September 2000
003
Restoring &
.Protecting
America's Waters
CLEAN WATER
ACHONPLAN
Watershed Success Stories
Applying the Principles and Spirit
of the Clean Water Action Plan
-------
Lead Agencies for the Clean Water Action Plan
USDA U'S- DePartment of Agriculture
(301) 504-2198
U.S. Department of Commerce
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
,
U.S. Department of Defense
(703) 604-1765
U.S. Department of Defense
Army Corps of Engineers
(202) 761-1980
U.S. Department of the Interior
(202) 208-6416
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(202)260-5700
Supporting Agencies
Tennessee Valley Authority
(865) 632-1671
U.S. Department of Energy
(202) 586-8505
U.S. Department of Transportation
(202) 366-5004
U.S. Department of Justice
(202) 514-2701
www.cleanwater.gov
The federal government is an equal opportunity employer
-------
Table of Contents
Introduction
Acronyms and Glossary ,-
Buzzards Bay, MA Restoring and Preserving Estuarine Resources 8
Barnegat Bay, NJ Stabilizing Erosion in an Estuarine Watershed 10
Bronx River, NY Community Cooperation in Urban Watershed Restoration 12
Wissahickon Creek, PA Countering Urban and Suburban Development Effects 14
Conasauga River, GA and TN Protecting Wildlife Habitat from Nonpoint Source Pollution 16
Cuyahoga River, OH Restoring an American Heritage River 18
Little Rabbit River, MI Using Best Management Practices 20
Big Darby Creek, OH Preserving Biological Diversity in an Agricultural Watershed 22
Conemaugh River, PA Innovative Solutions for Acid Mine Drainage. 24
Guest River, VA Rjver Restoration in an Appalachian Watershed 26
Oconaluftee and Ravens Fork Rivers, NC Restoring Rivers and Riparian Areas through Innovative Actions 28
Bigalk Creek, IA Eliminate the Sediment and Erosion; Bring Back the Fish 30
Illinois River, IL Demonstrating Stream Restoration and Land Management 32
Tensas River, LA Reversing the Adverse Impacts of Agricultural Development 34
Boulder and Upper Tenmile Creek, MT Cleaning Up a Century ofHardrock Mining 36
Upper and Lower Bad River, SD Addressing Water Quality through Land Management 38
North Fork of the Ninnescah River, KS Working Together on Agricultural Best Management Practices 40
Clear Creek, TX Saving a Natural Bayou 42
Willow Creek, CO Planning the Mitigation of Mining Pollution 44
North Fork of the Gunnison River, CO Coordinating Community-Led Restoration 46
San Miguel River, CO Comprehensive Watershed Management in Action 48
Little Colorado River, AZ andNM Multi-Objective Management of'Human Impacts 50
Steamboat Creek, NV « Watershed Restoration on Private Land 52
Haskell Slough, WA Excavation Resurrects Aquatic Habitat 54
Teanaway River, WA Restoring Fish Habitat 55
Napa River, CA Managing Land Use and Development in a Riverine Estuary System 58
Panoche-Silver Creek, CA Protecting the Regional Economy through Flood Management 60
Tijuana River, CA Reconstructing a Coastal Estuary 52
Duck Creek, AK Combining the City and the Wilderness 54
Ko'olaupoko, HI Working Together on Tropical Watershed Restoration 66
-------
j -s
St «B"
ma
/
-------
Introduction
Clean Water Action Plan
Success Stories
In February 1998, President Clinton
announced the Clean Water Action
Plan, an effort designed by nine
federal agencies to improve water
quality nationwide. By viewing
water quality problems on a water-
shed basis and coordinating both
existing programs and new Action
Plan initiatives, the federal govern-
ment hoped to provide improved
support for local watershed
restoration efforts within the con-
text of existing laws.
The Action Plan seeks to support
the ongoing local watershed part-
nerships that are now in place and
working to address critical local
problems, develop restoration
strategies and implement solutions
that bring about real improvements
in watershed health. This report
highlights these successes by look-
ing at individual case studies from
around the country that embody
the principles and spirit of partner-
ship of the Clean Water Action
Plan, regardless of when those
local efforts started.
The thirty success stories present-
ed in this report demonstrate how
coordinating efforts of federal, state
and local partners can lead to inno-
vative restoration solutions to
address a wide variety of water
quality problems.
Partnerships and
Public Participation
The Action Plan encourages federal
agencies to provide opportunities
for local, state, and tribal officials
to formulate watershed restoration
and protection plans. Thus, all of
the case studies in this document
highlight the degree to which
watershed restoration must be a
cooperative effort. Restoration
efforts in the Wissahickon
Watershed in Pennsylvania have
been successful due to the efforts
of 120 partner organizations. At
the local level, in one subwatershed
of the Bad River in South Dakota,
nine of every ten landowners have
participated in watershed restora-
tion activities.
The Watershed Approach
A watershed is a geographic area in
which all the falling water drains to
a common water body, i.e. river,
lake or stream. Watersheds may be
as small as a few acres or larger
than several states. Using data
2,149 Watersheds in U.S.
-------
from the U.S. Geological Survey,
the nation can be divided into
2,149 medium-sized watersheds,
averaging about 1,700 square miles
in each area. Each watershed pro-
vides a unique challenge and
requkes a unique solution. The
Action Plan is the first federal
attempt to use a watershed
approach to fix water quality prob-
lems, coordinating programs which
address point source and runoff
pollution, wetlands and estuaries,
agriculture and heavy industry.
Successful, ongoing local efforts to
address priority water quality
problems are found throughout the
country. This report presents
efforts taking place in a variety of
locations ranging from major cities
like New York and Philadelphia to
remote communities in Alaska and
on tribal lands. In accordance with
existing laws, the Action Plan
seeks to support these efforts by
providing a coordinated framework
for restoration activities. In late
1998 and early 1999, 50 states, five
territories, and 80 tribes completed
Unified Watershed Assessments
that identify which of these water-
sheds are in need of restoration,
preservation, or further investiga-
tion. The watersheds determined
to be most in need of restoration
efforts have been established as
priorities for further efforts.
Watershed Restoration
Action Strategies
Watershed Restoration Action
Strategies have already been devel-
oped for some of these highest pri-
ority watersheds. These strategies
describe the actions that will be
taken by various stakeholders to
help each watershed meet water
quality goals. A variety of stake-
holders play significant roles in
each restoration effort, including
local, state, and federal govern-
ments, private corporations, non-
profit organizations, and concerned
citizens. The partnerships resulting
from the stakeholders working
together are invaluable to the suc-
cess of the watershed restoration
action strategies.
Although the federal government
provided the impetus for the
Action Plan and continues to pro-
vide technical and financial support
for restoration efforts, local stake-
holders have typically led restora-
tion efforts. The importance of
this leadership cannot be overstat-
ed. Only watershed residents and
stakeholders can make the signifi-
cant, lasting changes in behaviors
and in land use and development
that are often required to ensure
clean waters for future generations.
Innovative Restoration
Each watershed provides a unique
situation, and therefore each
restoration effort has been similarly
unique, and often quite innovative.
For example, in Buzzards Bay,
Massachusetts, constructed wet-
lands are being used to treat
stormwater runoff that was impact-
ing the bay's shellfish populations.
In the Teanaway River Watershed
in Washington, the Yakama Nation
and the Bonneville Power
Administration are constructing
water conservation systems that
will increase both instream flows
and the reliability of the water sup-
ply for irrigation purposes. In the
Oconaluftee and Ravens Fork
Rivers Watershed in North
Carolina, restoration partners are
using their understanding of natural
stream dynamics to restore the
altered geology of impaired stream
sections providing the widths,
depths,.meanders, slopes and pool
spacings of healthy streams.
Improved Water Quality
Although many restoration efforts
have just begun, some projects
have already produced striking
environmental results. A single
project in Ohio has reduced ero-
sion, preventing 400,000 tons of
soil from muddying Big Darby
Creek. A variety of restoration
efforts in Bigalk Creek, Iowa has
caused rainbow trout populations
to increase sixfold since 1992.
Restoration activities in the Illinois
River Watershed have led to the
return of fish species not seen in
the river since 1908.
Moving Forward
The Clean Water Action Plan has
helped federal agencies coordinate
their efforts to assist local water-
shed organizations more effectively
with restoration activities.
Likewise, some states, territories
and tribes are beginning to factor
watershed restoration action strate-
gies into their programs and plans
for future restoration activities.
Watershed solutions, such as those
highlighted in this report, continue
to gain momentum. These local
efforts will make all of our waters
fishable, swimmable and drinkable
for future generations.
-------
Watershed Success Stories Organized by Hydrologic Region
1. Buzzards Bay, MA
2. Bamegat Bay, NJ; Bronx River, NY;
Wissahickon Creek, PA
3. Conasauga River, GA and TN
4. Cuyahoga River, OH; Little Rabbit River, MI
5. Big Darby Creek, OH; Conemaugh River, PA
6. Guest River, VA; Oconaluftee and Ravens
Fork Rivers, NC
7. Bigalk Creek, LA; Illinois River, IL
8. Tensas River, LA
10. Boulder and Upper Tenmile Creek, MT;
Upper and Lower Bad'River, SD
11. North Fork of the Ninnescah River, KS
12. Clear Creek, TX
13. Willow Creek, CO
14. North Fork of the Gunnison River, CO;
San Miguel River, CO
15. Little Colorado River, AZ and NM
16. Steamboat Creek, NV
I'-Z. Haskell Slough, WA; Teanaway River, WA
18. Napa River, CA; Panoche-Silver Creek, CA;
Tijuana River, CA
19. Duck Creek, AK
20. Ko'olaupoko, HI
-------
Acronyms
CWAP
Clean Water Action Plan
DOE
Department of Energy
DOI
Department of the Interior
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
NOAA
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
NRCS
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
USDA
United States Department
of Agriculture
Glossary
AMD - Acid Mine Drainage
Drainage that occurs as a result of chemical reactions in rock exposed to air
and water. AMD impacts watersheds through increased acidity and elevat-
ed levels of heavy metals and total dissolved solids. It emanates from both
surface and underground mine workings, waste and development rock, and
tailings piles and ponds.
BMP - Best Management Practice
Common-sense action to keep soil and other pollutants out of streams
and lakes. BMPs are designed to protect water quality and prevent new
pollution.
GIS - Geographic Information System
Computer system for capturing, storing, checking, integrating, manipulating,
analyzing and displaying data related to positions on the Earth's surface. A
typical system handles maps that contain layers of data about particular
features.
NPS - Nonpoint Source
Unlike pollution from industrial and sewage treatment plants, nonpoint
source pollution comes from many diffuse sources. NPS pollution is caused
when rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the ground, picks up
and carries away natural and human-made pollutants, finally depositing
them into lakes, rivers, wetlands, coastal waters, and even underground
sources of drinking water.
TMDL - Total Maximum Daily Load
A calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a waterbody can
receive and still meet water quality standards, and an allocation of that
amount to the pollutant's sources.
WRAS - Watershed Restoration Action Strategy
Watershed Restoration Action Strategies spell out the most important caus-
es of water pollution and resource degradation, detail the actions that all
parties need to take to solve those problems, and set milestones by which
to measure progress.
-------
* V
x^
* t
-------
'f;: : i ."i. '
S«^a^;HfO!^^fli!«'tft«|«3i«m!3;.
'''
Renowned for its ecological
resources, southeastern
Massachusetts is among the fastest
growing regions in the northeastern
United States; its population may
double in the next 20 years. The
Buzzards Bay Watershed comprises
over 275,000 acres, or 432 square
miles, in 17 municipalities in this
part of the state. The watershed is
known for its variety of habitats,
including salt marshes, tidal streams,
eelgrass beds, tidal flats, barrier
beaches, rocky shores and a number
of subtidal habitats. In 1987,
Buzzards Bay became one of four
pilot estuaries in the Environmental
Protection Agency's National
Estuary Program (NEP), a program
which now includes 28 estuaries.
A decline in water quality and
degradation of shellfish beds and
wildlife in Buzzards Bay are the
results of the cumulative impacts of
local land uses, such as agriculture,
industry and recreation. Nonpoint
source pollution from failing septic
systems, farm animal wastes,
stormwater and boat discharges
contributes to the degradation of
the watershed's resources. The
pollution leads to nitrogen enrich-
ment, pathogenic contamination of
shellfish populations and the pres-
ence of toxic pollutants.
Restoring an
Estuarine Ecosystem
The Buzzards Bay Project National
Estuary Program is a venture of the
Massachusetts Office of Coastal
Zone Management and EPA. It
studies regional water quality and
living resources, assesses watershed
health threats and develops long-
term restoration strategies. The pro-
gram works with local and commu-
nity organizations, such as the
1,500-member Coalition for
Buzzards Bay and the Buzzards Bay
Action Committee.
In 1991, the Buzzards Bay
Comprehensive Conservation and
Management Plan was approved by
the Commonwealth and EPA. The
plan identified the problems facing
the estuary and established long-
term strategies for each problem.
Stakeholders initiated projects to
control stormwater runoff and pro-
tect shellfish resources, wetlands and
coastal habitat by preventing oil pol-
lution and managing sewage, nitro-
gen sensitive embayments, waste-
water disposal systems and land use.
Shellfish Resources in
Buzzards Bay
One of the long-term strategies
involved the restoration of the eco-
-------
watershed success
InmVnllw wilinl-t1i~ rK,-»n£iVl-. Kr.r-1^ :.. ~ ~ ~ ~
Buzzards Bay. Studies and analysis
determined that shellfish bed clos-
ings were increasing as a result of
fecal coliform contamination con-
veyed principally by stormwater.
Watershed partners established a
series of efforts to reopen and pre-
serve shellfish resources in the bay.
One of these efforts focused on
Spragues Cove, a resource area
located in the western section of
the Town of Marion. This effort
involved the town, Massachusetts
Department of Environmental
Protection, USDA Natural
Resources Conservation Service,
US Fish and Wildlife Service and
Buzzards Bay NEP. A three-acre
constructed wetland system was
developed, consisting of a settling
basin, shallow marshes, interior
dikes and a stone-lined, vegetated
channel. The system acts as a sedi-
ment and bacterial contamination
treatment mechanism by increasing
retention time and flow length
while providing fish habitat.
Area residents supported the con-
struction initiative with wetland
plantings and bank vegetation
replantings. Local stakeholders also
participated in follow-up monitor-
ing, sampling and project assess-
ment. These samplings indicate
that the wetland system has
increased the viability of the shell-
fish resource area by removing sand,
silt, trash and other debris from the
The watershed is known for its variety of
habitats, including salt marshes, tidal streams,
eelgrass beds, tidal flats, barrier beaches,
rocky shores and a number of subtidal habitats.
stormwater discharge and reducing
the level of fecal coliform bacteria.
The shellfish bed restoration strat-
egy is typical of water quality
efforts in the Buzzards Bay
Watershed. For each problem
identified by the management
plan, coordinated education
efforts, restoration activities and
monitoring have begun to improve
the area's water resources.
Photos courtesy of Sarah Wilkes
the Buzzards Bay National Estuary
Program receives financial support
^from the federal government and the
State of Massachusetts. The
* Plymouth County Conservation
District and the Bristol Conservation
District are local sponsors for this
"watershed effort. Partners in state
"goverrirrierif include trie Office of
Coastal Zone Management,
Department of Environmental
Protection, Department of Fisheries,
Wildlife and Environmental Law
Enforcement and Cape Cod
Commission. Federal support comes
from the NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service, EPA, USDA Natural
Resources Conservation Service and
DOt Rsh; and Wijdlife Service.
