Applied Ecosystem Services, LLC

Environmental regulations are supposed to be based on sound science, yet too often either that science is not presented or is deemed insuffiient by permit applicants and others. The result can be administrative appeals and legal challenges that increase time and costs for the applicant and indecision by regulatory agency staff. At their core, all environmental regulations ask three questions to assess compliance with the relevant law or statute: Will the permitted activity adversely effect the natural environment (forecasting)?

Regulatory and resource agencies sometimes require collection of benthic macroinvertebrates and/or fish for baseline data or permit compliance. It is too common for them to not know what they will do with the data. Correctly analyzing and interpreting these data yields valuable information that operators and regulators can use to make well-informed decisions regarding Clean Water Act compliance. Aquatic biotic communities reflect ambient water quality conditions much better than do chemical concentrations.

The Clean Water Act (CWA) declares it is the national goal of water quality to provide for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and provide for recreation in and on the water. The US Environmental Protection Agency’s(EPA) historic approach is developing a national chemical criterion for chemical elements. There are so many differences in aquatic ecosystems across the US that a more pragmatic approach uses the aquatic biota – benthic macroinvertebrates – to quantify local community’s variability and response to anthropogenic activities.

The Clean Water Act (CWA) declares it is the national goal of water quality to provide for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and provide for recreation in and on the water. The US Environmental Protection Agency’s(EPA) historic approach is developing a national chemical criterion for chemical elements. There are so many differences in aquatic ecosystems across the US that a more pragmatic approach uses the aquatic biota – benthic macroinvertebrates – to quantify local community’s variability and response to anthropogenic activities.

Collecting sediment samples for analysis of contaminants—particularly in river systems—is not just a matter of going out with a bucket and shovel. In fact, it is much more complex than a water quality survey, aquatic biota survey, or any terrestrial sampling program. Monitoring of sediment contaminants frequently is done to determine whether the sediments are a sink or a source of the chemicals of interest, and to evaluate the effects of the contaminants on the aquatic ecosystem as a whole.

The requirement to use the best available science appears in most environmental regulations at the federal and state levels, but best available science is not defined in the dictionary or by consensus. Washington state lists excellent criteria in its Administrative Code (WAC 365-195-905), but these criteria are not complete nor easily applied by the non-technical decision-maker. Download the PDF.

Sage-grouse, salmon, desert tortoise, and many other animals are listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) or are being considered for listing. Much data have been collected on population abundance, distribution, and habitat quantity and quality. Unfortunately, most biotic data are incorrectly analyzed because count data differ from continuous data and require different statistical models. Because ineffective policy decisions result from inappropriate models correct analytical results are critical for regulated industries, regulators, and other stakeholders.

Many projects or operation involve geochemistry: chemicals in water, sediments, soils, or rocks. Most people are not concerned with chemicals like magnesium sulfate or sodium chloride, but they are seriously concerned with toxins that effect human and environmental health. These toxins can be inorganic metals such as arsenic, cadmium, and zinc or organic compounds such as polychlorinated dioxins, furans, biphenyls, and pesticides. These toxins are most commonly present in very low concentrations, frequently not detectable.

Many common threads connect geographically separate regulatory and public concerns. Oregon has peak and ecological flows for water storage projects, Nevada has water quality draining from waste rock disposal areas (RDAs), West Virginia (and other Appalachian coal mining areas) has downstream water quality and aquatic biota from valley fill runoff. Related concerns involve fish and the Endangered Species Act (ESA): bull trout in Idaho; salmon in Oregon and Washington; Lahontan cutthroat trout in Nevada.

Toxic metals and organic compounds are commonly present at very low concentrations in water, sediments, soils, and rocks. Concentrations cannot be quantified with 99% certainty; if those chemicals are present the instrument cannot distinguish them from zero. Concentrations below laboratory reporting limits are censored because their values are unknown. Censored values can be 70-80% of the available date, a meaningful amount of valuable information. Correct analysis of censored data is particularly important when performing an ecological risk analysis (ERA) as part of the CERCLA Superfund process.