inadequate buffer sites, a fourth ranking is done

to indicate the potential of creating wetlands at thesesites. The ranking is done because environmental agen-cies are often looking for potential areas where wetlandscould be built to mitigate for wetland losses in otherareas. Open un-forested areas near streams are oftenconsidered good possible sites for wetland creation proj-ects. The ranking is based on bank height and the slopeof the land. Areas with low banks (< 2 feet) and fairlyflat open land adjacent to the stream are given the bestranking of 1. Inadequate buffer sites with high banks(> 5 feet) and narrow steep floodplains are given theworst ranking of 5.

4.6.7 IN/NEAR STREAM CONSTRUCTION

In or near stream construction data sheets are usedto document the locations of major disturbances locatedin or near the stream corridor at the time of the survey.An example of an instream constructing site is shown inFigure 4.6.7-1. If construction is seen in or near thestream, indicate the location on the survey map andlook at the general condition of the stream near anddownstream of the construction site. Survey teamsshould be on alert for evidence of inadequate sedimentcontrol measures or if sediment pollution from the sitehas affected the stream. However, survey team members

are not sediment inspectors and it is not their job toreview sediment control measures at the constructionsite. Survey crews should avoid walking through theconstruction site and should never confront anyone atthe construction site about problems they observed.Any problems with sediment control measures at theconstruction site should be noted on the data sheets andthe supervisor or the survey manager notified at theend of the day, so appropriate action can be taken.

DATA SHEET FOR IN/NEAR STREAM CONSTRUCTIONMap,Team, Site, Date and Photo Numbers:


Type of Activity:

Indicate the type of construction activity occurringin or near the stream. Choices include:“road construc-tion, installation of a road crossing, utility work, logging,bank stabilization work, residential development andindustrial development.” If none of the choices accu-rately describes the activity observed, circle “Other” anddescribe the construction activity in the space provided.

Sediment Control:

Indicate where sediment control measures at theconstruction site appear to be adequate. If you observea problem with the sediment control measures at theconstruction site, circle “Inadequate,” and describe theproblem in the space provided. You should also take aphotograph of any problems you may observe. If youfeel that you cannot properly evaluate sediment controlmeasures, circle “Unknown.”

Stream Bottom with Excess Sediment:

Look at the stream bed just downstream of the con-struction activity and compare it to conditions upstreamof the site. Is there excessive sediment deposition in thestream bed that appears to be related to the construc-tion activity? If yes, indicate the length of stream that isaffected by the sediment deposition. If possible, alsophotograph the sediment problem.

Company Doing Construction:

If you are able to identify who is involved in theconstruction activity from signs posted at the site orinformation printed on the vehicles at the site, write itdown in the space provided. Do not interview anyone


Figure 4.6.7-1. An instream construction site.

at the site or ask questions to obtain this information.If it is not obvious who is involved in the constructionby simply observing the construction site from a dis-tance, leave this section blank.

Location:

Describe the location of the construction activity inrelation to the stream.

SeverityThe severity rating for In or Near Stream

Construction sites is intended to be an overall rating ofhow significant the survey teams believe the aquaticresource in the area will be affected by the constructionactivity. Factors that should be taken into considerationin assigning your severity rating are:

■■ How large is the construction site?■■ How close to the stream is work being done?■■ Does sediment control appear to be adequate?■■ Is there evidence down stream that sediment

from the construction site is getting into thestream?


Severe rating (1): A very large construction site with alarge amount of disturbance to the stream channel andsediment control measures appear to be absent or verypoorly maintained. Investigations downstream indicatethat a large amount of sediment is getting into thestream channel and depositing in the stream channel.An example of a severe construction site where sedi-ment control fencing has failed is shown in Figure 4.6.7-2.

Moderate rating (3): The construction site is near thestream but there appears to be very little disturbance tothe stream’s banks. Construction activities, however, doappear to be inside the streams riparian buffer.

Sediment control measures appear to be adequate andinvestigations downstream indicate that while some sed-iment may be entering the stream from the construc-tion site, the amount appears to be relatively small.

Minor rating (5): The construction site is away fromthe stream and well outside the streams riparian buffer.Sediment control measures appear to be adequate, andthere is not evidence that sediment from the construc-tion site is entering the stream.

Correctability & AccessCorrectability and Access ratings are not needed at

in or near-stream construction sites.

4.6.8 TRASH DUMPINGThe trash dumping data sheets are used to record

the location of places where large amounts of trash havebeen dumped inside the stream corridor or to noteplaces where trash tends to accumulate. An example ofa trash dumping site is shown in Figure 4.6.8-1. Themain purposes of identifying where trash is beingdumped in or near the stream is so that steps can betaken to limit access to these areas by vehicles if possi-ble. Past work by several community groups have

found that if vehicle access is restricted, the trash dump-ing usually ends. A second reason for noting trashdumping sites is to assist community volunteer groupslooking for possible sites to do stream clean-ups.Stream clean-ups are very good community activitieswhich encourage local residents to go out and take acloser look at the condition of their community stream.


Figure 4.6.8-1. Example of a trash dumping site.

Figure 4.6.7-2. Example of severe construction site where sediment controlfencing has failed



Type of Trash:

Indicate the main type of trash present. Possiblechoices include “Residential, Industrial,Yard Waste,Flotables (Styrofoam peanuts, plastics, and other floatingtrash),Tires, Construction Waste.” If none of the choic-es provided adequately describes the trash present, circle“Other” and describe it. Please select only one trashcategory. If more than one type of trash is presentchose the one that best describes the trash in general.

Amount of Trash:

Estimate the amount of trash present. If possible theestimate should be based on how many pick-up truckloads would be needed to remove all the trash. Ifunable to estimate how many pick-up truck loads arepresent, an estimate of the amount of trash by the sizeof the pile or the area covered is acceptable.

Trash Confined:

Indicate whether the trash is confined to a singlesite or if it is spread out over a large area.

Possible cleanup site for volunteers?

Does the site look like a good place to bring com-munity volunteers for a clean-up activity? In makingyour determination, consider both safety and access issues.

Land Ownership:

Indicate whether the trash dump is located on publicor private land. If you know that the land is public land,such as a public park, please indicate if the owner is city,state or county in the space provided. If you know thatthe land is publicly owned but are not sure who ownsit, enter whatever information you may have, such asthe name of the park. If you do not know who ownsthe land, circle “Unknown.” Do not spend extra timetrying to determine whether the land is publicly or pri-vately owned. If the answer to the question is not obviousjust circle “Unknown,” and continue with the survey.

SeverityThe severity rating for trash dumping will depend

on the amount of trash present, its location and whethercleaning up the trash would present any special prob-

lems. Factors that should be taken into consideration inassigning your severity rating are:

■■ How much trash is present?■■ What type of trash is present? Are there sharp

objects or possible chemicals present?■■ Is it safe for volunteers to enter and pick up trash?


Severe rating (1): A large amount of trash scatteredover a large area, where access is very difficult. If thereare any large chemical drums present or indications ofother hazardous materials, the site is given a SeverityRating of 1, no matter how much material is present.An example of a severe trash dumping site is shown inFigure 4.6.8-2.

Moderate rating (3): A fairly large amount of trash thatis in a small area with easy access. The trash may havebeen dumped over a long period of time but it couldbe cleaned up in a few days, possibly with the assistanceof a small backhoe.

Minor rating (5): A small amount of trash (i.e., lessthan two pickup truck loads) located inside a park witheasy access.

CorrectabilityThe correctability rating for trash dumping areas

will depend on how much trash is present and howeasy it would be to clean up the problem. The cor-rectability rating does not include long term solutionssuch as putting up fencing to prevent vehicles fromentering an area to dump trash. However, if the surveyteam believes there is a simple long term solution tothe trash dumping problem at a site, they should use anUnusual Problem/Comment Sheet to make theirsuggestions. Factors that should be taken into consider-ation in assigning a Correctability rating are:


Figure 4.6.8-2. Example of a severe trash dumping site.