-------
Even though it is only four feet
deep on average and ranges from
less than a mile to five miles at its
widest point, Barnegat Bay sup-
ports a remarkable diversity of
wildlife and habitats. The bay is
an estuary covering 42 miles of
New Jersey shoreline from the
Point Pleasant Canal to Little Egg
Harbor Inlet. The Barnegat Bay
Watershed drains approximately
660 square miles in Ocean County,
New Jersey. In recognition of the
importance of the bay and the
restoration and protection activities
underway in the bay, Barnegat Bay
was admitted into the
Environmental Protection Agency's
National Estuary Program in 1996.
Barnegat Bay is impacted by a vari-
ety of human activities.
Development contributes to
stormwater and nonpoint source
pollution and increases runoff by
decreasing open space and perme-
able land. Development also
removes native vegetation, thereby
degrading watershed habitats.
Recreational and commercial use of
the watershed exacerbates the
already considerable natural ero-
sion of Barnegat Bay's embank-
ments. Dredging and bulkhead
construction, while done to enhance
the use of Barnegat Bay, often also
increase sedimentation in the estu-
ary and accelerate habitat loss.
Experiments in
Bank Stabilization
Elevated levels of sedimentation are
especially detrimental in Barnegat
Bay because of its natural shallow-
ness. To counter the effects of sedi-
mentation, the Ocean County Soil
Conservation District, USDA
Natural Resources Conservation
Service and Ocean County Board of
Freeholders worked in conjunction
with the National Estuary Program
and initiated the Embankment and
Restoration Project. The project
was designed to coordinate the
efforts of watershed stakeholders in
bank stabilization and habitat
restoration. The project also
intended to demonstrate the practi-
cality of using vegetative and bio-
engineering practices to stabilize
eroding shorelines.
In 1995, the project partners com-
pleted an inventory to determine
potential restoration sites and
selected Beachwood Municipal
Beach in the Borough of
Beachwood, Cattus Island Park in
the Town of Dover and Long Point
in the Borough of Island Heights.
Stabilization work began in 1996
and involved the installation of
biologs and planting of native vege-
tation, some of which was provided
by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service Plant
Materials Center in Cape May. The
-------
W
a
h
e d success
coconut fiber biologs, which can be
connected for steep or long stream-
banks, manage stream velocity and
stabilize the shoreline. They are
also fitted with fiber netting to pro-
vide a planting medium for vegeta-
tion. Work at the Cattus Island
location combined biolog installa-
tion and native plantings with the
installation of tires as breakwater
structures.
Project partners learned a lot from
these trial sites. Some native vege-
tation flourished while other
species could not survive as a result
of either persistent wave attack,
storms or soils that were not con-
ducive to plant growth. Similarly,
bioengineering structures were
hampered by a variety of obstacles.
Where project efforts were success-
ful, methods were documented for
future replication, and where proj-
ects did not succeed, follow-up
studies and research analyzed the
results to guide future efforts.
Involving the Community
In addition to the restoration and
protection activities, the Barnegat
Bay Embankment and Restoration
Project initiated numerous public
outreach and education efforts.
Through tours of restoration sites
and a Coastal Restoration
Workshop, the project has enhanced
Through tours of restoration sites and a
Coastal Restoration Workshop, the project
has enhanced local understanding of the
impact of human activities, especially
regarding coastal bay and river erosion
local understanding of the impact of
human activities, especially regard-
ing coastal bay and river erosion.
Also, students from the Ocean
County Vocational School support-
ed watershed restoration education
by preparing several public service
announcements for local TV and
radio stations.
The Barnegat Bay Embankment and
Restoration Project received financial
support from the federal government
and the State of New jersey, with
local support from the Ocean
County Soil Conservation District.
State support comes from the
Department of Environmental
Protection, Federal partners include
the USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service, NOAA, EPA,
DOI Geological Survey, DOI Fish and
Wildlife Service and US Army Corps
of Engineers.
-------
JUS
A truly urban river, the Bronx River
in the City of New York flows for
23 miles through the New York
Botanical Garden, the Bronx Zoo,
Soundview, Hunts Point and other
communities before emptying into
the Long Island Sound. The Bronx
River Watershed encompasses 56.4
square miles in Westchester and
Bronx Counties, New York.
In the early 1800s, the Bronx River
watershed was characterized by a
magnificent oak forest and abun-
dant wildlife, including beaver and
trout. The watershed also support-
ed a major bird migration route,
and the river itself powered the
growing city's mills. However, the
Bronx River Watershed has been
subjected to the effects of urbaniza-
tion since the 1840s, when the local
railroad was built Over 100 years
of industrial pollution and urban
sewer discharges have caused
debris jams, flooding, excessive
stormwater runoff, sedimentation,
erosion, habitat loss and sewage
overflows. "The poor water quality
of the Bronx River negatively
impacts the watershed's value as a
recreational, educational, ecological
and economic resource.
Restoring the Urban River
Since the turn of the century, there
have been many attempts to
restore the Bronx River Watershed,
but in 1997, the Urban Resources
Partnership and Partnerships for
Parks formed the Bronx River
Working Group to coordinate
watershed restoration, education
and outreach efforts. Supported by
an EPA Wetlands Protection grant
and financial assistance from the
US Department of Transportation,
the continuously expanding alliance
of over 50 community groups, non-
profits, businesses and government
agencies - new partners and stake-
holders are joining - holds bi-
monthly meetings to organize its
implementation activities.
Participation in the Bronx River
Working Group is completely vol-
untary. No federal or state actions
mandate involvement, and each
organization participates to the
extent that its resources and mis-
sion match the needs of the initia-
tives. Also, the Bronx River
Working Group has developed five
action teams, which help focus the
alliance's resources and expertise,
thereby resulting in a high level of
understanding of community needs
and fostering better comprehension
of technical issues by community
members.
Bronx River Working
Croup Initiatives
The Bronx River Working Group is
accomplishing significant watershed
restoration and protection objec-
tives by acquiring land, restoring
river channel hydraulics, stabilizing
eroding riverbank with native vege-
tation, reclaiming wetlands and
floodplains, improving habitat and
increasing public access to the river.
Many projects and actions are
underway, including a mile-long
greenway project in the Soundview
section of the watershed, a com-
-------
w a t e r s h
e d success
bined sewer overflow abatement
project, composition of a compre-
hensive watershed management
plan, establishment of new parks
and introduction of community
stewardship initiatives.
Public outreach projects, such the
Adopt-The-River Program, are criti-
cal to restoration efforts and
increased public participation and
awareness. A City of New York
Department of Parks and
Recreation initiative, the Adopt-
The-River Program provides techni-
cal and financial assistance to com-
munity-based projects. In the fall
of 1999 alone, 15 program commu-
nity events focused on reopening
riverside trails, removing debris
from the river, restoring wildlife
habitat and developing waterfront
access. The program's quarterly
newsletter has a circulation of over
4,000 and informs Bronx River
stakeholders about river events,
workshops and cleanups.
Bronx River Golden Ball
A crucial aspect of this urban river
cleanup project is the extensive
community involvement. Project
area tours and "river cleanup days"
are highly effective and foster a
cooperative relationship among
local stakeholders, residents and
involved governmental agencies,
such as the National Park Service.
Special events, like the Bronx River
Golden Ball, combine art, commu-
nity and the environment to cele-
brate the river, its history and its
Public outreach
projects are critical
to restoration efforts
and increased public
participation and
awareness
restoration. Organized by 30 com-
munity groups, the Golden Ball
involved floating a 36-inch golden
orb down 10 miles of the river and
drew a wide spectrum of media
attention. Similarly, the May 1998
Bronx River Garden Festival at the
Lorraine Hansbury Park, a former
vacant lot, was attended by more
than 160 individuals and included
nature walks led by Urban Park
Rangers, canoe rides and gardening
workshops and plantings.
Bronx River Working Group partici-
pants have already noticed gradual
improvements in the watershed.
The US Army Corps of Engineers
will support the continuing water-
shed effort by conducting a study
that will explore ways to decrease
flooding, enhance indigenous habi-
tats and improve water quality. It
is hoped that new projects will
build upon this success and contin-
ue to improve the area's water
quality and habitat. Successful pro-
tection and preservation of the
Bronx River will play a central role
in the beautification and revitaliza-
tion of the rest of the watershed.
The Bronx River Working Group
receives financial support from the
federal government, State and City
:of New York, Partnership for Parks,
City Parks Foundation, River
.Network, Our Lady of Mercy
Medical Center, Bronx Zoo, The
'Point CDC, Patagonia and Con
Edison, as well as local support from
the New York City and Westchester
jCounty Soil and Water Conservation
Districts. Partners in state govern-
ment include the Department of
Environmental Conservation,
Department of Environmental
Protection, Department of
Transportation, Attorney General's
Office and Cornell University
Cooperative Extension Service.
Federal support comes from the
Urban Resources Partnership, US
Army Corps of Engineers, NOAA,
DOI National Park Service, DOI Fish
and Wildlife Service, Department of
Bousing and Urban Development,
;PA, USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service arid USDA
:orest Service.
-------
JH'«"'! llflKl! 1*1 IJIilililSiijiilN1'"i!lijlirw,". B,:''V»',"' llIiliiiSSIilL I'
^
" iJUbxiaH* ! Jii' !ali
-------
w a
t
e r s h
e
d success
Four Major Projects,
120 Partners
The Wissahickon Watershed
Partnership is currently focused on
four projects. One project, the
Paper Mill Run Riparian Restoration
and Demonstration Project, has
three phases. The first phase,
development of a comprehensive
riparian restoration plan, has been
completed. The second phase,
demonstration of best management
practices (BMP) for stream channel,
bank and area plantings with inter-
pretive exhibits, is underway. The
third phase will complement the
demonstration BMPs with work-
shops, publications and education
and outreach programs.
Another project, the Wissahickon
Riparian Restoration and Trail Link,
is developing a master plan for cre-
ation of a 3.5-mile greenway zone
that will allow regulation and land
use management of the watershed's
recreational resources. A third proj-
ect, the Wissahickon Watershed
Pilot Program, will employ a water-
shed approach, Geographic
Information Systems (CIS), model-
ing and Total Maximum Daily Load
(TMDL) studies to determine cost-
effective solutions to point and non-
point source pollution, stormwater
runoff and streamside land use
problems.
The cooperation
and coordination
between the
partnership's 120
partners provide a
model for the
restoration and
preservation of an
urban watershed
A fourth project, led by the
National Institute for Environmental
Renewal, is developing a coordinat-
ed environmental monitoring and
data management system. The
system integrates CIS, sensor and
environmental site data and allows
project participants to analyze the
effectiveness of certain BMPs and
other actions.
The Wissahickon Watershed
Partnership has made significant
progress in developing projects that
improve water quality and wildlife
habitat in the watershed, and as
each project advances, these
improvements are expected to con-
tinue. The cooperation and coordi-
nation between the partnership's
120 partners provide a model for
the restoration and preservation of
an urban watershed.
The Wissahickon Watershed Partnership receives financial support from the fed-
eral government, State of Pennsylvania, City of Philadelphia, Wissahickon Valley
Watershed Association, Friends of the Wissahickon, William Penn Foundation
and the Montgomery County Conservation District. Partners in state govern-
ment include the Department of Environmental Protection and the Department
of Conservation and Natural Resources. Federal support comes from the DOI
Geological Survey, EPA, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service,
Department of Energy and Department of Defense.
-------
The 91-mile Conasauga River is
home to a remarkable diversity of
species, including 25 that are con-
sidered rare. One species, the
Conasauga logperch, is found in a
12-mile stretch of the river and
nowhere else in the world. The
river originates in the
Chattahoochee National Forest, in
the mountains of northwest
Georgia, flows into Tennessee and
returns to Georgia to become part
of the Coosa Basin System that
continues toward Mobile Bay. In
1999, the USDA Forest Service
selected the watershed as one of 12
priority large watersheds, and the
river has been identified as one of
the most biologically important
rivers in the southeast United States.
The Conasauga River Watershed is
impacted by urban, forestry and
agricultural activities. The river's
resources are utilized for both
industrial, agricultural and recre-
ational purposes. Over time, habi-
tat modification and nonpoint
source pollution from highway and
land use runoff have impaired the
watershed. Although real progress
has been made, eighteen miles of
the Conasauga River and 54 miles
of tributaries are still in Georgia's
List of Impaired Waters for fecal,
metal, toxic chemical, sediment and
nutrient impacts. The Conasauga
River Watershed is classified as a
Category 1 priority watershed in
the state's Unified Watershed
Assessment.
Combating Habitat
Modification
In 1994, the Limestone Valley
Resource Conservation and
Development (RC&D) Council
undertook an ecosystem-based
assistance study and organized
meetings of local stakeholders.
Three years later, the council found-
ed the Conasauga River Alliance, a
partnership made up of local citi-
zens, conservation groups and fed-
eral, state and local agencies. The
alliance is addressing the degrada-
tion of habitat and water quality
caused by erosion, sedimentation,
excessive nutrients and toxic chemi-
cals in the watershed. The alliance
also works with other organizations
and stakeholders, such as represen-
-------
watershed success
La Lives of the Cherokee and B3H|iii|B|tfS||||^^
improve watershed conditions in
Georgia and Tennessee.
The Conasauga River Alliance has
worked with landowners and
agency representatives to support
enrollment of nearly 200 acres of
riparian area in the USDA
Conservation Reserve Program.
The alliance has also placed over
25 miles of riverbank and stream-
bank under some form of conser-
vation management and planted
11,000 trees.
Numerous public participation
activities and best management
practice demonstrations, involving
practices such as prescribed graz-
ing, animal waste and nutrient
management and streambank stabi-
lization, enhance public awareness
and education. The alliance is
implementing a comprehensive
watershed management plan that
includes 24 demonstration projects
to address nonpoint source pollu-
tion and habitat modification. The
partnership has also designed and
implemented a water quality moni-
toring program.
.The CqnasaygaJRiyer Watershed stakeholders receive financial support from the
federal government, Dalton Utilities and The Nature Conservancy, and local sup-
J?P,rt*r°u9h:,^ awf. Polk County
-------
'11 illiiilIN 1 Ail a .,!'Jll
A critical part of this country's
environmental history, the
Cuyahoga River travels 100 miles
from Geauga County, past
Cuyahoga Falls, and through the
Cuyahoga Valley National
Recreation Area located between
the urban and industrial centers of
Akron and Cleveland, before emp-
tying into Lake Erie. The Cuyahoga
River Watershed drains 813 square
miles in Cuyahoga, Summit,
Portage, Geauga and Medina
Counties in northeast Ohio.
The Cuyahoga River played an
important role in the birth of the
environmental movement. In 1936,
a spark from a blow torch ignited
floating debris and oils and set the
river on fire. The river was plagued
by fires until 1969, when a fire
caught the attention of the nation
and helped spur a great deal of envi-
ronmental legislation, including the
Clean Water Act, the Great Lakes
Water Quality Agreement and the
creation of national and state
Environmental Protection Agencies.
