This dashboard shows the results from macroinvertebrate sampling at this site. It displays three ecological indicators: macroinvertebrate community index, taxonomic richness and percent EPT.
For sites where State is 'N/A' or Trend is 'Not Assessed', there are not enough data to calculate a State and/or Trend result. Click on an indicator to see the available historical data.
Select trend period for MCI
- 10 years
- 15 years
MCI sample history at this siteShowing:MCI for Pigeon Bay Stream at Pigeon Bay RoadMCI score
What do the icons mean?EXCELLENTMCI score of more than 119. Streams in excellent ecological condition. Indicative of excellent water quality and/or habitat conditions.GOODMCI between 100 and 119. Streams in good ecological condition. Indicative of good water quality and/or habitat conditions.FAIRMCI between 80 and 99. Streams in fair ecological condition. Indicative of only fair water quality and/or habitat condition.POORMCI less than 80. Streams in poor ecological condition. Indicative of poor water quality and/or poor habitat conditions.
Taxa richness history at this siteShowing:Taxa richness for Pigeon Bay Stream at Pigeon Bay RoadNumber of taxa
EPT history at this siteShowing:Percent EPT richness for Pigeon Bay Stream at Pigeon Bay RoadEPT %
The Cawthron Institute has worked alongside regional councils to verify the processes and methods used for macroinvertebrate data collection, processing of the data in the laboratory, quality control in the field and laboratory and the statistical analysis and interpretation of the results presented.
For more details on each tick, see our 'Can I Trust this Data?' Factsheet.
Macroinvertebrates are sampled at this site as part of council's stream health monitoring programme.
Macroinvertebrate sampling is done annually or more frequently at this site. Annual sampling provides enough data points for state and trend analyses to be calculated with sufficient statistical power for trend detection.
This site is a hard-bottomed site and appropriate sampling protocols have been applied. Data shown here have been collected using current best-practice based on Stark et al. (2001).
Macroinvertebrate sampling is done in all meso-habitats (i.e., pool, run and riffle), rather than just in riffle habitat, as Stark et al. (2001) suggest. All-habitat sampling provides a more comprehensive description than riffle-only sampling of the invertebrate community at a stream site. However, comparisons made between macroinvertebrate data collected in all habitat and data collected in just riffle habitat need to be treated with caution.
This council does not collect any macroinvertebrate samples for up to two weeks after a flood greater than three times the median flow as recommended by Stark et al. (2001). Therefore, data collected at this site is following best practice.
Samples at this site have been processed following protocol P2 which is recommended by Stark et al. (2001). However, the individual count number has been reduced from 200 to 100 (with a scan for rare taxa). Data processed at this site are therefore not following best practice and conclusions based on this data need to be treated with caution.
Data collected at this site had some form of field quality control done.
Data processed at this site has had one of the three Laboratory Quality Control Protocols (i.e., QC1, QC2,Q C3) applied. Data shown here is more robust than data with no laboratory QC applied.