■■ How much trash is present?■■ What type of trash is present? Are there sharp

object or possible chemicals present?■■ Is it safe for volunteers to enter and pick up trash?

Best Correctability (1): A small amount of trash (i.e.,less than two pickup truck loads) located inside a parkwith easy access. This site would make a good site for acommunity stream cleanup.

Moderate Correctability (3): An area with a largeamount of trash in a fairly contained area that is notdifficult to access. This would be a problem that maybe too big for volunteers to clean up in a single day.The trash, however, is in large piles, and a crew workingfor several days with the assistance of a small backhoecould clean up the site.

Worst Correctability (5): A large amount of garbagespread over a large area with restricted or poor access.This is either the type of site where you could have astream clean up every weekend and it would still have atrash problem, or a site where hazardous chemical may bepresent and the site needs to be evaluated by professionals.


4.6.9 UNUSUAL CONDITION OR COMMENT

The unusual condition or comment data sheets areused by survey teams to record the location of anythingout of the ordinary or to provide some additional writ-ten comments on a specific problem. Figure 4.6.9-1shows a site where there was an unusually large amountof algae in a stream.



Type:

Indicate if the data sheet is being filled out to docu-ment an Unusual Condition or to provideComments on a situation that has been encounteredwhile surveying the stream. Unusual conditions mayinclude: unusual odor, scum, excessive algae, watercolor/clarity, red flock, oil on surface, etc. If youencounter an unusual condition that you believe is anenvironmental problem and the other data sheets do notapply, than circle Unusual Condition and fill out therest of the data sheet including the severity, correctabili-ty and access ratings.

In cases where you encounter something that is ofenvironmental interest but not necessarily a problem, orin cases where you have already filled out a problemdata sheet and want to add some additional observationson the problem, the word Comment should be cir-cled. You should than complete the Describe sectionof the sheet. Since this is only a comment, you shouldnot fill in severity, correctability or access rating. It isimportant to note that comment sheets cannot only beused to make observations about problems, but can alsobe used to bring attention to possible positive thingsthat you may encounter. For example, if you comeupon a completed instream restoration project or see anarea where a farmer is doing a good job at keeping thecattle out of the stream, you may want to fill out acomment sheet to document it.

Describe:

Describe the problem or situation in the space pro-vided. Please try to make your description as concise aspossible. If you require additional space, use the back ofthe data sheet.

Potential Cause:

Use the space provided to comment on either thecause of the problem or to make a comment about aspecific observation. If you have a suggestion on a pos-sible correction for the problem, make that suggestionin this space. Please try to make your statements asconcise as possible. If you require additional space, usethe back of the data sheet.


Figure 4.6.9-1. Excessive algae growth in stream.

SeverityThe severity rating for Unusual Conditions will

generally follow the general guidelines for the problemseverity rating system presented in Section 4.5.1.Factors that should be taken into consideration inassigning your severity rating are:

■■ What is the length of stream impacted and howsevere is the impact on the stream biota?

■■ Is the problem a human health risk as well as anenvironmental problem?


Severe rating (1): Problems that appear to have a directand wide reaching impact on the stream’s aquaticresources. Within a specific problem category, a 1 ratingindicates that the problem is among the worst that thefield teams have seen or would expect to see inMaryland.

Moderate rating (3): Problems that appear to be havingsome adverse impacts at a site. While a rating of 3 wouldindicate that survey crews believed it was a significantproblem, but they have either seen or would expect tosee much worse problems in that specific category.

Minor rating (5): Problems that do not appear to bedirectly affecting the stream. A rating of 5 indicates thata problem was present and should be addressed, butcompared to other problems it would be consideredminor.

CorrectabilityThe correctability rating for Unusual Condition

will generally follow the general guidelines for theproblem severity rating system presented in Section4.5.1. Factors that should be taken into considerationin assigning your Correctability rating are:

■■ How much time and effort would be needed tocorrect the problem?

■■ Would the project need Federal, State and/orlocal permits?

■■ How much funding would be needed?


Best Correctability (1): Problems that can be correctedquickly and easily using hand labor, with a minimumamount of planning. These types of projects wouldusually not need any Federal, State or local governmentpermits. It is a job that a small group of volunteers (10people or less) could fix in less than a day without usingheavy equipment.

Moderate Correctability (3): Problems that may requirea small piece of equipment, such as a backhoe, andrequire some planning to correct. This is not the typeof project that volunteers could do by themselves,although volunteers could assist in some aspects of theproject, such as final landscaping. This type of projectwould usually require a week or more to complete.The project may require some local, State or Federalgovernment notification or permits; however, environ-mental disturbance would be small and approval shouldbe easy to obtain.

Worst Correctability (5): Problems which wouldrequire a large expensive effort to correct.These proj-ects would usually require heavy equipment, significantamount of funding ($100,000.00 or more), and con-struction could take a month or more. The amount ofdisturbance would be large and the project would needto obtain a variety of Federal, State and/or local permits.


4.6.10 REPRESENTATIVE SITERepresentative site data sheets are used to document

the general condition of both in-stream habitat and thecondition of the adjacent stream corridor. The repre-sentative site evaluation procedures used during thesurvey are very similar to the habitat evaluations done aspart of the Maryland Save-Our-Stream’s HeartbeatProgram and are based on the habitat assessment proce-dures outlined in EPA’s rapid bioassessment protocols(Plafkin, et. al., 1989). For each of the 10 habitatparameters a rating of optimal, suboptimal, marginal orpoor is assigned based on the grading criteria that ispresented at the end of Appendix C. The 10 habitatparameters evaluated are:

■■ Attachment Sites for Macroinvertebrates■■ Embeddedness■■ Shelter for Fish■■ Channel Alteration■■ Sediment Deposition■■ Stream Velocity and Depth Combinations■■ Channel Flow Status■■ Bank Vegetation Protection■■ Condition of Banks■■ Riparian Vegetative Zone Width

In addition to the habitat ratings, data is collectedon the stream’s wetted width and pool depths at both



runs and riffles at each representative site. Depth meas-urements are taken along the stream thalweg (e.g., mainflow path). At these sites, field crews also indicatewhether the bottom sediments in the area were prima-rily silts, sands, gravel, cobble, boulders or bedrock.

Representative site evaluations are usually done atset intervals both along the stream’s mainstem and onmajor tributaries. The frequence that representative sitedata sheets are filled out will depend on the stream sys-tem, main purpose of the survey and the needs of thesurvey’s sponsor. In past surveys, the data sheets havebeen filled out at either 1/4 or 1/2 mile intervalsdepending on the survey. In general, for an urbanstream 1/4 mile spacing of representative sites has beenused, and for more rural areas 1/2 mile intervals.Representative sites are determined at the beginning ofthe survey by the survey manager, and indicated with ared dot on the survey maps. The survey manager mayvary the spacing of representative sites to collect infor-mation at critical survey points such as upstream anddownstream of the confluence of major stream seg-ments. When a survey team comes to a predesignatedrepresentative site, they should complete aRepresentative Data Sheet.

DATA SHEET FOR REPRESENTATIVE SITESMap,Team, Site, Date and Photo Numbers:


Habitat Assessment:

Using the habitat assessment guidelines on pages66-68, indicate whether each of the 10 habitat parame-ters listed on the data sheet should be rated Optimal,Suboptimal, Marginal or Poor. You need only to checkthe appropriate box on the data sheet. Do not attemptto assign numerical scores to each parameter.