As a result, large point sources of
pollution on the Cuyahoga have
received significant attention from
the Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency in recent decades. Water
quality has improved and, in recog-
nition of this improvement, the
Cuyahoga River was designated as
one of 14 American Heritage Rivers
in 1998. Yet, pollution problems,
particularly nonpoint source prob-
lems, remain. For this reason, the
Environmental Protection Agency
classified portions of the Cuyahoga
River Watershed as one of 43 Great
Lakes Areas of Concern, warranting
development of a Remedial Action
Plan (RAP).
The RAP
The Cuyahoga Remedial Action
Plan process began in 1988 when
the Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency formed the Cuyahoga
River RAP Coordinating
Committee (CCC), consisting of 33
representatives from local, regional,
state and federal agencies, private
corporations, and citizen and envi-
ronmental organizations. The mis-
sion of the RAP is to plan and pro-
mote the restoration and preserva-
tion of beneficial uses of the lower
Cuyahoga River and near-shore
Lake Erie through remediation of
existing conditions and prevention
of further pollution and degrada-
tion. Sources of water quality
impairment have been identified
and are being addressed through a
variety of restoration activities.
-------
waters
h
e d success
Several demonstration projects
have been constructed that show
the potential of bioengineering
techniques for stream restoration.
These projects demonstrated a vari-
ety of successful remedies for soil
erosion and flooding problems.
Other types of projects include the
City of Akron's separate sewer
overflow elimination program and
plans to address combined sewer
overflows.
A variety of research studies have
been funded to promote under-
standing of water quality impair-
ments and aid in the development
and refinement of educational pro-
grams. Studies include navigation
channel re-aeration feasibility, fish
advisories, creel surveys, communi-
ty preference polls, fish tissue, phy-
toplankton and larval fish studies,
US Geological Survey bacterial
studies and bioengineering projects.
Cuyahoga River Watershed
Community Involvement
The Cuyahoga River Watershed
RAP strives to reduce water pollu-
tion levels and enhance steward-
ship of the watershed's resources
by boosting community awareness
and involvement in local restora-
tion efforts. More than 50 educa-
tional RAP presentations are made
annually to civic, school and pro-
fessional groups. Five thousand
storm drains have been stenciled to
discourage inappropriate dumping.
Biannual newsletters update
approximately 6,500 stakeholders.
Watershed-wide restoration efforts
like river and stream cleanups, bio-
logical stream monitoring by volun-
teers and interested groups and an
annual Riverday are supported by
more closely focused activities
based in municipal and township
units. Programs such as the Big
Creek Stream Stewardship Program
involve locally-based education and
outreach activities, habitat
improvement projects, data collec-
tion and storm drain stenciling.
Scouts can earn the "Cuyahoga
River RAP Stream Stewardship"
patch by working on a number of
volunteer and educational activities.
Noticeable environmental improve-
ments have already been recorded
in the Cuyahoga River. A 1998 lar-
val fish study documented usage of
the river as a navigation channel for
Lake Erie fish migration. Follow-up
studies in 1999 confirmed these
results and documented the pres-
ence of steelhead trout adults.
The Cuyahoga River
played an important
role in the birth of
the environmental
movement
The Cuyahoga River Watershed RAP
receives financial support from
(numerous sources including the fed-
eral government and the State of
Ohio, and local support through the
;SpJl and Water Conservation
Districts in Cuyahoga, Geauga,
iPortage and Summit Counties.
State partners include the
.Department of Natural Resources,
Department of Health and Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency.
Partners in federal government
Include the DO) National Park
Service, US Army Corps of
Engineers, EPA, USDA Natural
Resources Conservation Service and
USDA Forest Service.
-------
s^^
14
V~tc
J ...-is-'-
*.-»%
Land in the Little Rabbit River
Watershed is 73 percent agricultur-
al, 17 percent woodland, 7 percent
urban and 3 percent water and
wetland. The midwestern water-
shed drains sections of four town-
ships in Allegan and Kent Counties
in southwest Michigan. The Little
Rabbit River itself flows to the
Rabbit River, a tributary of the
Kalamazoo River, which empties
into Lake Michigan. The 30,850
acre (48.2 square mile) watershed is
a sub-watershed of the Kalamazoo
River Basin.
The Little Rabbit River is designat-
ed as both a public water supply
and a warmwater fishery.
Pressures from agriculture, urban
sprawl and increasing populations
in the area threaten the sustainabil-
ity of these designated uses. The
watershed is negatively impacted
by sedimentation from stream-
banks, cropland, construction sites
and road crossings and ditches.
Excessive nutrients from agricultur-
al production, inadequate septic
systems, animal waste and residen-
tial area runoff and high flows from
uncontrolled stormwater also dam-
age the Little Rabbit River.
Cleaning Up the
Little Rabbit River
In the early 1990s, stakeholders in
Little Rabbit River Watershed met
to discuss potential actions to miti-
gate the effects of nonpoint source
pollution from sediment, nutrients
and stormwater flows. They also
sought to include water quality
considerations into development
and land use planning processes. In
1995, the broad partnership, involv-
ing local, state and federal stake-
holders, completed a Watershed
Management Plan that outlined the
goals and objectives of the project.
The partnership also successfully
submitted the Little Rabbit River
Watershed to USDA's Environmental
Quality Incentives Program as a
Conservation Priority Area.
The partnership created a resource
management system involving six-
teen different best management
practices (BMPs) on over 17,000
acres. The partners, with help
from the USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service, constructed
14,108 feet of exclusion fencing, 7
stream crossings and 7 watering
-------
w
facilities
0
t
e
r
for pasture management.
s
h
Township
e d success
ordinances were
Ten animal waste management sys
terns, an erosion control structure
and a sediment detention basin
were created. The stakeholders
also incorporated 4,750 acres into
crop residue management and
assembled 135.9 acres of filter
strips. As part of the resource man-
agement plan, BMPs in critical
areas, priority fields and other
problem sites qualified for federal
cost-sharing, which can fund up to
75 percent of the total cost of the
project.
Other aspects of the management
plan complemented the BMPs.
Stakeholders in both Lake
Macatawa and Lake Allegan initiat-
ed Total Maximum Daily Load
(TMDL) studies for phosphorous
and are developing plans to reduce
phosphorous levels. Allegan
County formed a Geographic
Information System (GIS)
Department and generated map
layers and models to assist various
projects. The information and edu-
cation program increased public
awareness of watershed and water
quality concerns. Newsletters, fly-
ers, brochures and meetings
enhanced public participation in
watershed restoration.
Working with
Town Ordinances
The Little Rabbit River Watershed
stakeholders developed mecha-
nisms for the continuation of proj-
ect goals and objectives in the years
following project completion.
reviewed and changed to take
water quality into greater consider-
ation. For example, Dorr Township
passed a conservation subdivision
zoning amendment which requires
40 percent of the land under devel-
opment to remain as open space,
with the rest committed to cluster
housing. Salem Township amend-
ed its zoning regulations to limit
development on prime agricultural
land. Such ordinances increase per-
vious surfaces and create pollutant-
filtering buffer zones around natu-
ral areas. The watershed's town-
ships are also considering an
amendment that would prohibit
any new development within the
floodplain delineation.
The Little Rabbit River Watershed
stakeholders have used town ordi-
nances, BMPs and educational out-
reach programs to focus the public's
attention on the watershed's future.
By raising public awareness, the
partners hope to effectively change
behavior, enhance local stewardship
and perpetuate their progress
beyond the life of the projects.
statciHS
the Little Rabbit River Watershed
projects receive financial support
from the federal government and
the State of Michigan; the Allegan
Conservation District provides local
support as a grants coordinator.
State partners include the
Department of Natural Resources,
Department of Environmental
Quality, Department of Agriculture
and Michigan State University
Cooperative Extension Service.
Federal support comes from the
USDA Farm Services Agency, USDA
Natural Resources Conservation
Service and EPA.
The partnership created a resource
management system involving sixteen
different best management practices
on 17,089 acres
-------
> i i .,.;,
iitB
BBBHIBIi
Known nationally for their diversi-
ty and abundance of aquatic and
terrestrial plants and animals, Big
and Little Darby Creeks are home
to 86 species of fish and 41 species
of mollusks, with 7 fish species and
6 mollusk species on the Ohio
endangered species list. Both
creeks have been designated as
State and Federal Scenic Rivers.
Located in west-central Ohio, the
Big Darby Creek Watershed con-
sists of 86 miles of main stem river
and 245 miles of tributaries. The
watershed drains 557 square miles
from six counties in central Ohio.
About eighty percent of the water-
shed is farmland, and local farming
has subjected the watershed to
both point source and nonpoint
source pollution. Residential land
uses and stress from the conversion
of agricultural land to urban and
suburban development have nega-
tively impacted water quality by
increasing sedimentation and nutri-
ent runoff. The decrease in water
quality poses a threat to the water-
shed's aquatic species and biologi-
cal diversity.
Protecting Wildlife and
Endangered Species
In response, local citizens have
organized action groups like the
Darby Partners, a partnership con-
sisting of more than 40 private and
public organizations. Over 2,900
people have been involved and 284
local farms are working to reduce
sediment and nutrient runoff. The
Ohio Department of Natural
Resources, The Nature Conservancy
and other stakeholders have identi-
fied Big Darby Creek as a high pri-
ority area and are developing a
Big and Little Darby
Creeks are home to
86 species of fish
and 41 species of
mollusks, with 7
fish species and 6
mollusk species on
the Ohio endangered
species list
-------
W
a
h
long-term management and protec-
tion plan for the river and riparian
areas. Ohio EPA and U.S. EPA's
Office of Water and Office of
Research and Development are
leading an ecological risk assess-
ment case study to guide future
development and land use.
Stakeholders in the Big Darby
Creek Watershed have supported
numerous activities to reduce the
effects of agriculture and develop-
ment-related pollution. Several
projects involved the installation
and monitoring of best manage-
ment practices. Other projects
studied stormwater in rapidly
growing areas of the watershed and
funded the compilation of a
Geographic Information System
(CIS) database that identifies erodi-
ble lands and the benefits of conser-
vation practices. Educational pro-
grams taught residents and county
officials new technologies and con-
servation practices.
Monitoring and evaluation by Ohio
EPA and U.S. Geological Survey
have revealed remarkable improve-
ments in the Big Darby Creek
Watershed. A USDA project that
d sue
cess
These Ipcal initiatives are financially supported by the federal government.
State of Ohio, City of Columbus, Ohio State University, The Nature
Conservancy and the Soil and Water Conservation Districts jn Champaign,
Franklin, Logan, Madison, Pickaway and Union Counties. State government
partners include the Department of Natural Resources, Ohio EPA, Mid-Qhip _
Regional Planning Commission and Ohio State University Cooperative
Extension Service. Federal partners include the USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service, USDA Farm Services Agency, EPA, DOI Fish and Wildlife
Service and DOI Geological Survey.
encouraged conservation tillage and
increased critical area seedings is
credited with sediment reduction of
35,500 tons and gross erosion
reduction of over 400,000 tons.
Eighteen new wetlands have been
created, 312 acres of trees have
been planted and over 32,000 acres
are now in conservation tillage.
The removal of two dams has per-
mitted the upstream migration of
native species.
-------
***> .niuik r*"
!<*«,
Designated as the State River of the
Year by the Governor of
Pennsylvania, the Conemaugh
River is located in Cambria and
Somerset Counties, Pennsylvania.
The Conemaugh River Watershed
covers 1,361 square miles in the
Allegheny Mountains of western
Pennsylvania and contains forest,
agricultural and urban habitats.
The Conemaugh River Watershed
is highly polluted by acid mine
drainage (AMD) from over 150
years of regional coal mining. Two
independent river basin studies
identified more than 250 separate
sources of AMD. The watershed
also suffers from excessive nitrate
concentrations of public surface
and groundwater supplies. It is list-
ed as a Priority 1-A watershed in
Pennsylvania's Unified Watershed
Assessment.
Getting to Work on AMD
The Stonycreek & Conemaugh
Rivers Improvement Project
(SCRIP) is a broad coalition of indi-
vidual volunteers, local organiza-
tions, county, regional, state and
federal agencies and universities
committed to restoration of the
watershed. The extensive, locally-
based partnership uses a wide vari-
ety of programs and has undertak-
en multiple projects that work to
mitigate the effects of AMD. To
ensure that the programs are effec-
tive, SCRIP'S Riverkeeper project
works with the US Geological
Survey to assess these programs
and monitor the watershed for new
AMD discharges.
SCRIP remediation projects often
employ passive treatment technolo-
gies. For example, one project,
with assistance from the USDA
Natural Resources Conservation
Service, constructed a passive wet-
land system on Bear Rock Run
which treated 100 gallon per
minute (gpm) drainage from an
abandoned mine with a shallow
oxidation basin, two organic sub-
strate ponds and a limestone pond.
The project also involved stream-
bank restoration and creation of a
3-mile walking trail. A SCRIP proj-
ect at the Hillman Mine maximized
retention and deposition time of
the 3,500 gpm discharge flow with
newly established vegetation, ser-
pentine rock-lined channels and
two settlement ponds. Finally, the
Manganese Reclamation Ecology
Team at Shade Creek installed two
anoxic limestone drains, two in-line
limestone cells, two in-line wet-
lands and five in-line ponds to miti-
gate the impact of AMD.
Acid Mine Drainage
& ART Program
One of the Conemaugh River
Watershed restoration efforts, the
-------
w a t
e r s h
e d success
AMD & ART Program, works with
many partners, such as the US
Forest Service, and receives finan-
cial assistance from an EPA
Sustainable Development Grant.
The program blends innovative sci-
ence and technology with cost-effi-
cient, low maintenance landscape
designs that promote community
participation, awareness and educa-
tion. More than 10 percent of the
local community assisted in the
development of the 35-acre
Vintondale remediation site, which
borders the Ghost Town Rail Trail,
host to approximately 70,000 users
annually. The site combines AMD
treatment and historical informa-
tion on a series of interpretive
trails. Another project, in the
Central City and Dark Shade Creek
Sub-basin, contains more than 20
AMD discharges and received the
first EPA Brownfields loan given to
a coal valley. The Brownfields
Assessment in the sub-watershed
will determine how regional AMD
and industrial sites can be
reclaimed for development.
Stream Team Project
The Stream Team Project is a
model monitoring program devel-
oped in the Conemaugh River
Basin. When two AmeriCorps
members linked the existing moni-
toring groups, they created a
stream monitoring network that
involves high school and college
students, senior citizens and work-
ing individuals. With an estimated
200 volunteers covering 100 stream
The Governor of Pennsylvania has
designated the Conemaugh River as
the State River of the Year
sites across six sub-watersheds, the
network is thriving and provides
reliable water quality data.
Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection laborato-
ries analyze the samples for metals
and related pollutants; the resulting
data are then used in AMD dis-
charge remediation planning.
Looking Forward
Significant results have already
been achieved along the
Conemaugh River. Fisheries have
been reestablished. A local water
supply has been restored. Well-
attended events, such as the
Stonycreek Kayak Rendezvous,
which drew 500 people, indicate
that recreational use of the water-
shed has also been reestablished.
