pH test strips for trout streams

[k-bob]

After looking around there is some limited long term epa data on the acid neutralizing capacity of pa streams... Here is the ANC/buffering capacity of stone, benner, and roberts run in state college-dubois area over about 20 years...

http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/surfacewater.html

 

[k-bob]

EPA has long term ANC/buffering data on two more PA streams, Linn and Baldwin, SWPA...

http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/surfacewater.html

 

[troutbert]

Which graph corresponds to which stream?

And how do you interpret those graphs?

 

[k-bob]

I think these are the only streams in Pennsylvania with this long term Anc data on the epa website. lost correspondence of data and stream will post later...

but over their 20 yr time frame, the charts suggest buffering capacity of some streams increased. not evenly across streams, some may have no improvement or lost anc. its a delayed response to cleaner air. gradual change, but acidity along w water temps, habitat, etc affects trout populations, so higher anc could over time affect some streams. I assume the change is bedrock dependent ??

 

[Chaz]

For what it's worth my sister used to raise ST in a Lab for water quality testing, the ph they used was between 6.5 and 8.5. The Young were raised at 7.2.

 

[k-bob]

Streams shown in two-decade ANC traces posts 21 & 22: (top to bottom): stone/clearfield; roberts/clearfield; benner/state cllge; baldwin crk/johnstown; linn run /ligioner

http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/surfacewater.html

another guess: there are streams with 25-year old class C or D ST biomass reports on the wilderness list and no BT reported. if some of them have decent habitat (gradient pools etc), they may have improved since then, subject to flood, drought, etc issues.

 

[k-bob]

my pH test kit is here and it seems to be very much as advertised... Good so far in a local field trial: Dasani and Aquafina in the Acme parking lot

 

[troutbert]

k-bob wrote:
Streams shown in two-decade ANC traces posts 21 & 22: (top to bottom): stone/clearfield; roberts/clearfield; benner/state cllge; baldwin crk/johnstown; linn run /ligioner

http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/surfacewater.html

another guess: there are streams with 25-year old class C or D ST biomass reports on the wilderness list and no BT reported. if some of them have decent habitat (gradient pools etc), they may have improved since then, subject to flood, drought, etc issues.

Benner Run has wild brown trout pretty far up, including above the monitoring station. And it has brook trout clear to the headwaters.

So it is not a highly acidified stream like Stone Run and Roberts Run, which have no brown trout and have brook trout only in their lower ends, while their upper ends have no fish.

 

[k-bob]

interesting that benner run has BT "pretty far up." never been there. If I have the right stream, one upper part is listed as class a brookies w/ no BT mentioned in a 2002 survey (wilderness list).

these anc changes are slow, so they may not have lead to any ST/BT balance or biomass changes in benner... but benner's ANC has increased, which could lead to more BT in some stream scetions over time?

CENTRE
Benner Run 308D Wild Brook Trout Sec 01
Limits: From hdwtrs dwnst to 1st trib below Pine Haven Camp
Length: 3.2 km; 2.0 mi. DER WQ Class: EV
Biomass Class: A ST = 36.91 kg/ha
Surveyed: 2002

 

[troutbert]

That's section 1, way up, where the stream is very small. That is brookie water.

That tributary and some springs add volume to the creek and not far below there you find brown trout as well as brookies.

That's the way it is now, and it was also that way in the 1990s.

Benner Run is more fertile than Stone Run and Roberts Run.

If this discussion gives someone the idea to fish Benner Run, just understand that most of it is thick with brush. It open up in a few places, but most of it has very tight casting.

 

[k-bob]

have now used the hach kit on a few small nepa streams - some I had published pH data for, some class a, some "new and what the hell." the kit is easy to use. helps that I bought extra tubes so could pull some water from multiple streams, or keep samples from multiple streams fished.

pH readings all made sense: they converged w/ published pH allowing for flow factor (lower pH with more rain rainoff).

also predicted whether Id catch more or less ST pretty well, adjusting for habitat, temps, the possibility of streams drying out in the summer.

kit is too big for vest, so I tested streams at road crossings where possible. others I fished and brought water back.

rather than just guessing/gauging pH from headwaters geology, conductivity, swampy headwaters, etc., better to have a quick ph test on stream too, or at least one when you get back to the car.

thanks Millsertime for mentioning the hach kit!

 

[k-bob]

have now used hach kit on trips to areas w many small streams. kit fits in back pocket of my fishpond sagebrush vest. no problem to carry at all.

very helpful to have pH of streams you pass and fish. once you're back at home, can study the headwaters geology/pH profile of tested streams (using the bedrock geology layer from dcnr mapping online). often nearby streams have similar headwaters bedrock types, or predictably higher or lower buffering bedrock types. can improve guesses on the pH of nearby streams, input on whether they may be interesting to visit....

BTW, a pH of 6.0 or above with medium rainwater input seems to be a good sign for ST presence. a stream with a 6.3 pH at medium rainwater input might have more / bigger fish.