Wetted Width:

Wetted width is the width of the stream that is cov-ered with water. At the pool, riffle and run sectionsnear the predesignated representative site, identify repre-sentative cross sections and measure the wetted width ofeach in inches.

Thalweg Depth:

The thalweg is the main flow channel in a streamcross section. This is usually the area where water depthand water velocities are the highest. At the pool, riffleand run sections near the predesignated representativesite, identify representative cross sections and measurethe thalweg depth in inches.

Bottom Type:

Looking at primarily the riffle and run sections ofthe stream, determine if the bottom sediments in thestream are primarily silts, sands, gravel, cobble, bouldersor bedrock. Most stream bottoms are made up of avariety of different size sediments, but your answershould indicate the dominant size.


5.1 DATA SHEETSData sheets used in the SCA survey can be found in

Appendix C. During the survey, each team will carryenough data sheets for that day’s work. At the end ofthe day, all used data sheets should be removed from thestorage compartment on the clip board and checked bythe team leader for completeness. Any data sheets thatare incomplete or require special attention, such as aleaking sewage line or near stream construction sitesthat is causing a sediment pollution problem, should beset aside and discussed with either the survey crew chiefor survey manager as soon as possible. Data sheets notrequiring immediate attention should be placed insequential order. These data sheets are clipped togetherand placed in a storage box until the information onthe data sheets can be entered into the survey’s database.Do not bring completed data sheets from the previousday into the field where they can be damaged or lost.

5.1.1 DATA ENTRYData entry should be done within one or two

weeks of when the data is collected. If possible, theteam that collected the data should enter the informa-tion from the data sheets into the project database. It isalso helpful to have the photograph available duringdata entry to help answer any questions that may arise.At present, the data collected during SCA surveys arestored in separate project databases. As the number ofstreams that have undergone an SCA survey increase,the data from these separate project databases will becombined and incorporated into DNR’s GeographicalInformation System (GIS).

Information collected during the SCA survey isentered into a separate Microsoft Access Database devel-oped for each project. A data entry program has beendeveloped to aid in data entry and is available from theWatershed Restoration Division of DNR. After thedata entry program has been loaded and a project database established, the survey crew can begin data entry.Data entry is usually done when the crew has some freetime usually due to poor weather conditions. It isimportant, however, that the data be entered into theproject database periodically during the survey, and thatthere is no more than a 2-week time lag between datacollection and data entry. After each data entry cycle,the data that has been entered into the project databaseshould be printed out and a backup copy of the data-base made. Backup copies of the database should bestored in a safe place.

5.1.2 DATA VERIFICATIONAll data entered into the project database must be

verified by the survey crew to insure that the informa-tion has been accurately entered into the database. Dataentry verification is a simple process where the data inthe database is checked against the original data sheets.This is usually done by one person reading aloud theinformation from a printout of the database and a sec-ond individual checking the original data sheet to makesure it is correct.When discrepancies occur they shouldbe noted on the database printout and the database cor-rected. Once the data in the database has been verified,the original data sheets should be stored in a safe place.

5.2 CATALOGING PHOTOGRAPHSPhotographs taken during the SCA survey have

proven to be a very important tool in analyzing prob-lem sites and in prioritizing future restoration work.The information collected by the field teams during anSCA survey is limited, and the photographs can oftenhelp provide insight about problems identified in thesurvey.

The survey crew should develop a regular routineto collect exposed film and bring it in for developing.Film should be dropped off and picked up from a filmprocessor at least once a week. When the photographprints and negatives are returned to the field teams, theteam should first make sure the photographs are inproper sequential order. If there are any questionsabout the sequential order of the photographs the teamshould refer back to the negatives. The field teamshould then determine the field identification numberfor each photograph, and write the field identificationnumber on the back of each photograph using a softfelt tip pen. Do not use a ball point pen or pencilbecause they can cause creases in the photographs.Once all the photographs have been processed, theyshould be placed in 3-ring binder plastic sleeves andstored in a safe place. The plastic sleeves holding thenegatives should be labeled with the survey name, teamnumber and dates the photographs were taken. Afterthe negatives have been labeled, they should also bestored in a safe place away from the photographs.

After the field surveys have been completed, allphotographs should be digitized using a scanner. Inpast studies two survey crew members have been ableto scan two to three hundred photographs in a singleday. The scanned photographs are usually stored in a

5.0 DATA MANAGEMENT

temporary directory and eventually copied onto a com-pact disk (CD). The production of a CD containingdigitized copies of all the photographs, as well as a copyof the survey’s database and final report, has proven tobe a very effective way of sharing the survey’s informa-tion with other watershed stakeholders. The size of thefiles needed to store each digitized photograph dependson the scanning resolution. In order to store more thanfive hundred photographs on a single CD, photographsare usually scanned at 100 to 200 dpi. Photographsscanned at 100 to 200 dpi will provide a fairly clearimage on a computer monitor and can also be used toproduce small prints using a color printer. To producelarger blowups of the images, it will usually be necessaryto rescan the original photographs at a higher resolu-tion. In the past, the TIF file format has been usedbecause it can be read by a variety of software packages.

After all the photographs have been scanned, theyshould be placed in sequential order and placed backinto a 3-ring binder. The 3-ring binders should besafely stored until they are turned over to the projectmanager for analysis and production of a final report.After a final report has been completed, the originalphotographs will be either given to the survey sponsoror kept on file with DNR’s Watershed RestorationDivision.

5.3 MAP INFORMATIONThe location of environmental problems and repre-

sentative sites are first recorded on field survey maps. Atthe end of each day field team leaders should quicklyreview the maps to make sure they are filled in properly.When all the streams present on a map have been surveyed,the completed field maps should be stored in a safe place.If possible the completed maps should be photocopiedand stored at a separate location from the original maps.Periodically during the survey, the completed field surveymaps will be brought to either the sponsor’s or DNR’sGIS centers and entered into a GIS database.

5.3.1 GIS DATA ENTRYData entry of site locations into a GIS database will

depend on the GIS system being used. When countygovernments have been the survey’s sponsor, the coun-ties have provided training to the survey crew memberson how to enter site location information directly intothe sponsor’s GIS system. Once data entry is completed,the data will eventually be transferred to DNR for usein the GIS system. When the survey sponsor does nothave an adequate GIS system, the data has been entereddirectly into DNR’s GIS system.

5.3.1 GIS DATA VERIFICATIONJust as field data entered into a project database

must be verified (Section 5.1.2), it is important that sitelocation data also undergoes the same process. Oncethe site location data has been entered into a GIS systemand the location of the survey sites is ready to be displayedby the system, survey crew members should compare allsite locations in the GIS system with the original fieldsurvey maps. When discrepancies are identified, theyshould be noted and arrangements made with the GISsystem manager to correct them.

5.4 DATA REVIEW AND MODIFICATION

Once the survey teams have completed data entryand have verified that the data has been entered cor-rectly, the entire survey crew should be broughttogether to review the data. This data review by thesurvey teams is primarily designed to assure that theseverity and correctability ratings are consistent.While survey members all receive the same trainingand follow the same protocols during the survey, it isnot unusual, especially for surveys that have beendone over several months, to find at the end of thesurvey some small inconsistencies in the ratings ofdifferent problems. These inconsistencies are oftendue to increases in the ability of survey teams toproperly evaluate problems as they gain more experi-ence. By reviewing all of the data at the end of thesurvey, the survey crew has an opportunity to com-pare ratings they have given different problems at different times, and determine if the ratings are consistent within each problem category and withthe survey protocols.

The review is done by first sorting the data ineach problem category by the severity rating indescending order. The crew should then comparethe information they have about each problem todetermine if all of the problems that received a specify severity or correctability ratings are similiar or if the ratings of some of the problems should beadjusted. If the ratings, or any other information ischanged during the data review, it is important thatchanges be made to both the computer database andon the original data sheets. Changes made on theoriginal data sheets should be done in colored pencilto indicate that it was changed during the surveycrew’s data review.