Future SCRIP endeavors will build
upon past successes. A feasibility
study has already been completed
for a project involving the St.
sSis^^
The SCRIP partnership receives
financial support from the federal
government, State of Pennsylvania,
Cambria County Conservation and
Recreation Authority, Cambria
County Conservation District,
Somerset County Conseryatjon
District, Canaan Valley Institute,
Captain Planet Foundation and a
__ private Somerset County nonprofit
corporation. Partner organizations
iri state government include the
Department of Environmental
Protection, Department of
Conservation and Natural Resources
5rM Pennsylvania state University
School of Forest Resources. Federal
^partners include the US Army Corps
of Engineers, Americorps, EPA, DOI
Qffke of Surface. Mining, DOI
Geological Survey and USDA Natural
Resources Conservation Service.
Michael mine shaft, which is
responsible for almost 30 percent
of the pollutant load in the water-
shed. The shaft's 2,500 gpm sup-
ply of water and surrounding
topography would allow the uti-
lization of a pump storage system
to generate electricity during peak
demand times. Such innovation
characterizes SCRIP and its work in
the Conemaugh River Watershed.
-------
"' t+Strm* - lagiiogSKLga?
r' '^'IJ^i'i4!^ik^^'iMii^
I ,-ti.i.l.-... I.. LO, ...IL i .1,. ll .. -l..lt. , I, I
The Guest River Watershed is in
the seven-county Coalfields Region
of southwest Virginia and lies with-
in the Appalachian Plateaus
Province. The watershed drains
approximately 100 square miles in
Wise County, Virginia. The Clean
Water Action Plan partners recog-
nized the accomplishments in
restoration in the watershed by
designating it a National Case
Study Watershed.
The Guest River Watershed is typi-
cal of many coal-impacted water-
sheds in the Central Appalachians.
Abandoned mine lands have caused
excessive erosion, decreasing vege-
tative cover that is the watershed's
natural riparian habitat. An exten-
sive Tennessee Valley Authority
monitoring program, carried out
from 1994 through 1997, indicated
that untreated wastewater dis-
charge, past mining operations and
urban runoff all contribute to the
low level of water quality in the
Guest River.
Using Stream Corridor
Restoration Technology
In 1995, the formation of the Guest
River Group, an informal alliance of
watershed residents and over 15
local, state and federal agencies,
sparked interest in protection and
restoration of the Guest River
Watershed and led to the develop-
ment of an integrated remediation
plan for the entire watershed. The
plan addresses a variety of water
pollution sources, including fecal
coliform bacteria, sedimentation,
hazardous wastes and urban non-
point source runoff.
A primary goal of the Guest River
Restoration Project is to reduce sed-
imentation and erosion levels
through the application of stream
corridor restoration technology.
Many different techniques have
been used for stream restoration
and streambank stabilization.
Banks have been sloped to open
channels and lower instream flow.
Log sills and check dams have been
installed to maintain mid-channel
flow, reduce flow energy and
improve aquatic habitat upstream.
Erosion control fabric placements
and cedar tree revetments have pro-
tected and narrowed stream width.
A tree give-away program and tree
and shrub plantings have comple-
mented the creation of a vegetated
riparian buffer zone. Actions to
date have protected more than six
miles of streambanks.
-------
w a
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
Pollutant Mitigation
in the Guest River
The accomplishments of pollutant
mitigation and management actions
undertaken as part of the Guest
River Restoration Project are also
already apparent. Bacterial levels in
the river have been lowered due to
the elimination of 33 residential
straight pipes and the pumpout of
400 residential septic tanks.
Hazardous waste pollution has
been reduced through a no-penalty
collection program, reclamation of
three abandoned mine lands,
cleanup of 11 illegal dump sites and
removal of 234 tons of material.
_ Sta^liff ;c| JeSer|i| ,p!irtn1e?s S
The Guest River Watershed Project
receives financial support from the
federal government and the State of
Virginia; local coordination is provid-
ed by the Lonesome Pine Soil and
Water Conservation District. State
partners include the Department of
Forestry and the Department of
Game and Inland Fisheries. Federal
partners in the Guest River
Restoration Project include the
Tennessee Valley Authority, USDA
Natural Resources Conservation
Service and USDA Forest Service.
The Clean Water
Action Plan partners
recognized the
accomplishments in
restoration in the
watershed by
designating it a
National Case
Study Watershed
Several activities have increased
public awareness of the Guest
River Watershed Project. The
towns of Coeburn, Norton,
Apalachia and Wise participated in
an urban storm drain stenciling pro-
gram. An outdoor classroom was
created for area school children,
and over 2,500 students have been
reached through education days
and enviro-scape presentations.
Project partners also published a
12-page supplement to the
Coalfield Progress, a local newspa-
per, and distributed 4,000 informa-
tive placemats to local restaurants.
The Guest River Group continues
to design and implement best man-
agement practices to reduce urban
runoff and control sedimentation
and erosion. Project partners have
installed individual treatment sys-
tems at seven homes which cur-
rently discharge wastewater direct-
ly into the river and plan to install
similar systems at two more
homes. More dumpsite cleanups
are planned, and an innovative
white goods program will be initi-
ated to protect streams by remov-
ing appliances that have the poten-
tial to contain harmful pollutants.
-------
i iia lii -. ii
The Oconaluftee and Ravens Fork
Rivers flow through the lands of
the Eastern Band of the Cherokee
Indians in a region of western
North Carolina that borders the
Great Smoky Mountains National
Park. The rivers and nearby Soco
Creek are part of 30 miles of trout
streams commercially managed by
the Cherokee Tribe.
The watershed is a popular area for
tourists and is also an important
source of revenue for local commu-
nities, especially the Cherokee
Tribe. The negative impacts of
development, recreation and urban-
ization in the watershed have led
to increased erosion, sedimentation
and habitat degradation. Historic
gravel dredging has also affected
one reach of stream in the water-
shed by causing a 19-foot vertical
incision in the channel wall.
The Federal-Tribal Partnership
In 1999, the former Principal Chief
of the Cherokee Tribe initiated the
formation of a partnership with
EPA and USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service. New part-
ners, such as the Bureau of Indian
Affairs, have also joined the water-
shed effort. The partners' objec-
tives are two-fold: plan, design and
implement best management prac-
tices (BMPs) for stream restoration
and build greater awareness of
watershed protection techniques
among area landowners. By 1998,
work had begun on restoration
projects and on drafts of an Erosion
Control Ordinance and an
Integrated Resource Management
Plan.
Fluvial Geomorphology
The stream restoration projects uti-
lize the basic principles of fluvial
geomorphology, a technique that
adapts natural river dynamics for
stream restoration. For example,
constructed rock vanes reduce the
rate of stream flow by deflecting
The rivers and nearby
Soco Creek are part
of 30 miles of trout
streams commercially
managed by the
Cherokee Tribe
higher velocities away from the
bank to the center of the channel.
This deflection promotes sediment
deposition near the streambank and
has transformed several erosional
streambanks into depositional
streambanks. Plantings of native
vegetation, such as mountain laurel
and maple, reinforce the effects of
-------
w a
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
the rock vanes by slowing flood
velocities, stabilizing streambank
soils and creating buffer zones.
The restoration of Soco Creek
involved a "marriage" of classic
engineering and fluvial geomor-
phology. The project included
channel reconstruction, installation
of rock vanes in the lower portions
of channel and installation of
gabion baskets, a type of channel
wall support structure, in the por-
tions of the channel higher than
normal flood flows. Project partici-
pants worked on a 300-foot stream
channel by comparing it to a
healthy upstream section. Similar
widths, depths, meanders, slopes
and pool spacings were reconstruct-
ed based on the upstream section.
The structures secure a farmer's
barn from collapsing into the
stream, and the channel reconstruc-
tion provides a naturally stable
channel and floodplain.
Restoration activities on the
Oconaluftee and Ravens Fork Rivers
and Soco Creek have already yield-
ed significant improvements. Nine
hundred feet of streambank have
been stabilized and 900 feet of
riparian areas have been replanted.
An additional two thousand feet of
channel are being redesigned using
natural techniques, and an addition-
al 4,000 feet of riparian areas are
being replanted. Also, project part-
ners plan to work with the Natural
Resources Conservation Service
Plant Materials Center to restore
and protect culturally important
State-' and" Federal PartnS
The Oconaluftee and Ravens Fork Rivers restoration projects receive financial
support from the federal government, State of North Carolina, Wildlife
Federation ana1 Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians, and local support
through the Swain County Soil and Water Conservation District. Partners in
state government include the North Carolina State University Cooperative
Extension Service and Western Carolina University. Federal support comes from
the Department of Energy, Tennessee Valley Authority, EPA, DOI Bureau of
Indian Affairs, DOI Fish and Wildlife Service and USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service.
native riparian vegetation, such as
the river cane used by the Cherokee
Tribe in basket weaving.
Building Upon Success
Educational outreach and monitor-
ing projects complement the BMPs.
A partnership between Western
Carolina University and Tennessee
Valley Authority is organizing the
collection and analysis of sedimen-
tation data in the watershed. This
monitoring will determine portions
of the watershed most in need of
restoration and BMP implementation.
While, monitoring efforts assess
project effectiveness, educational
outreach programs display projects
and enhance public awareness of
restoration activities. For instance,
tours for interested parties, such as
landowner associations, have
exhibited actions taken and
planned. Newsletters, articles and
conferences have also increased
public awareness of the watershed-
wide effort. Through BMPs, educa-
tion and monitoring, stakeholders
hope to continue improving the
watershed and preserve the essen-
tial trout habitat.
-------
The Bigalk Creek, a spring-fed,
coldwater tributary of the Upper
Iowa River in northeast Iowa, has
a unique limestone bedrock that
provides some of the most spectac-
ular and fragile surface waters in
the state. The Howard County
watershed is six miles long and
encompasses 11,600 acres within
the Upper Iowa Watershed, which
contains 14 lakes and 1,429 miles
of river.
Land located above the trout
stream in the Bigalk Creek
Watershed is used predominantly
for agriculture. In recent years,
uncontrolled livestock access to the
creek has significantly diminished
the fish population. Livestock over-
grazing, sedimentation and stream-
bank erosion have degraded pool
habitat and reduced instream vege-
tation. Also, the creek's geological
composition, fractured limestone
bedrock covered by a thin layer of
soil, potentially allows agricultural
inputs such as fertilizers, pesticides
and manure to leach through the
soil and contaminate groundwater.
The USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service classifies all
of the cropland near the fishable
section of the stream corridor as
highly erodible, with a high poten-
tial for sediment to reach the
stream channel.
Landowners Take
the Initiative
In 1992, landowners in the water-
shed joined with federal, state and
local agencies to create the Bigalk
Creek Water Quality Project. The
project has five goals: to create
awareness of fertilizer and pesticide
use impacts, to demonstrate the fea-
sibility of several innovative
resource management systems, to
reduce streambank erosion, to
reduce sedimentation and to reduce
the amount of livestock manure
reaching the stream.
Landowners' restoration efforts near
the trout stream have included tree
plantings, implementation of
streambank stabilization measures,
construction of a cattle crossing,
installation of fish habitat structures
and utilization of innovative nose
pumps for livestock watering.
Farmers have also erected perma-
nent fencing, including a solar-pow-
ered electric fence, to limit cattle
access to the stream system.
Upland management practices to
control runoff have included con-
struction of sediment basins, imple-
mentation of no-till and strip-crop-
ping farming systems and establish-
-------
w a
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
ment of contours and grassed
waterways.
Governmental agencies have sup-
ported local actions with their own
initiatives to restore the stream cor-
ridor. The USDA Conservation
Reserve Program has worked with
landowners to install riparian
buffers and filter strips along the
stream. The Iowa Department of
Natural Resources PNR) and the
Department of Agriculture and Land
Stewardship Division of Soil
Conservation have contributed tech-
nical expertise and funding to
reshape the streambanks, construct
fish hides, re-seed vegetation in the
area and install rock riprap, a combi-
nation of various materials, such as
concrete blocks and rubble, intend-
ed to prevent flooding and erosion.
The Trout Return
The extensive effort made in Bigalk
Creek has enjoyed tremendous suc-
cess. A July 1999 DNR creek sur-
vey counted 80 rainbow trout, rep-
resenting a 600 percent increase
from an identical 1992 survey. The
same survey noted that 20 percent
of the fish were naturalizedthey
had been in the stream long enough
to acquire their natural coloring or
were naturally reproduced. The
results make the Bigalk Creek only
the third stream in Iowa with docu-
mented natural rainbow trout
reproduction. A follow-up survey
in October 1999 documented 150
naturalized rainbow trout per mile
of stream, the highest number of
wild rainbow trout ever document-
ed in an Iowa trout stream. The
A survey counted
80 rainbow trout,
representing a 600
percent increase
from an identical
1992 survey
surveys also detected the presence
of invertebrates, another key indi-
cator of stream health.
The Bigalk Creek Water Quality
Project has surpassed many of its
original goals. Sediment delivered
to the stream has been reduced by
50 percent. The creek's annual sed-
iment load from erosion has
deceased by 5,000 tonsa 60 per-
cent reduction. Livestock manure
reaching the stream has been
reduced by 50 percent. These
reductions have brought about a
noticeable improvement in water
quality and slowed algal growth.
More Progress to Come
Landowners have found best man-
agement practices to be both eco-
logically and economically reward-
.^^'^ft3asia^-p«a;:^:Sa*SS'S-fc
State and Federal Partners
Restoration activities in the Bigalk
i Creek receive financial support from
the federal government and the
State of Iowa. Local leadership and
^administration of tfie B|ga|k Creek
Water Quality Project is provided by
rthe Howard County Soil and Water
Conservation District. Partners in
jsfate government include the
'"Department of Natural Resources,
Department of Agriculture and Land
Stewardship and Iowa State
^yniversity Cooperative Extension
Service. Federal partners include
the EPA, USDA Farm Services
Agency and USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service.
ing, and future use of BMPs should
continue improvement of Bigalk
Creek's water quality and fish habi-
tat. A 1998 effort, the Bigalk to
Bohemian Water Quality Project,
will use integrated crop manage-
ment techniques to further reduce
the potential for agricultural con-
taminants to leach into water
resources. Targeting 83,000 acres in
Howard County, the project has
shifted the emphasis of restoration
efforts from surface water to
groundwater concerns.
-------
I
m
s ; ;
1;:: ;,:SE is .;; "
' '"'j '>m ii
as;1,
"''
The Illinois River Watershed com-
prises approximately 200,000 acres
in 54 counties in the State of
Illinois, a region representing 90
percent of the state's population.
327 miles in length, the Illinois
Waterway flows from nine smaller
rivers and Lake Michigan to the
Mississippi River, near St. Louis,
and contains 11,061 miles of
streams. Certain aspects of the
watershed, such as its "flood pulse"
or natural seasonal water level fluc-
tuations, create optimal conditions
for aquatic and terrestial wildlife
habitat; the Natural Heritage
Biological and Conservation
Database lists occurrences of 1,286
aquatic organisms and 744 terrestri-
al species.
The watershed includes rural,
urban and forest ecosystems but is
used primarily for fishing, recre-
ation and wildlife habitat. Human
impacts, such as agricultural and
industrial runoff and stream chan-
nelization, have impaired the
watershed by altering the natural
stream flow and generating exces-
sive levels of nutrients, siltation,
metals, suspended solids and organ-
ic enrichment. The annual deposi-
tion of 8 million tons of sediment
in the river has virtually filled over
50 lakes and greatly impairs the
river's functionality. In 1992, the
National Research Council named
the Illinois River Watershed as a
restoration priority - one of only
three river-floodplain ecosystems
selected. The Illinois River Basin
contains 124 waterbody segments
and 71 lakes on the state's List of
Impaired Waters and 32 Unified
Watershed Assessment Category 1
watersheds.
