If you do a search, you will find a lot of previous threads on what constitutes a loggable dive. Opinions vary greatly. There is no consensus. Unless you have some specific need to prove you have done certain dives--which most of us do not--then what dives you log is purely a personal decision. You are free to log or not log whatever dives you want. The main reason to log dives is to record information that might later be useful for some reason or another. If you make a practice of logging truly inconsequential dives, you are not doing yourself a favor. But I don't think 22 feet in a river, where you were probably dealing with current and some kind of goal, like looking for fossils or swimming with manatees or whatever, is inconsequential at all. If you do a lot of that kind of diving, and want to remember where you've been and what you did, what weights you had, what suit you wore, etc., then consider logging those dives.
My own personal threshold for what constitutes a loggable dive is what I call my "rule of 60": I log a dive only if the sum of the maximum depth and the number of minutes of bottom time is at least about 60. So, for example, I'd log a dive to a mere 10 feet only if my bottom time exceeded about 50 minutes. I figure if I'm breathing compressed air underwater on a scuba unit for that long, then I probably had some goal for doing it that I'd want to record for future reference. For example, maybe it was a training dive where I was practicing a particular skill.