The SCA survey is designed to provide a quick sys-tematic survey of the streams in a watershed to assesshabitat conditions and identify environmental problemsfor future restoration work. The main products of thesurvey are: lists of environmental problems in nine sepa-rate categories, a general rating of in-stream and ripari-an habitat in different stream segments, and a series ofmaps showing the location of problem and representa-tive sites in the watershed.

Data collected as part of the SCA survey is firstentered into both a project database and a GIS system(See Section 5.0). Once the data has been entered into aGIS system, a series of maps showing the locations of theproblems identified in the survey should be produced.Depending on the size of the watershed surveyed andthe capabilities of the GIS system, one or more maps areusually produced for each of the nine problem categories,as well as maps showing the location of representativesites. An additional map showing the location of allproblem and representative sites on a single map shouldalso be produced. The maps should be detailed enoughso that the location of a site can be easily identified, butnot cluttered with so much information that it is difficultto either see all the sites on the map or read the fieldidentification number for each site. An example isshown in Figure 6.0-1.

Information collected and entered into the projectdatabase should be arranged and displayed in three separatesets of tables. The first table is the Site IdentificationTable which is developed by combining all the data fromthe problem and representative sites. Tables producedfrom this new data set will show the following informa-tion: field identification number, problem type, severity

rating, correctability rating, accessability rating, mapcoordinates (state plane or latitude and logitude) andstream segment name. The data sorted and displayed by sequential field identification number is useful inworking with the maps to determine what problems are present on what stream segment. An example ofthis table is shown in Figure 6.0-2 and was produced as part of the SCA survey of Carroll and Rock Creeks.

Most of the data presented in the Site IdentificationTable is the data that is common to all the problem cat-egories. One exception is representative sites, which arenot given severity, correctability and access ratings. Inaddition, information on stream segment names is notpart of the original database and must be determinedseparately and added to the site identification data set.The purpose of breaking the stream up into a series ofstream segments is twofold. First, it provides some local,easily recognizable, geographical references to the site

Figure 6.0-1. Map of Carroll & Rock Creeks Inadequate Buffer Sites

6.0 ANALYSIS & PRIORITIZATION OF PROJECTS

Figure 6.0-2. Example of a Site Identification Table produced as part of theRock & Carroll Creek SCA survey.

numbers. When working with a large number of sitesthat are identified by only field identification numbers,it is often helpful to quickly determine if a site is in theupper, middle or lower mainstem or in one of the tribu-taries. The second reason is to group sites whenreviewing information on general stream conditions. Datacollected at both problem and representative sites can begrouped by stream segment to aid in later data analysis.

Stream segments are determined by first reviewingthe maps of the watershed. The overall goal is to dividethe stream network into a series of ecologically relatedstream segments. The stream segments can vary in lengthand should be determined based on the local geologyand land use. Initially, the stream will be segmentedinto the stream’s mainstem and major tributaries.Depending on the size of the stream system, these initialsegments may be further divided into upper, middle,lower segments or major and minor tributaries. Thenumber and size of the stream segments will be dictatedby the pattern of the stream network and land use inthe watershed. The beginning and end of a stream seg-ment should be based on identifying logical breakpoints in the stream network. These would include thestream confluences or even a road crossing where land

use is very different up and downstream of the road.Each stream segment should be given a name and allproblem and representative sites in the segment identi-fied using the GIS maps. As site identification numbersare matched to stream segments, the information shouldbe recorded and entered into the Site IdentificationData set.

The second set of tables that are usually producedfor the SCA survey are the Problem Information Tables.These tables are grouped by problem type and includeall of the information collected on the survey datasheets. An example of a Problem Information Tableproduced as part of the Rock and Carroll Creek SCAsurvey is shown in Figure 6.0-3. While the informationin these tables can be organized in a number of differ-ent ways, usually the data is sorted in descending orderby the severity, correctability and accessability ratings.This produces a set of tables with the sites that are con-sidered the worst in each category at the top of thetable.

The final table produced in the analysis of the SCA data is the Representative Site Table. TheRepresentative Site Table displays the data collectedconcerning general habitat conditions during the SCA


Inadequate Buffer RC4009 Both 0 1500 Livestock 20 1500 Livestock Private 1 2 1Inadequate Buffer RC5001 Both 0 1000 Lawn 10 1000 Lawn Unknown 1 4 4Inadequate Buffer RC5011 Both 0 600 Park 0 600 Park Private 1 4 2Inadequate Buffer RC4008 Both 0 500 Pasture 0 500 Pasture Private 1 1 2Inadequate Buffer RC6009 Both 5 400 Lawn 0 400 Lawn Private 1 3 3Inadequate Buffer RC2074 Both 0 500 Lawn 0 500 Lawn Unknown 1 4 1Inadequate Buffer RC6011 Both 0 650 Lawn 0 650 Other Public 1 3 1Inadequate Buffer RC3001 Both 0 1000 Park 10 1000 Park Public 1 3 1Inadequate Buffer RC2007 Left 0 150 Lawn Shrubs Public 2 2 2Inadequate Buffer RC2004 Right Shrubs 10 75 Paved Private 2 5 2Inadequate Buffer RC2011 Both 0 250 Lawn 0 300 Lawn Unknown 2 2 2Inadequate Buffer RC2052 Both 0 50 Lawn 0 50 Lawn Public 2 2 2Inadequate Buffer RC3029 Both 0 500 Park 0 500 Park Private 2 4 2Inadequate Buffer RC1004 Both 30 100 Park 30 100 Park Private 2 3 3Inadequate Buffer RC6006 Both 5 1420 Other 5 1420 Other Private 2 1 1Inadequate Buffer RC6008 Left 5 1400 Lawn Shrubs Private 2 4 3Inadequate Buffer RC6001 Left 5 300 Park Shrubs Private 2 1 2Inadequate Buffer RC6002 Left 5 300 Park Shrubs Private 2 1 2Inadequate Buffer RC6005 Both 5 1420 Crop Field 5 1420 Crop Field Private 2 1 1Inadequate Buffer RC2017 Right Shrubs 0 200 Lawn Unknown 2 2 2Inadequate Buffer RC1007 Both 30 500 Crop Field 30 500 Lawn Unknown 2 3 2Inadequate Buffer RC6004 Both 0 250 Park 0 250 Park Private 2 1 1Inadequate Buffer RC2014 Left 12 300 Lawn Shrubs Private 2 2 3Inadequate Buffer RC2057 Both 0 200 Shrubs 0 200 Shrubs Public 2 2 2Inadequate Buffer RC2010 Both 0 120 Lawn 0 120 Shrubs Unknown 2 2 2

Site Width Length Land Width Length Land UseProblem Number Sides Left Left Use Left Right (ft) Right (ft) Right (ft) Owner ship S* C* A*

*NOTE: S= Severity C= Correctability A= Access

Figure 6.0-3. Example of a Problem Identification Table produced as part of the Rock & Carroll Creeks SCA survey.