150 Partners in Restoration
Several different programs are
involved in the restoration of the
Illinois River Watershed. They
include the US Army Corps of
Engineers Illinois River Ecosystem
Restoration Study, USDA-State of
Illinois Conservation Reserve
Enhancement Program (CREP), US
EPA-Illinois EPA Nonpoint Source
Control Program and Illinois
Conservation 2000 Streambank
Stabilization Program.
These programs are coordinated by
the Integrated Management Plan for
the Illinois River Watershed
(IMPIRW), developed in 1997 after
a year-long effort involving 150
partners. The plan's objectives
include stream restoration, water
quality improvement, habitat
preservation and support and pro-
tection of the regional economy.
The plan hopes to attain these goals
through restoration, monitoring,
public outreach and public educa-
tion actions. Its 34 recommenda-
tions for restoration focus on
-------
watershed success
lization, runoff, erosion and sedi-
mentation reduction, wetland con-
struction and development of cost-
effective, voluntary best manage-
ment practice (BMP) programs.
Implementing the 34
Recommendations
Many projects have already been
completed; many are ongoing or
planned. Stream corridor restora-
tion projects are applying such new
and innovative technologies as rock
rifflesinstream structures that
reduce water velocity and create
slackwater areasand bendway
weirsupstream-angled low-eleva-
tion stone sills designed to control
and redirect currents and velocities
throughout a stream bend. Four
pilot watersheds across Illinois are
implementing restoration tech-
niques in collaboration with "con-
trol" watersheds to determine the
effectiveness of the BMPs. One of
the pilot -watersheds is Court
Creek, a sub-watershed of Illinois
River Basin. Sixty-six ambient
water quality monitoring stations
and 947 intensive survey sites sup-
port these restoration activities by
gathering and analyzing data.
The success of the actions in the
Illinois River Watershed is exempli-
fied by the success of the
Conservation Reserve Enhancement
Program. This voluntary program
began accepting applications in
May 1998. As of January 2000,
As of January 2000,
2,088 watershed
landowners had
enrolled 42,551 acres
in the Conservation
Reserve Enhancement
Program, and 1,741
acres were in the
enrollment process
2,088 watershed landowners had
enrolled 42,551 acres in the pro-
gram, and 1,741 acres were in the
enrollment process.
Public outreach and education proj-
ects have played a significant role
in supporting watershed activities.
BMP demonstration projects have
been completed in 33 of the water-
shed's 54 counties. Over 10,000
copies of the IMPIRW have been
distributed. Meetings, conferences,
field trips and reports all enhance
public awareness and participation.
The watershed-wide restoration
effort is already producing results.
Most notably, fish species absent
from the river since 1908 have
returned. Building upon past and
current progress, the watershed
partners will continue the restora-
tion and preservation of the Illinois
River Watershed.
The Illinois River Watershed restora-
tion effort receives financial support
..from the federal government, State
of Illinois and McNight Foundation,
with local support from county Soil
and Water Conservation Districts.
Partners in state government
include the Department of
Agriculture, Department of Natural
Resources, Environmental Protection
Agency, Department of Commerce
and Community Affairs, State
Geological Survey, State Water
Survey and State Natural History
Survey. Federal support comes from
the US Army Corps of Engineers,
USDA Farm Services Agency, USDA
Natural Resources Conservation
Service, EPA, DOI Fish and Wildlife
Service, DOI Geological Survey and
US Coast Guard.
-------
The Tensas River Watershed com-
prises 718,000 acres in Madison,
Tensas, East Carroll and Franklin
Parishes in Louisiana. The river
flows approximately 315 miles, or
504 kilometers, through northeast
Louisiana before emptying into the
Black River.
Although 90 percent of the water-
shed was forested at one time,
much of the Tensas River Basin has
been cleared, drained and convert-
ed, and the watershed's land use is
now 71.5 percent agriculture. The
Tensas River Basin has approxi-
mately 65,000 acres of bottomland
hardwood swamps remaining,
most of which are located in the
Tensas River National Wildlife
Refuge and Big Lake Wildlife
Management Area. The resulting
loss of wetlands and riparian areas
has contributed to water quality
degradation, sedimentation,
increased flooding and wildlife
habitat and biodiversity losses.
Suspected causes of river impair-
ment include sediment, pesticides,
organic enrichment and metals.
The Tensas River fails to meet the
state's dissolved oxygen standard, is
listed as threatened in the state's
1998 Water Quality Assessment
and is categorized as impaired in
Louisiana's Unified Watershed
Assessment.
Restoring Bottomland Habitat
Various federal and state agencies,
nonprofit and special interest
groups and local citizens formed a
partnership to collaborate on
restoration and research projects
and work on a Watershed
Restoration Action Strategy for the
Tensas River. The Louisiana
Department of Environmental
Quality, EPA, The Nature
Conservancy, USDA and other
state and federal agencies used a
holistic approach in developing a
The Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program
has restored almost 4,000 acres of bottom-
land habitat and 15 miles of riparian areas
-------
w a
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
1
comprehensive protection plan for
the watershed. The USDA Natural
Resources Conservation Service,
with assistance from the partner-
ship's Technical Steering
Committee, completed a River
Basin Study. The resulting water-
shed strategy seeks to improve
water quality and restore bottom-
land habitat through best manage-
ment and conservation practices,
educational outreach programs and
monitoring projects.
Best management practices (BMP),
erosion control structure installa-
tions and reforestation measures
have been implemented through
cost-share programs, such as
USDA's Environmental Quality
The Tensas River Watershed receives
financial support from the federal
government, State of Louisiana and
The Nature Conservancy, and the
local support of the Tensas-
Concordia, East Carroll, Northeast
and East Carroll-Madison Soil and
Water Conservation Districts. State
government partners include the
Department of Environmental
Quality, Department of Agriculture
and Forestry, Department of Health
and Hospitals and Louisiana State
University Cooperative Extension
Service. Partner organizations in
federal government include the
USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service, EPA, DOI Fish
and Wildlife Service and DOI
Geological Survey.
Incentives Program and Wetland
Reserve Program and US Fish and
Wildlife Service's Partners for Fish
and Wildlife Program. The BMPs,
including conservation tillage, preci-
sion agriculture, filter strips and
nutrient and pesticide management
practices, combat nonpoint source
pollution and reduce the levels of
agricultural chemicals and sediment
entering the Tensas River.
Educational outreach, which
includes public meetings, work-
shops and publications, increases
awareness of the various efforts
taking place in the watershed, such
as the BMPs, water quality Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
study, monitoring and sampling.
Reforesting the
Tensas River Watershed
The Tensas River Watershed proj-
ects are beginning to show an
impact in arresting the environmen-
tal degradation of the watershed.
For example, an estimated 56,000
acres of farmland have been refor-
ested. Also, approximately 48,000
acres have been enrolled into the
Wetland Reserve Program, and the
Partners for Fish and Wildlife
Program has restored almost 4,000
acres of bottomland habitat and 15
miles of riparian areas.
Current and future projects will aug-
ment this progress. For instance, a
hardwood seedling nursery that
grows over one million native
seedlings annually will assist refor-
estation efforts. Several TMDLs
have been completed that, when
achieved, will result in nonpoint
source load reductions. A Tensas
River trend station will improve
monitoring and assessment capabil-
ities. Educational programs now
underway aim to increase local
awareness and participation.
-------
Lands in the Boulder and Upper
Tenmile Creek Watersheds in
Montana have been mined since
the nineteenth century. Principal
metals extracted from this area
included gold, silver, lead and zinc.
Between 1902 and 1958, minerals
extracted just in the Basin-Cataract
Creek Mining District in the
Boulder Watershed had an estimat-
ed value of $11 million.
The mining legacy, however, is the
contamination and degradation of
the watersheds' water resources.
Metal-mining wastes and mill tail-
ing deposits negatively impact
water quality, riparian vegetation,
human health and the overall envi-
ronment. Streams are affected by
the direct discharge of acid drainage
from adits, seepage from tailings
pipes and erosion of tailings.
Basin and Upper Tenmile
Creek Mining Areas
Efforts at mine cleanup in Montana
are almost always initiated, organ-
ized and led by local stakeholders.
Assistance from federal and state
agencies supports the actions of the
watershed residents. For example,
The extensive
partnership includes
more than 20
landowners, local
communities and
numerous federal
agencies
cooperation was key to the success
of clean-ups in the Upper Tenmile
Creek Mining Area, located in the
Rimini Mining District, which con-
tains more than 20 abandoned
mine sites. EPA and US Forest
Service removed almost 40,000
cubic yards of mine waste from this
Lewis and Clark County watershed
in 1999, and watershed residents
implemented streambank stabiliza-
tion and fishery enhancement proj-
ects. In 1998 and 1999, locals plant-
ed nearly 5,000 indigenous riparian
plants, trees and shrubs.
Similarly, in the Basin Mining Area
of the Boulder River Watershed,
community members are working
with the EPA, US Forest Service,
Bureau of Land Management and
Montana Department of Environ-
mental Quality to conduct a feasi-
bility study and preliminary mining
-------
w a
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
waste removal actions. In 1999,
EPA added the Basin and Upper
Tenmile Creek Mining Areas to its
Superfund National Priorities List.
Restoration of High Ore Creek
Environmental degradation in the
Boulder River Mining Area has
drawn together an extensive part-
nership in which local communities
and more than 20 landowners are
working with numerous federal
agencies. Bureau of Land
Management has already worked
with the project partners to clean
up seven sites. Thermal modifica-
tion, habitat alterations, toxics,
metals, siltation, suspended solids
and turbidity all affect this region.
A glimpse of the massive restora-
tion effort underway in the Boulder
River Mining Area can be seen at
High Ore Creek in Jefferson
County, an area with 26 abandoned
or inactive mine sites. Acid mine
drainage from the Comet Mine has
distributed 32,000 cubic yards of
streamside tailings and 5,800 cubic
yards of waste rock throughout the
3.7-mile High Ore Creek floodplain.
In 1999, project partners cleared a
six-acre repository, improved access
roads and backfilled the floodplain
with coversoil. The partners also
constructed streambed including
steps, pools and grade control
structures and excavated, loaded
and hauled streamside mine
wastes. Moreover, they installed
stream protection structures, silt
State and Federal PartneW*'-
Mining cleanup and watershed restoration projects in Montana receive finan-
cial support from the federal government, State of Montana, Lewis and Clark
Conservation District, Jefferson Conservation District and Walmart. Partners in
state government include the Department of Environmental Quality,
Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Bureau of Mines and Geology,
Department of Natural Resources and Conservation and State Conservation
Corps. Federal partners include the USDA Forest Service, USDA Natural
Resources Conservation Service, EPA, DOI Office of Surface Mining, DOI Bureau
of Land Management, DOI Geological Survey, DOI Fish and Wildlife Service
and US Army Corps of Engineers.
fencing, willow fascines, bank sta-
bilization fabric and erosion control
mat. Finally, they reconstructed
almost 3,500 linear feet of High Ore
Creek and seeded and mulched sta-
bilized streambanks.
The state constructed two toxic sed-
iment settling ponds and put about
300,000 yards of mine tailings back
into the original mine site. Bureau of
Land Management relocated an
additional 150,000 yards of material.
The next phase will cover and
reseed the site. More construction
and restoration activities are
planned to continue the amazing
progress of 1999's projects.
-------
The Upper and Lower Bad River
Watersheds encompass more than 2
million acres, or 3,172 square miles,
in the South Dakota Counties of
Jackson, Jones, Haakon, Lyman and
East Pennington. The Bad River
converges with the Missouri River
near Ft. Pierre. The river and its
watersheds support an abundance
of wildlife and aquatic species.
Land use in the Bad River
Watersheds is primarily agricultural
and consists of 75 percent range-
land and 25 percent dryland wheat
farming. The soil and landscapes
of the region make the land highly
susceptible to both wind and water
erosion. This erosion and season-
long grazing practices that lead to
the destruction of the riparian chan-
nels are the main causes of sedi-
mentation and other forms of non-
point source pollution in the water-
sheds. The river's annual sediment
load of 3.25 million tons negatively
affects the local sport fishing and
recreation economy and leads to
increased turbidity in the Missouri
River, localized flooding and a
reduction in power generation
capacity at the Oahe Dam. The
degraded water quality also
impacts irrigated cropland, wildlife
and fish habitats and the Lake
Sharpe reservoir.
Land Treatment for
Water Quality
Throughout the 1990s, area stake-
holders have attempted to improve
the Bad River and its watersheds,
primarily through best management
practices (BMPs), monitoring and
education programs. BMPs in the
region have sought to improve
water quality, restore riparian areas
and reduce polluted runoff. Many
BMPs were implemented as
demonstration projects to exhibit
both the environmental and eco-
nomic advantages to local stake-
holders. Demonstration BMP proj-
ects were eligible for EPA Section
319 grants and USDA
Environmental Quality Incentives
Program cost-sharing of 30-70 per-
cent of project costs.
Projects received technical assis-
tance from USDA Natural
Resources Conservation Service and
involved planned grazing systems,
proper grazing uses, erosion control
structures, riparian revegetation,
range seedings, water spreader sys-
tems and alternative stock watering
facilities. One particularly innova-
tive BMP helped preserve and
restore riparian channel vegetation
-------
w a t
e r s
h
e d success
with the installation of metal,
wind-break fencing, which protects
livestock and provides shelter with-
out destroying the woody cover in
the riparian area. Another innova-
tive BMP constructed dual-purpose
concrete access roads as stream
crossings across eroding gullies.
Removing livestock and other traf-
fic from the waterways helped sta-
bilize the streambanks, control ero-
sion and restore natural grazing
patterns.
An EPA National Monitoring
Program project complements these
BMP implementation projects. The
monitoring project measures the
impact of BMPs on water quality
and compares the results with the
results of a nearby control area that
does not implement BMPs. BMPs
were evaluated at locations in both
the Upper and Lower Bad River
Watersheds.
Success in the Bad River
The BMP, monitoring and educa-
tion projects in the Bad River
Watershed have brought about
considerable progress. By some
estimates, 45 percent of certain Bad
River channels have been revege-
tated, and sedimentation reaching
the Missouri River has been
reduced by 30 percent. US
Geological Survey data show that
over the course of five years, the
Plum Creek subwatershed's sedi-
ment per acre/foot of runoff
dropped sharply from 82.7 tons to
10.2 tons. Improvements have
By some estimates, 45 percent of certain
Bad River channels have been revegetated,
and sedimentation reaching the Missouri
River has been reduced by 30 percent
been made on 90,000 acres of
rangeland. No-till and mulch-till
farming has been initiated on 4,084
acres of farmland.
Nothing indicates this project's suc-
cess more than the voluntary par-
ticipation of local stakeholders.
Landowner participation was
exceedingly high throughout the
watershed. Remarkably, in the
Plum Creek subwatershed, 90 per-
cent of the landowners, who hold
title to 95 percent of the land area,
have participated in the project.
State and Fedelil PaHneli
Projects in the Bad River Watershed
receive financial support from the
federal government, State of South
Dakota, Jackson, Jones, Haakon,
lyman and Pennington Counties,
their respective Conservation
Districts and Resource Conservation
apd Development Councils,
J Pheasants Forever, Monsanto, Ducks
Unlimited and Lower Brule Sioux,
Oglala Sioux and Lajcota Tribes.
:State partners include the
Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, Department of
Game, Fish and Parks, Department
of Agriculture and South Dakota
State University Cooperative
Extension Service. Federal support
comes from the DOI Fish and
Wildlife Service, DOI Bureau of
Reclamation, DOI Geological Survey,
US Army Corps of Engineers, EPA,
USDA Forest Service, USDA Natural
Resources Conservation Service and ]
USDA Farm Services Agency. ;
-------
The North Fork of the Ninnescah
River flows into the Cheney
Reservoir in south-central Kansas
and provides 40 to 60 percent of
the City of Wichita's daily water
supply. The North Fork of the
Ninnescah River Watershed covers
over 600,000 acres and encompass-
es land in Sedgwick, Reno, Kingman,
Pratt and Stafford Counties in
southeast Kansas. The watershed
is diverse in terms of soil types,
topography and rainfall.
The North Fork of the Ninnescah
River Watershed is 99 percent agri-
cultural, with a variety of farming
and ranching practices. Sediment
and other nonpoint source pollution
from crops and livestock production
are the main threats to water quali-
ty. Concentrations of animal waste
and over-application or improper
application of fertilizers and pesti-
cides have created excessive levels
of nutrients, especially phospho-
rous. The watershed is listed as a
Category 1-A watershed in Kansas's
Unified Watershed Assessment.
Agricultural Best
Management Practices
In 1992, the Reno County
Conservation District began to pre-
pare a comprehensive management
plan for the watershed.
Implementation began in 1994 under
the leadership of Citizen's
Management Committee (CMC) of
the Cheney Lake Water Quality
Project, a rural-urban partnership
representing local, state and federal
agencies, local landowners and farm-
ers and the City of Wichita. In
1995, the Kansas Rural Center joined
the effort promoting and implement-
ing sustainable farming and best
management practices (BMP).
Implementation of BMPs to miti-
gate the impacts of agricultural pol-
lution and sedimentation has
occurred throughout the North Fork
of the Ninnescah River Watershed.
On-farm demonstrations, farm
tours, educational workshops and
farmer-to-farmer meetings have all
encouraged and spread successful
and innovative conservation prac-
tices. Agricultural BMPs used in the
watershed include cover crops, fil-
ter strips, crop rotations, manage-
ment-intensive grazing systems,
strip cropping, center pivot irriga-
tion, no-till planting techniques and
animal waste systems, waterways
and terraces. Seventeen percent of
the land in the watershed is
-------
watershed success
Reserve Program.
The Cheney Lake Water Quality
Project uses innovative funding to
encourage BMP implementation.
Traditional cost-share programs,
such as USDA's Environmental
Quality Incentive Program, provide
funds covering 50-70 percent of the
cost for structural practices, thereby
leaving some of the BMP financial
burden with the landowner. In the
North Fork of the Ninnescah River
Watershed, the City of Wichita
pays an additional 30 percent of the
cost so that, in some cases, farmers
do not incur any expenses for BMP
installation. BMPs ineligible for
cost-sharing can receive EPA
Section 319 grants. BMPs and sus-
tainable farming practices are cred-
ited with preventing 77,000 tons of
manure from entering the water-
shed annually.
BMPs and sustainable
farming practices
are credited with
preventing 77,000
tons of manure from
entering the
watershed annually
State and Federal £grf5S?£
The watershed project receives financial support from the federal government
and the City of Wichita Water and Sewer Department, and local support from
:Jhe Reno, Sedgwick Pratt, Kingman and Stafford County Conservation Districts.
State support comes from the Department of Health and Environment,
Department of Wildlife and Parks and Kansas State University Cooperative
Extension Service. Federal partners include the USDA Farm Services Agency,
,USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, EPA, DOI Geological Survey,
DOI Bureau of Reclamation, DOI Fish and Wildlife Service and DOI National
..,.'.".."" . ' _. ... . . . " . '
Park Service.
-------
Si!::1'!'!*" "' ;'' ' " . ' '(-'. i" '
!l! 'il1#: -' ; 's4»!B1! ' '. J M "i" '"
wmm
S '
I "t'1;
J i^jjj
Clear Creek is a lushly forested
bayou that meanders 40 miles from
near the City of Friendswood,
Texas to Clear Lake and Galveston
Bay. Much like other bayous, Clear
Creek provides extensive fish and
wildlife habitat, purifies water and
recharges aquifers. One of only
four natural, unchannelized bayous
in the City of Houston area, the
creek is a nursery and feeding
ground for more than 50 species of
finfish, including redfish and floun-
der, and 3 species of shrimp.
Clear Creek is a vitally important
and valuable watershed. Many of
the species that spawn and feed in
the watershed are important to the
commercial fishing industry, and
the area is a popular ecotourism
and recreation destination.
Unfortunately, human impacts
including urban development, agri-
culture, and dredge and fill activi-
ties have degraded vital watershed
habitats and water resources.
Protecting the Bayou
To reverse the trend of habitat and
water resource degradation in the
Clear Creek Watershed, the
Galveston Bay Estuary Program,
one of the 28 EPA estuary programs
nationwide, included restoration of
Clear Creek as one of its priorities
in its Comprehensive Conservation
and Management Plan (CCMP).
The program builds consensus
among citizens, business and indus-
try, academia and government
agencies and pools together
resources, expertise and funding to
-------
w a
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
support innovative projects that
involve local public and private
partners.
Acknowledging that maintenance
dredging is a necessary activity in
the watershed, the Estuary
Program sought to identify ways of
making better use of the disposable
material. A demonstration project
constructed new wetlands with
dredged material, thereby restoring
valuable wetland habitats and
enhancing the local environment
by creating homes for fish and
wildlife. The project dredged
approximately 29,000 cubic yards
of material and constructed a 12-
acre containment dike. The mate-
rial was then moved to a designat-
ed placement area behind the dike
and was seeded with "Vermillion"
smooth cordgrass. An additional
4.2 acres of wetlands were also cre-
ated. The project received a 1999
Coastal America Partnership Award
for its innovation and successful
implementation.
Monitoring Bayou Restoration
Through water quality monitoring,
watershed stakeholders identify
and characterize watershed condi-
tions and track the success of
restoration efforts. The Clear
Creek Surface Water Quality
Monitoring Program conducts bac-
teria and metal analyses on a daily
basis. Data from this program are
recorded into a central database
and distributed in monthly reports.
The Texas Coastal Management
Clear Creek Watershed restoration efforts receive financial support from the fed-
eral government, State of Texas, City of Houston, Environmental Institute of
Houston and Reliant Energy, and local support from the Harris Soil and Water
Conservation District. State partners include the Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission. Federal support comes from the DOI Fish and
Wildlife Service, EPA and USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Program also measures watershed
conditions and enters the informa-
tion into a Geographic Information
System (CIS) database. Another
project monitors storm sewers to
detect illicit connections in the
Clear Creek Watershed. These
monitoring programs evaluate the
effect of ongoing restoration efforts
and will complement future
restoration effort planning in Clear
Creek.
The creek is a
nursery and feeding
ground for more
than 50 species of
finfish, including
redfish and flounder,
and 3 species
of shrimp
-------
I;;,!";; ;; WiS:;;1!1»i';::>>'i..it :;;» w?tji ;!!?$
BWjSWseiJiUiKSIft Sir
,£,',; > ;£ ..v; 1;| [ ;,;£ ;''!
j : 'inj
Between the 1890s and 1980s,
Mineral County land in the State of
Colorado was used for metal min-
ing. Willow Creek, a headwater
tributary to the Rio Grande River, is
located near the Town of Creede in
Mineral County. The Willow Creek
Watershed consists of 35 square
miles in the south-central part of
the state.
Mine entrances opened in the
mountains allowed water to flow
through parts of the Creede District
mines and mix with toxic sub-
stances. Mine waste piles through-
out the creek also contributed to
Local citizens and organizations have
much expertise in evaluating the mining
impacts to the Willow Creek Watershed
nonpoint source pollution. As a
result, East and West Willow Creek
contain levels of zinc, dissolved
cadmium and lead well above state
water quality standards. For exam-
ple, in West Willow Creek, lead is
found at 82 times the Colorado
Table Value Standard. The State of
Colorado's Nonpoint Source
Assessment Report and
Management Plan identifies the
Willow Creek Watershed as a high
priority area requiring nonpoint
source metal control.
Planning Willow
Creek Restoration
Contaminated water in the Willow
Creek not only affects the chemical
makeup of the waters in the Rio
Grande River, but also negatively
impacts the aesthetic and recre-
ational values of the watershed. In
late 1997, a coalition of over 35 local
partners along with federal and state
agencies formed the Willow Creek
Reclamation Committee to address
mine tailing pollution of the creek.
This committee used an EPA
Section 319 Nonpoint Source
Management Grant through the
State of Colorado to initiate a com-
munity-based approach to deter-
mine remediation needs and is in
the process of drafting a long-term
management program to improve
-------
w a
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
physical habitat and water quality
in the watershed.
The committee compiled a list of
goals and objectives for Willow
Creek as a part of the watershed
management plan to address non-
point source pollution from mine
adit discharges and mine tailings.
The partners seek to avert fish kills
in the Rio Grande River and
improve water quality in Willow
Creek. They also hope to improve
the physical, chemical, biological
and visual aspects of the watershed.
'* £ '''-jf '"^L^'iiS.i'jr*?'%--*~M'»!!:!J^^^
State .and. Federal Partners
The stakeholders in the Willow
Creek Watershed receive financial
support from the federal govern-
ment and the State of Colorado,
and local support through the
Mineral County Soil and Water
Conservation District. Partner
organizations in state government
include the Rio Grande Soil
Conservation District, Cooperative
Extension Service, Department of
Minerals and Geology, Department
of Natural Resources, Department of
Water Resources, Department of
Local Affairs, Department of Public
Health and Environment and State
Historical Society. Federal support
comes from the USDA Forest
Service, USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service, EPA, DO! Fish
and Wildlife Survey, DOI Geological
Survey, DOI Bureau of Land
Management and US Army Corps of
Engineers.
Assessing the Nonpoint
Source Impact
Local citizens and organizations
have much expertise in evaluating
the mining impacts to the Willow
Creek Watershed. In addition,
numerous federal and state agen-
cies are assisting the local partners
in the planning phase of the Willow
Creek Watershed restoration proj-
ect. For example, the Army Corps
of Engineers is planning to fix a
flume through Creede, the USDA
Natural Resources Conservation
Service is designing stream-channel
reconstruction and EPA and DOI
are involved in sampling events.
The Colorado Department of
Minerals and Geology is in charge
of controlling physical hazards to
prevent future contaminant releases
while preserving historic structures.
The US Forest Service is tracing
contamination in groundwater, and
the US Geological Survey is similar-
ly tracing contamination in area
streams. The outcome of the first
dye tracing phase suggests that the
contamination in Willow Creek
may be confined to a limited area.
This result indicates that the
Willow Creek Watershed manage-
ment plan may be technically and
financially realistic. Once the
Willow Creek committees finish
their watershed characterization
work and finalize their nonpoint
source pollution abatement strate-
gy, then actual restoration work
will proceed.
-------
1.1
The North Fork of the Gunnison
River Watershed consists of 986
square miles in the State of
Colorado bounded on the north by
Grand Mesa, McClure Pass and the
Ragged Mountains and on the east
and west by the Grand Mesa
National Forest and the White
River National Forest. The river
flows 33 miles, through the Cities
of Paonia and Hotchkiss, before
flowing into the Gunnison River
just north of the Black Canyon of
the Gunnison National Park.
The watershed is characterized by a
valley of multiple river terraces used
for agricultural purposes.
Channelization of the river has
destabilized stream flows and the
river bottom. The river is further
impacted by grazing, logging, pesti-
cide application, feed lot and high-
way runoff, coal and in-stream
gravel mining, irrigation diversions
and reservoir operations. As a
result, the Colorado Department of
Public Health and the Environment
identified the North Fork watershed
as a priority watershed in its 1998
Unified Watershed Assessment and
a watershed restoration action strat-
egy is being developed.
Community-Led Restoration
For years, restoration activities in
the watershed were not coordinat-
ed and were usually carried out by
individual landowners. These sin-
gle-handed efforts were rarely suc-
cessful, and often caused problems
for nearby landowners. However,
in 1996, landowners, water users,
government agencies and concerned
citizens formed the North Fork
River Improvement Association
(NFRIA). This association has
sought to meet usage demands on
the river while improving stream
stability, riparian habitat and
ecosystem function.
NFRIA supports long-term, cost-
effective projects that improve water
quality, channel stability and ripari-
an habitat, divert irrigation water,
increase in-stream flows and reduce
ditch maintenance. For example, in
1999, 20 acres of wetlands were
created, 2,500 feet of streambank
were stabilized and work on 100
acres of conservation easements
was completed. The University of
Colorado-Denver has recognized
NFRIA for its consensus building
and collaborative decision-making
efforts related to local sustainable
development policies.
-------
w a t e r s h
e d success
Moving Forward
The North Fork's watershed-wide
coordination has increased stake-
holder involvement in restoration
activities and has greatly increased
the number of efforts underway in
the region. The North Fork
Irrigation Diversion Demonstration
Program, a project on 1.5 miles of
the North Fork channel floodplain,
highlights the innovation of these
activities. Constructed in the win-
ter of 2000, the demonstration proj-
NFRIA projects receive financial
assistance from numerous sources
including the federal government
and the State of Colorado. Partners
in state government include the
Delta Soil Conservation District,
Department of Transportation,
Department of Natural Resources,
State Water Conservation Board and
Colorado State University. Federal
partners include the USDA Natural
Resources Conservation Service,
USDA Forest Service, USDA Farm
Services Agency, EPA, DOI National
Park Service, DOI Geological Survey,
DOI Bureau of Reclamation, DOI
Fish and Wildlife Service and US
Army Corps of Engineers.
20 acres of wetlands were created, 2,500
feet of streambank were stabilized and
work on 100 acres of conservation
easements was completed
ect restored meanders to the reach
and employed a wide range of bio-
engineering treatments to stabilize
banks and enhance wetlands. An
irrigation diversion was also recon-
structed to eliminate the need for
annual "push-up" gravel diversion
dams. High school students assist in
project revegetation work and docu-
ment project progress on video.
NFRIA studies in the watershed
will collect the data necessary for
continued restoration. One study is
being led by the Colorado State
University and is researching the
impact of the Paonia Reservoir on
restoration efforts downstream.
The study is also examining the
rate at which silt is settling in and
filling up the reservoir.
-------
The San Miguel River Watershed in
southwest Colorado extends 72
miles from high alpine meadows
and waterfalls above Telluride to a
sandstone canyon confluence with
the Dolores River. The one million
acre watershed drops over 7,000
feet between the alpine and desert
ecosystems. With 33 different
landscape types found in the 18
headwater basins, and with many
rare plant and animal communities,
the San Miguel River Watershed
includes some of the most biologi-
cally intact and valuable landscapes
in the nation.
Land use in the watershed includes
agriculture, mining, resort tourism
and recreation. These uses and the
related regional development and
growth have negatively impacted
the San Miguel River Watershed.