LOWER CARROLL CREEK

RC3004 Representative Site Suboptimal Suboptimal Marginal Optimal Marginal Optimal Marginal Poor Poor Poor

RC3010 Representative Site Suboptimal Marginal Optimal Suboptimal Optimal Optimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Poor

RC3019 Representative Site Optimal Optimal Optimal Suboptimal Optimal Suboptimal Optimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Poor

RC3027 Representative Site Marginal Optimal Poor Poor Optimal Poor Optimal Poor Optimal Poor

RC6011 Representative Site Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor

Average Suboptimal Suboptimal Marginal Marginal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Marginal Marginal Poor

ROCK CREEK

RC2002 Representative Site Optimal Suboptimal Optimal Suboptimal Marginal Optimal Suboptimal Optimal Optimal Marginal

RC2009 Representative Site Suboptimal Optimal Suboptimal Optimal Marginal Suboptimal Suboptimal Marginal Suboptimal Marginal

RC2016 Representative Site Suboptimal Suboptimal Optimal Optimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Marginal Suboptimal

RC2024 Representative Site Marginal Marginal Suboptimal Marginal Marginal Marginal Suboptimal Marginal Poor Poor

RC2029 Representative Site Suboptimal Marginal Marginal Suboptimal Marginal Poor Optimal Optimal Suboptimal Poor

RC2036 Representative Site Suboptimal Marginal Suboptimal Suboptimal Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal Poor Marginal

RC2042 Representative Site Suboptimal Optimal Marginal Optimal Poor Suboptimal Marginal Marginal Marginal Poor

RC2050 Representative Site Marginal Marginal Suboptimal Optimal Marginal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Marginal Poor

RC2056 Representative Site Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Optimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Marginal Poor

RC2067 Representative Site Marginal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal

RC2073 Representative Site Marginal Suboptimal Marginal Suboptimal Marginal Suboptimal Suboptimal Optimal Suboptimal Poor

RC6002 Representative Site Suboptimal Suboptimal Marginal Optimal Marginal Marginal Suboptimal Optimal Suboptimal Suboptimal

Average Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Marginal Suboptimal Suboptimal Suboptimal Marginal Marginal

Macro-Site Inver tebrate Shelter Channel Sediment Velocity & Channel Bank Bank Riparian

Number ProblemSubstrate

Embed dedness For Fish Alteration Deposition Depth Flow Vegetation Condition Vegetation

Figure 6.0-4a. Example of the first part of the Representative Site Table produced as part of the Rock & Carroll Creeks survey

Figure 6.0-4b. Example of the second part of the Representative Site Table that was produced as part of the Rock & Carroll Creek survey.


survey. The information is grouped by stream segmentsand the habitat ratings in each category are combinedto provide an overall rating for each habitat category ineach stream segment. An example of a portion of theRepresentative Site Tables from the Rock and CarrollCreek SCA survey are shown in Figure 6.0-4 a & b.

Once a working set of maps and tables have beendeveloped, it is the responsibility of the project managerto do a complete review of the information. Duringthe review the photographs, data and GIS maps areexamined for all problem sites. The review is usuallydone with the survey team leaders and the project man-ager will look for possible discrepancies in the data, aswell as possible trends and restoration opportunities. Itis not unusual for the project manager to make a num-ber of changes to the original survey data during thereview. This is especially true in reviewing the severityand correctability rating of the survey teams. It is notunusual when viewing a number of different problemsin the same category to adjust the rating to reflect the

relative importance of specific problems. In makingthese changes it is important that the data base, GISmaps and original data sheets all reflect any changes thatare made. The SCA Data Change Log shown in Figure6.0-5 can be used by the project manager to keep trackof changes.

Once the project manager’s review is performed, itis recommended that a panel of experts be broughttogether to review the data in specific problem cate-gories. It is helpful if the panel is made up of not onlyindividuals who are familiar with correcting specifictypes of problems, but also some of the watershed stake-holders who will be asked to help fix the problems.During the panel review, survey data and photographswill be discussed and follow-up surveys may be scheduled.The objective of the panel review is to identify anytrends in the data and to begin to develop a consensusamong the watershed stakeholders on what futurerestoration work may be needed.

SCA DATA CHANGE LOGSurvey Project manager:

Initial and enter date when change made.

Site Number Date Chang e Chang e Master GIS Original(map, team, site) Proposed (description) Database Map Data Data Sheets

Figure 6.0-5. SCA data change log sheet that is used by the project manager to keep track of changes made to the original survey data.


Once the data has been reviewed, a final reportsummarizing the results of the SCA survey is written.The final report should summarize the findings of thesurvey and discuss any trends seen. The report shouldalso point out possible restoration opportunities and/orfollow-up work that may be needed. This report is notintended to provide an overall management strategy orplan for a watershed. Management plans are consensusdocuments that are written in collaboration with the

stakeholders in the watershed. The SCA survey reportinstead provides a list of environmental problems andrecommendations on possible steps that could be takento improve environmental conditions. The SCA surveyshould be seen as a resource that watershed stakeholderscan use in developing future watershed restorationstrategies. For copies of past SCA reports check outDNR’s website at www.dnr.state.md.us or contact:

REFERENCES

A.W. Hosmer, 1988. MaryPIRG’S streamwalk manual. Univ. of Maryland, College Park.

EPA, 1992. Streamwalk Manual. Water Division Region 10, Seattle WA. EPA 910/9-92-004.

Harford Co. DPW, 1999. Bynum Run Stream Survey. Harford County Department of Public Works,WaterResources Engineering, Bel Air, Maryland.

J. Plafken, M.T. Barbour, K. D. Porter, S. K. Gross and R. M. Hughes. 1989. Rapid bioassessment protocols for usein streams and rivers. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Water, EPA/440/4-89-001.

K.T.Yetman, D. Bailey, C. Buckley, P. Sneeringer, M. Colosimo, L. Morrison and J. Bailey. 1996. Swan Creek water-shed assessment and restoration. Proceedings Watershed ‘96. June 8-12, 1996 Baltimore, MD. Prepared by TetraTech Inc. under contract to EPA.

Maryland Save Our Steams (SOS). 1970. Conducting a stream survey. Maryland Department of Natural Resource’sAdopt-A-Stream Program. Annapolis, MD.

National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 1998. Stream visual assessment protocols. National Water andClimate Center Technical Note 99-1.

Kenneth YetmanWatershed Restoration Division

Maryland Department of Natural ResourcesTawes State Office Building

Annapolis, MD 21401e-mail: [email protected]

APPENDIX A

EXAMPLES OF FOLLOW-UPCONTACT LETTERS

November 1, 2001

Dear Watershed Resident:

Warren County is conducting a stream survey of the Bear Creek watershed where yourproperty is located. This survey is being performed as part of the County’s cooperativeefforts to protect the natural resources within the Rocky Gorge Reservoir watershed.

The Maryland Conservation Corps, whose staff presented you this letter, has been contracted by Warren County to perform the fieldwork for this study. Teams of two to threecorps members are walking the streams in the watershed and making field observations andtaking photographs of various stream characteristics such as streambank erosion, trash,exposed or undermined pipes, unshaded stream sections and other related environmentalconcerns. Corps members have been trained in stream survey techniques by the MarylandDepartment of Natural Resources. The information collected from this study will be used to help direct future stream restoration and protection efforts.

Please understand, that the Corps’ field staff have been directed only to record the condition of the streams in the watershed. They are not here to remedy or address anypotential problems at this time. If you have any specific concerns regarding the streams on your property, please fell free to direct them to John Smith of the Department of PublicWorks at 410-999-9999.

Sincerely,

John SmithStorm Water Management DivisionDepartment of Public Works

APPENDIX B

EXAMPLES OF PROPERTY OWNERNOTIFICATION LETTERS

November 1, 2001

Dear Bear Creek Watershed Resident:

Your help is needed for an important environmental study of Bear Creek and its tributaries.

In November 2001,Warren County Government along with the Maryland Conservation Corpsbegan a base study of the Bear Creek watershed for developing a baseline assessment of the streamscondition.

Your permission is requested to allow a field team to visit the property shown under your owner-ship by the latest digital version of the Maryland tax records at 00399 Singer Road referenced by taxidentification number 01201123. Each member of the team will be appropriately identified and willobserve proper protocols. It is anticipated that the crews will be in your area in February 2001.

The first step in the program is to walk the stream and to do field observations of various streamcharacteristics such as areas of erosion, stream degradation, unshaded stream banks, and other relatedenvironmental concerns.

Upon completion of the field study, the information will be collated into a draft document andpresented at a Public meeting. Public comment will be welcome at the meeting.

Bear Creek will be the third watershed study in Warren County, preceded by studies in SwanCreek in 1994 and Bynum Run in 1996. The information for Winters Run as with the other studieswill be used to identify and set priorities in areas where restoration could be implemented. The typesof projects that my potentially be investigated and implemented will range from recommendations toproperty owners about modifying lawn maintenance practices, tree and shrub plantings to stabilizestream banks, and larger capitally funded projects to manage runoff and restore stream habitat.

Your permission to walk your property will allow this important project to move forward.Should you object to our field crews entering your property, please contact John Smith at (410) 999-9999 by February 13, 2001. Otherwise, we will assume that we have permission to walkthe stream on your property.

Thank you for your support.Very truly yours,

John JonesWarren County Executive

APPENDIX C

DATA SHEETS

CHANNEL ALTERATION CA

Map: Team: Site:

Date: / / Photo: Survey:M M D D Y Y

Type: Concrete, Gabion, Rip-rap, Earth Channel, Other:

Bottom Width: in Length: ft.

Does channel have perennial flow? Yes No

Is sediment deposition occurring in the channel? Yes No

Is vegetation growing in the channel? Yes No

Is it part of a road crossing? No Above Below Both

Channelized length above road crossing ft.

Channelized length below road crossing ft.

Severity Severe 1 2 3 4 5 Minor Unknown (-1)

Correctability Best 1 2 3 4 5 Worst Unknown (-1)

Access Best 1 2 3 4 5 Worst Unknown (-1)

CHANNEL ALTERATION CA

Map: Team: Site:


Type: Concrete, Gabion, Rip-rap, Earth Channel, Other:

Bottom Width: in Length: ft.

Does channel have perennial flow? Yes No

Is sediment deposition occurring in the channel? Yes No

Is vegetation growing in the channel? Yes No

Is it part of a road crossing? No Above Below Both

Channelized length above road crossing ft.

Channelized length below road crossing ft.





EROSION SITE ES

Map: Team: Site:


Type: Downcutting Widening Headcutting Unknown

Cause: Bend at steep slope, Pipe Outfall, Below Channelization, Below Road Crossing,

Livestock, Land Use Change Upstream, Other:

Length: ft. Average exposed bank height: ft.

Present Land Use Left Side (looking downstream): Crop field, Pasture, Lawn, Paved, Shrubs & Small Trees,

Forest, Multiflora Rose, Other

Present Land Use Right Side (looking downstream): Crop field, Pasture, Lawn, Paved, Shrubs & Small Trees,


Threat to Infrastructure?: Yes No Describe:




EROSION SITE ES

Map: Team: Site:


Type: Downcutting Widening Headcutting Unknown

Cause: Bend at steep slope, Pipe Outfall, Below Channelization, Below Road Crossing,

Livestock, Land Use Change Upstream, Other:

Length: ft. Average exposed bank height: ft.

Present Land Use Left Side (looking downstream): Crop field, Pasture, Lawn, Paved, Shrubs & Small Trees,


Present Land Use Right Side (looking downstream): Crop field, Pasture, Lawn, Paved, Shrubs & Small Trees,


Threat to Infrastructure?: Yes No Describe:





EXPOSED PIPE EP

Map: Team: Site:


Pipe is: Exposed across bottom of stream, Exposed along stream bank, Exposed manhole,

Above stream, Other:

Type of Pipe: Concrete, Smooth Metal, Corrugated Metal, Plastic,Terra Cotta, Other:

Pipe Diameter: in. Length exposed: ft.

Purpose of Pipe: Sewage,Water Supply, Stormwater, Unknown, Other:

Evidence of Discharge?: Yes No

Color: Clear, medium brown, dark brown, green brown, yellow brown, green, other:

Odor: Sewage, oily, musky, fishy, rotten eggs, chlorine, none, other:




EXPOSED PIPE EP

Map: Team: Site:


Pipe is: Exposed across bottom of stream, Exposed along stream bank, Exposed manhole,

Above stream, Other:

Type of Pipe: Concrete, Smooth Metal, Corrugated Metal, Plastic,Terra Cotta, Other:

Pipe Diameter: in. Length exposed: ft.

Purpose of Pipe: Sewage,Water Supply, Stormwater, Unknown, Other:








PIPE OUTFALL PO

Map: Team: Site:


Type of Outfall: Stormwater, Sewage Overflow, Industrial, Pumping Station,

Agricultural, Other:

Type of Pipe: Earth Channel, Concrete Channel, Concrete Pipe, Smooth Metal Pipe,

Corrugated Metal, Plastic, Other:

Location (facing downstream): left bank, right bank, head of stream, Other

Pipe Diameter: in. Channel width: ft.







PIPE OUTFALL PO

Map: Team: Site:


Type of Outfall: Stormwater, Sewage Overflow, Industrial, Pumping Station,

Agricultural, Other:

Type of Pipe: Earth Channel, Concrete Channel, Concrete Pipe, Smooth Metal Pipe,

Corrugated Metal, Plastic, Other:

Location (facing downstream): left bank, right bank, head of stream, Other

Pipe Diameter: in. Channel width: ft.








FISH BARRIER FB

Map: Team: Site:


Fish Blockage: Total, Partial, Temporary, Unknown

Type of Barrier: Dam, Road Crossing, Pipe Crossing, Natural Falls, Beaver Dam, Channelized, Instream Pond,

Debris Dam, Other:

Blockage because: Too high Too shallow Too fast

Water drop: inches (if too high)

Water depth: inches (if too shallow)




FISH BARRIER FB

Map: Team: Site:


Fish Blockage: Total, Partial, Temporary, Unknown

Type of Barrier: Dam, Road Crossing, Pipe Crossing, Natural Falls, Beaver Dam, Channelized, Instream Pond,

Debris Dam, Other:

Blockage because: Too high Too shallow Too fast

Water drop: inches (if too high)

Water depth: inches (if too shallow)





INADEQUATE BUFFER IB

Map: Team: Site:


Buffer inadequate on: Left Right Both (looking downstream)

Is stream unshaded? Left Right Both (looking downstream) Neither

Buffer width left: ft. Buffer width right: ft.

Length left: ft. Length right: ft.

Present land use left side: Crop field, Pasture, Lawn, Paved, Shrubs & Small Trees,Forest, Multiflora Rose, Other

Present land use right side: Crop field, Pasture, Lawn, Paved, Shrubs & Small Trees,Forest, Multiflora Rose, Other

Has a buffer recently been established: Yes No

Are Livestock present: Yes No Type: Cattle, Horses, Pigs, Other:




Wetland Potential Best 1 2 3 4 5 Worst Unknown (-1)

(Good wetland potential = low slope, low bank height)

INADEQUATE BUFFER IB

Map: Team: Site:


Buffer inadequate on: Left Right Both (looking downstream)

Is stream unshaded? Left Right Both (looking downstream) Neither

Buffer width left: ft. Buffer width right: ft.

Length left: ft. Length right: ft.

Present land use left side: Crop field, Pasture, Lawn, Paved, Shrubs & Small Trees,Forest, Multiflora Rose, Other

Present land use right side: Crop field, Pasture, Lawn, Paved, Shrubs & Small Trees,Forest, Multiflora Rose, Other

Has a buffer recently been established: Yes No

Are Livestock present: Yes No Type: Cattle, Horses, Pigs, Other:




Wetland Potential Best 1 2 3 4 5 Worst Unknown (-1)

(Good wetland potential = low slope, low bank height)


IN OR NEAR STREAM CONSTRUCTION IC

Map: Team: Site:


Type of activity: Road, Road Crossing, Utility, Logging, Bank Stabilization, Residential Development,

Industrial Development, Other:

Sediment Control: Adequate Inadequate Unknown

If inadequate, why?