Large-scale development is one
possible cause of both excessive
nutrient levels and concentrated
flows of runoff, which lead to
heavy sedimentation and erosion.
Consistent with increases in devel-
opment, population increases have
resulted in the over-appropriation
of water and reduction of instream
flows. Separately, on-site gravel
mining and historical mining runoff
have contaminated surface water,
contributed to a lack of riverside
vegetation and limited essential
wildlife habitat. Channelization
and stormwater runoff also affect
the San Miguel River Watershed.
Protecting the San Miguel
River Watershed
Efforts to coordinate restoration
activities in the San Miguel
Watershed began in 1990. In 1994,
the San Miguel Watershed Coalition
was formed, led by the Rivers and
Trails Program of the National Park
Service and the Telluride Institute.
Numerous studies, including rare
plant and animal surveys, instream
flow studies, a fish survey, a land
health assessment, a hazardous
waste inventory, water quality stud-
ies and ongoing river restoration
studies determined the condition of
the watershed. The broad coalition
of over 20 participating entities uti-
lized information from the studies
and public meetings to draft a man-
agement plan to conserve and
enhance the natural, cultural, recre-
ational, social and economic
resources of the watershed.
Many different kinds of restoration
projects have been implemented in
the San Miguel River Watershed.
In 1998, the San Miguel Planning
Commission sought to amend local
land use codes to protect headwa-
ter catchments from further devel-
opment and degradation. This
action led to the San Miguel Board
of County Commissioners' legal
adoption of stipulations on con-
struction, sewage disposal, fertilizer
use, blasting and new roads.
Combined with Geographic
Information System (CIS) mapping
and modeling and the development
of sourcewater protection pro-
grams, these stipulations earned
San Miguel County an EPA
Outstanding Achievement Award
and a National Association of
Counties Award for community-
based ecosystem protection.
-------
w
a
h
d
u
Several other projects focus on lim-
iting the impact of recreational and
tourism-related watershed uses.
The Bureau of Land Management,
with assistance from the Forest
Service, has introduced a designa-
tion system for area campgrounds
and trails. Eleven sites have been
closed to camping and vehicles,
and educational posts and bulletin
boards will explain the importance
of the closures for habitat protec-
tion and preservation. A new map
will display sites available for
recreational purposes. Some open
sites, such as the Jud Wiebe trail,
will be reconstructed or improved
to enhance the outdoors experi-
ence. The Bureau also lifted a
moratorium on commercial river
outfitting to increase the recre-
ational options in the watershed.
The San Miguel Watershed
Coalition also works on more tra-
ditional watershed restoration
activities, such as streambank sta-
bilization, acid mine drainage miti-
gation and land acquisition. For
example, the Town of Telluride
will begin construction on a section
of the San Miguel River to restore
aquatic, wetland and riparian habi-
tat, improve river hydraulics and
mitigate sediment impact in the
channel. The project has complet-
ed construction of a wetland that is
part of a drainage system designed
to filter runoff from 40 percent of
the town streets. Also, four proj-
ects in the Mountain Village area
involve stream and wetland
restoration, native material planting
Successful watershed
projects earned San
Miguel County very
distinguished awards
and construction of aquatic bench-
es, shallow areas that support sub-
merged and emergent aquatic vege-
tation. Near Nucla, approximately
160 acres of roller chopping, which
stimulates forage plant growth by
removing older trees and shrubs,
and revegetation improved winter
range for watershed animals and
supported the weed control efforts
of the local community.
The coalition has used local stew-
ardship and involvement to the
benefit of the watershed restoration
plan. The partners support numer-
ous public outreach activities. One
project, the San Miguel Watershed
Education Project, seeks to include
younger stakeholders. This project,
with participants from all three of
the watershed's school districts,
sponsors educational field trips to
"Living Classroom" sites. At these
sites, the project's interdisciplinary
curriculum covers geology, water
quality testing, river dynamics,
nature writing, mining history, dam
exploration and other topics.
Past, Current and
Future Success
The San Miguel Watershed
Coalition's efforts have already pro-
tected over 10,000 acres of alpine
wetlands and headwaters. New
projects, such as Community Based
Environmental Protection pilot
sourcewater protection programs
developed by seven communities,
will continue the regional protection
and preservation. The extensive
locally-based partnership will help
sustain past progress and enhance
stewardship in the watershed.
State and Fedei%rPapers!
The San Miguel Watershed Coalition
receives financial support from the
federal government, State of
Colorado," County of San Miguel,
Natural Resource Damage Funds,
Telluride Company, Great Outdoors
Colorado and Telluride Institute.
The coalition also receives proceeds
from a VISA credit card, issued by
San Miguel County Open Space
Commission, Conservation
Foundation and Telluride Visitor
Services. Partners in state govern-
ment include the San Miguel Soil
Conservation District, Cooperative
Extension Service, Department of
Public Health and Environment,
Water Conservation Board,
Department of Natural Resources
and Department of Local Affairs.
Federal partners include the DOI
National Park Service, DO! Bureau of
rjiManagemeDt, DOI Geological
Sjjryey, EPA, USDA Forest Service
jnd USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service.
-------
Timi i - m I?- a c:: i ^^fs^iili'Sfw^ii
Most of the over 26,000 square
miles of land in the Little Colorado
River Watershed is rural, with
almost half in Indian Nation lands.
Bounded by the basins of the Rio
Grande, Gila, Salt, San Juan and
Colorado rivers, the watershed
consists of 17 sub-basins and cov-
ers vast parts of northeast Arizona
and northwest New Mexico. The
main stem of the Little Colorado
River begins near Springerville,
Arizona, in the White Mountains
and flows nearly 350 miles before
emptying into the Colorado River
in Grand Canyon National Park,
where it provides a major source of
sediment for Canyon beaches.
Land uses include ranching, timber
harvesting, agriculture, mining,
power generation, tourism and
recreation. These activities, most
notably mining and agriculture,
have caused surface water contami-
nation, high turbidity levels, flood-
ing and excessive sedimentation
and erosion.
The Multi-Objective
Management Plan
In 1996, in response to continued
flooding threats to the communities
of Winslow and Holbrook, Navajo
County, with assistance from the
Army Corps of Engineers' Task
Force Based Floodplain Management
Assistance initiative, sponsored a
workshop to focus on watershed
management and address stakehold-
er concerns. That workshop, held
in 1997, and another workshop held
that same year organized a locally-
led planning effort under the Little
Colorado River Plateau Resource
Conservation and Development
Area, Inc., a rural development, non-
profit organization. Community
leaders agreed to address issues
through the use of a multi-objective
management approach, which
simultaneously addresses all of a
watershed's problems.
The Little Colorado River
Watershed Partnership provides an
opportunity for citizens, business-
es, and communities to establish a
voluntary collaborative approach to
enhancement of the quality of life
in the watershed. The partnership
seeks to accomplish this objective
through management of natural
resources that ensures equity
among shared interests, respects
diverse cultural values and pre-
serves the environmental health of
the land, while promoting appro-
priate economic growth.
The Little Colorado River
Watershed Project Action Plan doc-
umented the partnership's multi-
objective management strategy.
Issues addressed included flood and
sedimentation mitigation, stream
form and function restoration,
water conservation and recreation
and tourism management.
Through community-based cooper-
ation and coordination, the pro-
-------
w
a
h
d
u
posed multi-objective management
process will increase public aware-
ness and education, networking
opportunities and information and
technology transfer.
Undertaking the Multi-
Objective Management
Approach
The Little Colorado River
Watershed Partnership works close-
ly with local communities to
address water quality concerns. The
partnership has developed a "Rapid
Resource Assessment" process
through which partnership resource
professionals are invited into local
communities to find solutions to
watershed problems. Cpmmunity
concerns have included under-
ground storage tank leakage on trib-
al lands, irrigation system rehabilita-
tion and managed wetlands con-
cepts that utilize city wastewater
effluent and provide bicycling and
bird-watching opportunities.
Through the multi-objective man-
agement approach, the Little
Colorado River Watershed
Partnership has also effectively
opened doors of communication
between two very diverse water-
shed communities. The Upper
Little Colorado River Watershed
Group was initiated by water users
addressing irrigation system effi-
ciency, sufficient water quantity for
agricultural uses and identification
of the primary system users in
Round Valley. Downstream lies
"Zuni Heaven," a sacred area for
The proposed multi-objective management
process will increase public awareness and
education, networking opportunities and
information and technology transfer
the Zuni Tribe and, at one time, a
very lush riparian area with willow,
cottonwood, cattails, turtles, and
waterfowl. The Zuni Pueblo hopes
to restore the Zuni Heaven wet-
lands so tribal elders can make their
journeys to this place and again col-
lect sacred plants and animals. The
Little Colorado River Watershed
Partnership has coordinated infor-
mation exchange issues and oppor-
tunities between these two groups.
Cooperation between the water-
shed partnership and the US Army
Corps of Engineers resulted in
broadening the scope of a
Reconnaissance Study, and the
Bureau of Reclamation has begun a
Data Inventory and Needs
Assessment study. The National
Park Service Rivers and Trails
Program provided leadership in
developing strategies to meet with
watershed stakeholders in focus
group workshops to define prob-
lems, opportunities and concerns in
the watershed. Over 25 issues
were identified by stakeholders that
address all eight partnership water-
shed goals. The focus group work-
shops also identified potential
strategies, partners and priority
actions.
The Little Colorado Resource
Conservation & Development Area
administers this program and is
assisted by the Navajo (AZ) and San
Francisco (NM) Soil and Water
Conservation Districts. It receives
financial support from the federal
government, State of Arizona,
Counties of Navajo and Apache and
Hopi Tribe. Partner organizations in
state government include the
Department of Game and Fish,
Department of Environmental
Quality, Department of Water
Resources, Navajo Nation Water
Resources Department and Zuni
Pueblo. Federal support comes from
the US Army Corps of Engineers,
EPA, USDA Forest Service, USDA
Natural Resources Conservation
Service, DO I National Park Service
arid DOI Bureau of Reclamation.
-------
MOltA-ii -i-niii liii'liil ' iiiiM.il
"if h
il it
W^smimm^'^''^
Steamboat Creek has historically
been a valuable water resource in
the West and provided early settlers
with water for agricultural uses.
The creek originates at the outlet of
Little Washoe Lake in the State of
Nevada and meanders for 17.5 miles
to the Truckee River. The
Steamboat Creek Watershed encom-
passes approximately 200 square
miles in Washoe County, Nevada.
Land in the watershed is currently
undergoing a transition from agri-
cultural to urban uses. The impacts
of land development, water diver-
sion, and bank erosion are increas-
ing nonpoint source pollution in
the watershed. The Nevada
Division of Environmental
Protection found excessive levels of
sediment, nitrogen, phosphorous
and trace metals in the Steamboat
Creek and included the creek on
the state's list of "target impaired
waters." The creek constitutes the
largest source of pollution to the
Truckee River.
The Steamboat Creek
Restoration Plan
With funding from a Clean Water
Act grant, the Washoe-Storey
Conservation District initiated the
Steamboat Creek Restoration Plan
to promote voluntary efforts to
improve the creek's water quality
and re-establish vegetation and
wildlife habitat. Completed in
1998, the plan provides recommen-
dations and designs for restoration
activities, coordinates stakeholder
efforts and attempts to increase
public awareness and involvement
in water quality concerns. The
plan focuses on encouraging volun-
tary implementation of both off-
stream and on-stream best manage-
ment practices (BMPs) by private
landowners, who own 98 percent
of the land in the watershed.
-------
w
a
h
The Small Ranch Program
Understanding the importance of
involving landowners in Steamboat
Creek restoration actions, the
University of Nevada Cooperative
Extension Service launched the
Small Ranch Program to assist in
BMP implementation on private
properties. The BMPs address ero-
sion control, animal waste manage-
ment, pasture and irrigation water
management, integrated pest man-
agement.and well and septic sys-
tem care and maintenance. BMP
projects are supported by program
classes, workshops and work parties.
The Washoe-Storey Conservation
District and the US Army Corps of
Engineers augment voluntary
restoration efforts in the watershed
by both designing some projects
and reviewing others. They are
also working with the University of
Nevada on a feasibility study for a
wetlands creation project. Through
this coordinated mix of public and
private activities, Steamboat Creek
stakeholders are striving to restore
and protect the watershed.
The plan focuses
on encouraging
voluntary
implementation of
both off-stream and
on-streani best
management
practices by private
landowners, who
own 98 percent of
the land in
the watershed
amiiffiaiH^^
Stearnbpat Creek Restoration Plan projects receive financial support from the
^federal, government and the State of Nevada. Partners in state government
!nctlj,d?tne Division of Environmental Protection and the University of Nevada
Cooperative Extension Service. Federal support comes from the US Army Corps
of Engineers, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, EPA and DO! Fish
and Wildlife Service.
-------
! SBHItt'SliBlllilittiillliM^I
Bi'iJilliBSHiiBiiifiiSfiiiEiiBI
,«. ;-,-;, ^jt&Jg^nfjJUlJlSlHIintfEIISSS^KSSt^SHi(SKHS§M^IUflHMSSHU
iS* iBafiSKUaSi: i - :i^^
!!|! ,! L ;:; :> !i|!s,:":i,.i -::, W«j v«-; i '^ ^ ji|*">:ui(l i I ti'iii k|f»t| it" |l^(|^^^l|sll^||^
v__ ^Ibfc..- IJ??5A^^_^^ oEj^^^^i^i i^^^^a^^^
Haskell Slough is an important fish
overwintering and rearing area for
Puget Sound chinook, coho, steel-
head and chum. The Haskell
Slough Watershed is a system of
streams and ponds connected to
the Skyhomish River. The system
is located near the City of Monroe
in the Tualco Valley in Snohomish
County, Washington.
In the 1930s, the system was diked
upstream, and years of intermittent
flooding and silt deposits isolated
The project has already restored salmon
production to Haskell Slough, after 50
- - 11 " : : '
years of limited or no production
the system from the Skyhomish
River. Human impacts, such as
development, roadway construction
and agricultural runoff, filled in the
channels between the system's
ponds. As a result, adult or juvenile
salmon washed into the system
during ;high water periods were
blocked from returning to the river
and the ocean. Trapped fish either
died out naturally or were eaten by
predators. Salmon production
almost completely disappeared
from Haskell Slough.
Reconnecting the
Stream System
In 1996, the NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service and Northwest
Chinook Recovery initiated the
HaskeE Slough Salmon Restoration
Project, a cooperative effort that
included private landowners and a
coalition of non-profit organizations
and state and federal agencies. The
project partnership also included the
Tulalip and Upper Skagit Tribes.
After-two years of planning and
design, the project began implemen-
tation of its strategy for the restora-
tion of Haskell Slough's salmon
habitat in 1998.
-------
a
h
u
Phase one of the project, channel
construction, was completed in
1998. Phase two work restored 3.5
miles of river bed by excavating
7,000 feet of stream channels con-
necting 11 existing large, ground-
water-fed ponds. The excavation,
completed in the spring of 1999,
connected the downstream part of
the system to the river and ensures
a year-round flow through the
entire Haskell Slough. Phase two
also involved installation of root-
wads, large woody debris, log
weirs and other structures to
enhance the salmon rearing habitat.
A simple monitoring system of fish
traps allows project participants to
track progress and the quantity of
fish in the system.