Is stream bottom below site laden with excess sediment? Yes No

Length of stream affected: ft.

Company doing construction:

Location:


Contact office as soon as possible: ( )

IN OR NEAR STREAM CONSTRUCTION IC

Map: Team: Site:


Type of activity: Road, Road Crossing, Utility, Logging, Bank Stabilization, Residential Development,

Industrial Development, Other:

Sediment Control: Adequate Inadequate Unknown

If inadequate, why?

Is stream bottom below site laden with excess sediment? Yes No

Length of stream affected: ft.

Company doing construction:

Location:


Contact office as soon as possible: ( )


TRASH DUMPING TD

Map: Team: Site:


Type of trash: Residential, Industrial, Yard Waste, Flotables, Tires, Construction,

Other:

Amount of trash: pick-up truck loads

Other measure:

Is trash confined to? Single site, Large Area

Possible cleanup site for volunteers? Yes No

Land Ownership: Public Private Unknown

If public, name:




TRASH DUMPING TD

Map: Team: Site:


Type of trash: Residential, Industrial, Yard Waste, Flotables, Tires, Construction,

Other:

Amount of trash: pick-up truck loads

Other measure:

Is trash confined to? Single site, Large Area

Possible cleanup site for volunteers? Yes No

Land Ownership: Public Private Unknown

If public, name:





UNUSUAL CONDITION OR COMMENT UC

Map: Team: Site:


Type: (circle one) Unusual Condition Comment

Describe: Odor, Scum, Excessive Algae, Water Color/Clarity, Red Flock, Sewage Discharge, Oil

Potential Cause:




UNUSUAL CONDITION OR COMMENT UC

Map: Team: Site:


Type: (circle one) Unusual Condition Comment

Describe: Odor, Scum, Excessive Algae, Water Color/Clarity, Red Flock, Sewage Discharge, Oil

Potential Cause:





REPRESENTATIVE SITE RE

Map: Team: Site:


Optimal Suboptimal Marginal Poor

Macroinvertebrate Substrata

Embeddedness

Shelter for fish

Channel Alteration

Sediment Deposition

Velocity and Depth

Channel Flow

Bank Vegetation

Bank Condition

Riparian Vegetation

Wetted width: Riffles: in. Runs: in. Pools: in.

Thalweg depth: Riffles: in. Runs: in. Pools: in.

Bottom type: Silts, Sands, Gravel, Cobble, Boulder, Bedrock

REPRESENTATIVE SITE RE

Map: Team: Site:


Optimal Suboptimal Marginal Poor

Macroinvertebrate Substrata

Embeddedness

Shelter for fish

Channel Alteration

Sediment Deposition

Velocity and Depth

Channel Flow

Bank Vegetation

Bank Condition

Riparian Vegetation

Wetted width: Riffles: in. Runs: in. Pools: in.

Thalweg depth: Riffles: in. Runs: in. Pools: in.

Bottom type: Silts, Sands, Gravel, Cobble, Boulder, Bedrock


HABITAT ASSESSMENTRocky Bottom Streams

Habitat Parameter1. Attachment Sites for Macroinvertebrates

(see page 67)

2. Embeddedness (see page 67)

3. Shelter for Fish (see page 67)

4. Channel Alteration (see page 67)

5. Sediment Deposition (see page 67)

6. Stream velocity and depth combinations(see page 67)

7. Channel Flow Status (see page 68)

8. Bank Vegetative Protection (see page 68)

9. Condition of Banks(see page 68)

10. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width(see page 68)

OptimalWell-developed riffle and run; riffle is as wideas stream and length extends two times thewidth of stream; cobble predominates; boul-ders and gravel common.

Fine sediment surrounds and fills in 0-25% ofthe living spaces around and in between thegravel, cobble, and boulders.

Snags, submerged logs, undercut banks, orother stable habitat are found in over 50% ofthe site.

Stream straightening, dredging, artificialembankments, dams or bridge abutmentsabsent or minimal; stream with meanderingpattern.

Little or no enlargement of islands or pointbars and less than 5% of the bottom affectedby sediment deposition.

Slow (< 1 ft/sec)/shallow (< 1 ft); slow/deep,fast/deep; fast/shallow; all four combinationspresent

Water reaches base of both lower banks andminimal amount of channel substrate isexposed.

More than 90% of the streambank surfacescovered by natural vegetation, including trees,shrubs, or other plants, vegetative disruption,through grazing or mowing, minimal or notevident; almost all plants allowed to grow nat-urally.

Banks stable, no evidence of erosion or bankfailure; little potential for future problems.

Width of riparian zone >50 feet; no evidenceof human activities (i.e., parking lots, roadbeds,clear-cuts, mowed areas, or crops) within theriparian zone.

SuboptimalRiffle is as wide as stream but length is lessthan two times width; cobble less abundant;boulders and gravel common.

Fine sediment surrounds and fills in 25-50%of the living spaces around and in betweenthe gravel, cobble, and boulders.

Snags, submerged logs, undercut banks, orother stable habitat are found in over 30-50%of the site.

Some stream straightening, dredging, artificialembankments or dams present, usually in areaof bridge abutments; no evidence of recentchannel alteration activity.

Some new increase in bar formation, mostlyfrom coarse gravel; 5-30% of the bottom affect-ed; slight deposition in pools.

3 of the 4 velocity/depth combinations pres-ent; fast current areas generally predominate.

Water fills >75% of the available channel;<25% of channel substrate is exposed.

70-90% of the streambank surfaces covered bynatural vegetation, but one class of plants isnot well-represented; some vegetative disrup-tion evident; more than one-half of thepotential plant stubble height remaining.

Moderately stable; infrequent, small areas oferosion mostly healed over.

Width of riparian zone 35-40 feet.

MarginalRun area may be lacking; riffle not as wide asstream and its length is less than 2 times thestream width; gravel or large boulders andbedrock prevalent; some cobble present.

Fine sediment surrounds and fills in 50-75% ofthe living spaces around and in between thegravel, cobble, and boulders.

Snags, submerged logs, undercut banks, orother stable habitat are found in over 10-30%of the site.

Artificial embankments present to some extenton both banks; and 40 to 80% of stream sitestraightened, dredged, or otherwise altered.

Moderate deposition of new gravel, coarsesand on old and new bars; 30-50% of the bot-tom affected; sediment deposits at streamobstructions and bends; moderate depositionin pools.

Only 2 of the 4 velocity/depth combinationsare present. Score lower if last current areas aremissing.

Water fills 25-75% of the available channeland/or riffle substrates are mostly exposed.

50-70% of the streambank surfaces covered byvegetation; patches of bare soil or closelycropped vegetation common; less than one halfof the potential plant stubble height remain-ing.

Moderately unstable; up to 60% of banks insite have areas of erosion; high erosion poten-tial during floods.

Width of riparian zone 20-35 feet.

PoorRiffles or run virtually nonexistent; largeboulders and bedrock prevalent; cobble lack-ing.

Fine sediment surrounds and fills in morethan 75% of the living spaces around and inbetween the gravel, cobble, and boulders.

Snags, submerged logs, undercut banks, orother stable habitat are found in less than 10%of the site.

Banks shored with gabion or cement; over80% of the stream site straightened and dis-rupted.

Heavy deposits of fine material, increased bardevelopment; more than 50% of the bottomaffected; pools almost absent due to substantialsediment deposition.

Dominated by 1 velocity/depth category(usually slow/shallow areas)

Very little water in channel and mostly pres-ent as standing pools.

Less than 50% of the streambank surfacescovered by vegetation, disruption of stream-bank vegetation is very high; vegetation hasbeen removed to 2 inches or less in averagestubble height.

Unstable; many eroded areas;“raw” areas fre-quent along straight sections and bends; obvi-ous bank collapse or failure; 60-100% of bankhas erosional scars.

Width of riparian zone <20 feet.

Use the habitat characteristic (parameter) defini-tions and guidance that follows when completing thehabitat assessment field data form. Rocky-bottom streams(Piedmont Streams) are generally fast moving streamswith beds that are made up to gravel/cobbles/boulders inany combination and that have definite riffle areas.

1. Attachment Sites for Macroinvertebrates are essen-tially the amount of living space or hard sub-strates (rocks, snags) available for aquatic insectsand snails. Many insects begin their life underwa-ter in streams and need to attach themselves torocks, logs, branches, or other submerged sub-strates.The greater the variety and number ofavailable living spaces or attachment sites, thegreater the variety of insects in the stream.Optimally, there should be a predominance ofcobble, and boulders and gravel should be com-mon.The availability of suitable living spaces formacroinvertebrates decreases as cobble becomesless abundant and boulders, gravel, or bedrockbecome more prevalent.

2. Embeddedness refers to the extent to which rocks(gravel, cobble, and boulders) are surrounded by,covered, or sunken into the silt, sand, or mud ofthe stream bottom. Generally, as rocks becomeembedded, the living spaces available to macroin-vertebrates and fish for shelter, spawning, and eggincubation are decreased.

To estimate the percent of embeddedness,observe the amount of silt or finer sedimentsoverlying and surrounding the rocks. If kickingdoes not dislodge the rocks or cobbles, they maybe greatly embedded. It may be useful to lift afew rocks and observe how much of the rock(e.g., 1/2, 1/3) is darker due to algal growth.

3. Shelter for Fish includes the relative quantity andvariety of natural structures in the stream, such asfallen trees, logs, and branches, large rocks, andundercut banks that are available to fish for hid-ing, sleeping, or laying eggs.A wide variety ofsubmerged structures in the stream provide fishwith many living spaces; the more living spaces ina stream, the more types of fish the stream cansupport.

4. Channel Alteration is basically a measure of large-scale changes in the shape of the stream channel.Many streams in urban and agricultural areas have

been straightened, deepened (e.g. dredged), ordiverted into concrete channels, often for floodcontrol purposes. Such streams have far fewernatural habitats for fish, macroinvertebrates, andplants than do naturally meandering streams.Channel alteration is present when the streamruns through a concrete channel; when artificialembankments, riprap, and other forms of artificialbank stabilization or structures are present; whenthe stream is very straight for significant distances;when dams, bridges, and flow altering structuressuch as combined sewer overflow pipes are pres-ent; when the stream is of uniform depth due todredging, and when other such changes haveoccurred.

Signs that indicate the occurrence of dredginginclude straightened, deepened, and otherwiseuniform stream channels, and the removal ofstreamside vegetation to provide access to thestream for dredging equipment.

5. Sediment Deposition is a measure of the amountof sediment that has been deposited in the streamchannel and the changes to the stream bottomthat have occurred as a result of the deposition.High levels of sediment deposition create anunstable and continually changing environmentthat is unsuitable for many aquatic organisms.

Sediments are naturally deposited in areas wherethe stream flow is reduced, such as pools andbends, or where flow is obstructed.These depositscan lead to the formation of islands, shoals, orpoint bars (sediments that build up in the stream,usually at the beginning of a meander) or canresult in the complete filling of pools.To deter-mine whether or not these sediment deposits arenew, look for vegetation growing on them; newsediments will not yet have been colonized byvegetation.

6. Stream Velocity and Depth Combinations areimportant to the maintenance of aquatic commu-nities. Restrictions to normal velocity and/or thefilling of pools will affect the organisms living inthe stream by reducing the dissolved oxygen thatis available and by slowing down the movementof food items. Streams function best when themovement of water continually replenishes thesupply of oxygen and food, and does not becomestagnant.


HABITAT CHARACTERISTICS DEFINITIONS

Slow velocity is generally described as watermoving less than (<) 1 foot/second

Fast velocity is generally described as watermoving greater than (>) 1 foot/second

Shallow water is generally described as lessthan (<) 1.5 feet

Deep water is generally described as greaterthan (>) 1.5 feet

Four general categories of velocity and depth areoptimal for benthic macroinvertebrate and fishcommunities.The best streams will have all fourvelocity/depth combinations and can maintain awide variety of aquatic life:

(1) slow, shallow(2) slow, deep(3) fast, deep(4) fast, shallow

Depth can be estimated by standing in thestream at various points. If the water level comesto below the bottom of your knee cap, it can beconsidered shallow. If it reaches above the bottomof your knee cap, consider it deep.Also, you canuse the measuring rope to measure the length ofyour leg to the knee cap to judge depth.

To estimate velocity, use the measuring ropeto mark off 10-foot areas of stream in the samegeneral areas where you measured depth. Drop atwig in the stream and count the number of sec-onds it takes for the stick to travel the 10 feet.Generally it is best to do this in run and poolareas since velocity is difficult to measure in rifflesas the twig may get caught up by rocks. Divide10 by the number of seconds to determine veloc-ity in “feet per second.” For example:

If the twig took 6 seconds to travel the 10 foot dis-tance, then divide 6 seconds into 10 feet, which isequal to 1.4 ft/sec. In this case, the velocity wouldbe considered fast, as it is greater than 1 ft/sec.

Since water in riffle areas tends to have the great-est velocity, you can assume that riffle velocity isfaster than velocity in either the run or pool areasyou measure.

7. Channel Flow Status is the percent of the exist-ing channel that is filled with water.The flow sta-tus will change as the channel enlarges or as flowdecreases as a result of dams and other obstruc-

tions, diversions for irrigation, or drought.Whenwater does not cover much of the streambed, theamount of living area for aquatic organisms islimited.

8. Bank Vegetative Protection measures the amountof the stream bank that is covered by natural (i.e.growing wild and not obviously planted) vegeta-tion.The root systems of plants growing onstream banks help hold soil in place, reducingerosion.Vegetation on banks provides shade forfish and macroinvertebrates, and serves as a foodsource by dropping leaves and other organic mat-ter into the stream. Ideally, a variety of vegetationshould be present, including trees, shrubs, andgrasses.Vegetative disruption may occur when thegrasses and plants on the stream banks are mowedor grazed upon, or the trees and shrubs are cutback or cleared.

9. Condition of Banks measures erosion potentialand whether the stream banks are eroded. Steepbanks are more likely to collapse and suffer fromerosion than are gently sloping banks and aretherefore considered to have a high erosionpotential. Signs of erosion include crumbling,unvegetated banks, exposed tree roots, andexposed soil. Bank failure and the subsequentcollapse of portions of the stream bank is referredto as bank sloughing.

10. The Riparian Vegetative Zone Width is definedhere as the width of natural vegetation from theedge of the stream bank.The riparian vegetativezone is a buffer zone to pollutants entering astream from runoff; it also controls erosion andprovides stream habitat and nutrient input intothe stream.A wide, relatively undisturbed riparianvegetative zone reflects a healthy stream system;narrow, far less useful riparian zones occur whenroads, parking lots, fields, lawns and other artifi-cially cultivated areas, bare soil, rocks, or buildingsare near the stream bank.The presence of “oldfields” (i.e., previously developed agricultural fieldsallowed to convert to natural conditions) shouldrate higher than fields in continuous or periodicuse. In arid areas, the riparian vegetative zone canbe measured by observing the width of the areadominated by riparian or water-loving plants, suchas willows, marsh grasses, and cottonwood trees.


watershed restoration division chesapeake & coastal ... · annapolis, maryland 21401 toll free...

Documents