Reconstructing Fish Habitat
The restored channels will provide
overwintering and summer habitat
for juvenile salmon that enter vol-
untarily or due to flooding events.
Seepage of river water through the
existing dike and high quality
groundwater will supply the salmon
with clean water while the slough
environment will protect them from
The Salmon Restoration Project receives financial support from the federal gov-
ernment, State of Washington, Stilliguamish-Snohomish Fisheries Enhancement
Task Force, Northwest Chinook Recovery, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
and Daley Design, with local support through the Snohomish Conservation
District. State support for the project comes from the Department of Fish and
Wildlife and the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation. Federal part-
ners include the DOI Fish and Wildlife Service, USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service and NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service.
the elevated velocity and turbid
flows of the adjacent river.
The project has already restored
salmon production to Haskell
Slough, after 50 years of limited or
no production. In May 1999,
approximately 10,000 coho salmon
fry were counted swimming into
the slough. Adult salmon have
returned to the high water in the
lower portion of the system, and
juvenile salmonids have either
washed into the system or entered
it voluntarily. The project manager
predicts that, within four years,
"several thousand adult coho will
be produced by the system, as well
as increased numbers of chinook,
steelhead and searun cutthroat."
-------
-Jlj!llt:
The Teanaway River is a tributary
to the Yakima River and has histor-
ically been an essential habitat for
spring chinook, coho and steelhead.
The Teanaway River Watershed is
located in Washington State.
As natural runoff declines during
the summer and fall, the Teanaway
River's instream flows fall. These
declines, coupled with peak irriga-
tion demand, often dewater sec-
tions of the river and cause barriers
to the migration, spawning and
rearing of anadromous fish. As a
result, the Teanaway River's steel-
head and bull trout are listed as
endangered species. The river is
included in Washington State's List
of Impaired Waters for inadequate
stream flow and excessive tempera-
ture levels.
Bringing Back the Fish
In 1996, the Bureau of Reclamation
formed the Teanaway Study Group
with representatives from the
The property's
irrigation water
right has been
transferred to a
permanent instream
flow water right; this
transfer is the first
of its kind in the
State of Washington
Yakama Nation, Bonneville Power
Administration, Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife,
U.S. Department of Energy, USDA
Natural Resources Conservation
Service, local land owners and irri-
gation water rights users. The
group examined options to increase
instream flows, enhance water sup-
plies and conserve and restore
salmon habitat.
The Teanaway River Watershed
partners hope to boost instream
flows and restoration of salmonid
habitat through land acquisition. In
-------
w a
t e r s
h
e
d
success
1999, two properties were identi-
fied as essential habitats by the
Yakima River Basin Water and
Land Acquisition Program Working
Group, which includes representa-
tives from the Yakama Nation,
Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife, US Department of
Energy, US Fish and Wildlife
Service and local communities.
The group acquired one of these
properties; negotiations are under-
way to place a conservation ease-
ment on the second property that
will permanently restrict certain
future land uses. The restoration
plan for the acquired 40-acre parcel
of land involves access road clo-
sure, native vegetation plantings
and dike removal. The property's
irrigation water right has been
transferred to a permanent
instream flow water right; this
transfer is the first of its kind in the
State of Washington.
Innovative Water
Conservation Systems
To increase both instream flows
and the reliability of the water sup-
ply for irrigation purposes, the
Yakama Nation and Bonneville
Power Administration are con-
structing three water conservation
systems. The three entities have
over 600 acres of land, or approxi-
mately half of the irrigated lands in
the basin, and the accompanying
4000 acre-feet of water rights. The
systems will move all original irri-
gation diversion points on their
lands at least three miles down the
river, which will allow a transfer of
between 30 to 50 percent of the
original irrigation water right to an
instream flow water right. In
return for the "saved" water, the
project will provide local land and
water rights owners with a new
water conservation system, which
will give them a more reliable sup-
ply of irrigation water.
To alleviate the impact of excessive
temperatures in the watershed, the
Washington Department of Ecology
is preparing a temperature Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for
the Teanaway Basin and is forming
a workgroup of local, state and fed-
eral landowners and agencies.
Implementation measures will
focus on reducing sedimentation
and conserving riparian zones,
water and stream flows.
The Teanaway River Watershed ini-
tiatives receive financial support
from the federal government, State
of Washington and Bonneville
i Power Administration, with local
'support through thei Klickitat
County Conservation District. State
partners include the Department of
Fish and Wildlife, Department of
Ecology, Governor's Salmon
Recovery Funds Program, Yakama
Nation, Northwest Power Planning
Council, University of Montana and
Central Washington University.
Federal support comes from the
Department of Energy, USDA
Natural Resources Conservation
Service, EPA, DOl Fish and Wildlife
Service and DOl Bureau of
Reclamation.
-------
Stretching 50 miles from Mt. St.
Helena to San Francisco Bay, the
Napa River and its 47 tributaries
form a linear wilderness running
through the heart oE an intensely
farmed and partially urbanized val-
ley. The Napa River Watershed
also serves as a valuable water
resource for a local population of
over 120,000 people. The water-
shed encompasses 450 square miles
in Napa County, California.
The watershed serves
as a valuable water
resource for a local
population of over
120,000 people
The Napa River Watershed histori-
cally supported a dense riparian for-
est, significant wetland habitat and
spawning areas for fish such as
salmon and steelhead. The pres-
sures of urbanization, agriculture
and grazing have degraded the
watershed's habitats and drastically
increased the rates of erosion and
sedimentation. Since 1800, an esti-
mated 6,500 acres of historical val-
ley floor wetlands have been drain
or filled, 19,700 acres of the water-
shed are now under hardened
pavement or rooftops and another
26,000 acres have been developed
to intensive cultivated agriculture.
At the same time, much of the river
system has been altered by straight-
ening channels, hardening banks,
changing the flow, and constructing
levees. These alterations have
made the natural drainage system
insufficient to prevent extensive
flooding in the area. Since 1862,
more than 27 major floods have
plagued the Napa Valley, resulting in
significant loss of life and damage to
property. The 1995 flood damaged
227 businesses and residences at a
cost of over $100 million.
Restoring the River
In 1996, over 50 watershed stake-
holders, including federal, state and
-------
w a
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
regional agencies and local organi-
zations, formed a partnership to
address this periodic flooding. This
coalition hopes to accomplish this
task by reconnecting the Napa
River to its floodplain and creating
wetlands while maintaining fish
and wildlife habitat and retaining
natural river characteristics.
One of the major features of the
project is the planned purchase of
over 300 parcels of land (720 acres)
along a 6.9 mile stretch of the river.
These lands will include mudflats,
tidal marshland, seasonal wetlands,
riparian forest, and high-value
woodlands. Other project features
include dike removal, wetland and
marshplain creation, floodplain
restoration, channel modifications,
bank stabilization, and building
demolition.
Napa River Watershed
Owner's Manual
Watershed stakeholders have also
worked together to develop and
implement a management plan for
the watershed called the Napa
River Watershed Owner's Manual.
The management plan enabled cre-
ation of the Conservation
Regulations Community Task
Force, which prepared an ordinance
that requires an erosion control and
water protection plan for all devel-
opment on slopes exceeding five
percent. The plan also supports
the Napa Sustainable Wine
Growing Group. The group is
working to establish voluntary
farm management guidelines.
The Napa River Watershed restoration partnership receives financial support
from the federal government, State of California and Napa County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District, with local support through the Napa
County Resource Conservation District. State partners include the Department
of Fish and Game, Coastal Conservancy and State Lands Commission. Federal
support comes from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, USDA
Natural Resources Conservation Service, EPA and US Army Corps of Engineers.
Napa River Watershed
Towns and Streams
Location of Napa River
Watershed in Napa County
Napa County Resource Conservation District
Creek data layer torn USGS 1:100,000 DLG, UTM Zone 10.
-------
tJSrf.tWJte iW
£31^3
!»^^ in:! ill HJHii
'is* iisJ^^^
IHifilillllH ?
!: i,111 , !; ; ': T i: If * r* i
As a result of historical volcanic
activity, the Panoche-Silver Creek
Watershed in the State of California
contains some of the largest
deposits of selenium in the world.
Tlie watershed comprises approxi-
mately 300,000 acres and ranges in
elevation from 100 to 5,000 feet
above sea level. The Panoche-Silver
Creek Watershed is located in the
Coastal Range and San Joaquin
Valley, 35 miles west of Fresno,
California.
Unfortunately, the natural selenium
deposits and similar deposits of
boron and other salts contribute to
contamination of the watershed's
surface water. Development of the
lower watershed has virtually elim-
inated the creek channel and, as a
result, continual flooding and sedi-
ment transport has deposited the
selenium, boron and other salts
into the region's waters. This
flooding also increases already
excessive levels of streambed and
streambank erosion and sedimenta-
tion in the watershed. Flooding
damages the watershed's agricul-
tural land and industry, an impor-
tant component of the local, coun-
ty and state economies. A 1998
survey estimated damage costs to
be $370 per acre.
Controlling the Floods
In 1989, a joint effort between fed-
eral, state and local agencies,
landowners and water districts cre-
ated the Panoche-Silver Creek
Coordinated Resource Management
and Planning (CRMP) Program.
After completing a sedimentation
study of the 30,000-acre confluence
of the Panoche and Silver Creeks,
By concentrating
on flood, erosion
and sedimentation
concerns, partners in
the Panoche-Silver
Creek Watershed
hope to improve
water quality and
wildlife habitat
program partners developed a
watershed management plan to
address flood and erosion control
and sediment transport.
While most program initiatives are
either in the planning phase or
underway, some projects have been
completed. For instance, in two
"Clinic Programs," watershed stake-
holders worked with the California
State University Fresno School of
Agricultural Sciences and
Technology to construct a riparian
area along Panoche Creek. A gaug-
ing station was also installed on
Panoche Creek to support monitor-
-------
w a
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
sue
c
ess
ing and assessment aspects of the
CRMP program.
Current projects include the instal-
lation of riparian filter strips, reveg-
etation, revetment and stabilization
of the channel bed. Additionally,
an erosion control structure is being
developed to reduce the flow and
velocity of runoff. A project is also
taking an inventory of the regional
population of tamarisks, an invasive
species of salt cedar, as a first step
toward the development of an erad-
ication program.
Future CRMP Projects
Future actions include restoring
riparian pastures and corridors,
revegetating filtration zones and
constructing an erosion control
structure in the Panoche drainage
for flood control purposes. CRMP
program partners will also support
the activities of another Panoche-
Silver Creek Watershed partner-
ship, the Central Valley Project.
The Central Valley Project and the
Bureau of Land Management have
designated the watershed as an
Improvement Area and plan to pur-
chase a 9-mile-long, 1-mile-wide
corridor for land retirement and
flood control.
By concentrating on flood, erosion
and sedimentation concerns, part-
ners in the Panoche-Silver Creek
Watershed hope to improve water
quality and wildlife habitat. Those
improvements, in turn, will benefit
the regional economy and all of the
watershed's inhabitants.
State anQ.federal PaMfieFT
The Panoche-Silver Creek CRMP program receives financial support from the
federal government, State of California, City of Mendota, Central Valley Project,
Westside Resource Conservation District and Silver Creek Drainage District.
Partners in state government include the Department of Water Resources,
Department of Transportation, Regional Water Quality Control Board,
Department of Fish and Game, University of California Cooperative Extension
Service, CALFED Bay-Delta Program and California State University Fresno
School of Agricultural Sciences and Technology. Federal support comes from
the EPA, DOI Geological Survey, DOI Bureau of Land Management, DOI Bureau -
of Reclamation and USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.
-------
uana
The Tijuana River Watershed is a
1,735 square mile intertidal coastal
estuary located on the international
border between the United States
and Mexico, with one-quarter of
the land contained in San Diego
County, California. Extreme
changes in streamflow make the
Tijuana Estuary one of the nation's
most variable estuaries and an
important part of the National
Estuarine Research Reserve System.
With a multitude of habitats includ-
ing sand dunes and beaches, open
tidal channels and mudflats, sand
marshes and fresh-brackish marsh-
es, the Tijuana Estuary has approxi-
mately 380 species of birds and at
least 29 species of fish. Six species
of birds, several invertebrate species
and one plant are endangered.
Land in the estuary is mainly used
for agricultural, military and recre-
ational purposes. For years, agricul-
tural and military activities degraded
the region by filling and diking sig-
nificant stretches of salt marsh.
Throughout the estuary, human dis-
turbances have modified and endan-
gered critical habitats, most often by
increasing sedimentation.
Organizing to Save
Critical Habitats
For over 15 years, scientists at the
Pacific Estuarine Research
Laboratory unit at the San Diego
State University worked in conjunc-
tion with NOAA to analyze the
watershed and human impacts on
the estuary. Research has also been
conducted by scientists associated
with the University of California
The Tijuana River
Watershed is a
1,735 square mile
intertidal coastal
estuary located on
the international
border between the
United States
and Mexico
Scripps Institute of Oceanography.
Due to the results of these studies,
a broad regional stakeholder part-
nership was formed which devoted
its efforts to the restoration and
expansion of key estuarine habitats.
This partnership, the Southern
California Wetlands Recovery
Project, is a coalition of 14 state and
federal agencies and numerous local
organizations.
Habitat Reconstruction
The partnership initiated a model
marsh project to expand wetland
-------
w
a
h
d
u
habitat and restore tidal marsh
through excavation, revegetation
and natural species colonization.
The first phase of this project,
completed in 1997, connected two
areas of tidal saltmarsh, created
two acres of new saltmarsh and
channel habitat and enhanced cir-
culation to approximately 200 acres
of the estuary's north arm.
The Southwest Wetlands
Interpretive Association worked
with watershed stakeholders to
complete the second phase of the
model marsh project: excavation of
135,000 cubic yards of fill material
from a former saltmarsh, recon-
struction of a tidal marsh plain and
creation of a network of tidal chan-
nels. Future phases of the project
will establish coastal sage shrub
habitat, replenish beach habitat and
use excavated material to recontour
an abandoned gravel quarry.
Several other efforts support
restoration activities and enhance
stewardship of the watershed's
resources. Interpretive signs have
been placed on four miles of trails
to increase public education and
awareness. Bilingual nature classes,
site visits and site-based training for
teachers are part of a broad initia-
tive to heighten public participation.
Estuarine stakeholders hope to use
these education and outreach pro-
grams to sustain the restoration and
preservation activities undertaken
throughout the estuary.
State and Federal Part tiers
?The Tijuana River National Estuarine
Research Reserve Model Marsh
Project receives financial assistance
from the federal cjovernment, State
* of California, California Association
" " f «i, i *~' ; »
of Resource Conservation Districts_
-and South Coast Resource
5jGohservatiori"anc! Development """
Area;. State partners include the
"Department of Fish and Came,
California EPA, Coastal Conservancy,
^State Coastal Commission, State
Resources Agency, State Lands
Commission, State Water Resources
^Control Board4 San Diego State
Qniver^ity aoo" Unlvejs7iy"of """
California. Federal support comes
from the USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service, US Army
Corps of Engineers, EPA, DOI Fish
and Wildlife Service cind NlOAA
National Ocean Service.
-------
! iijiiiiisiiir'iiiiiiiiii'iiiiijiii!;j!:;n::;i'ii!nii''ii||"i!j';'i !in»ii!i ai'pm niiiiijinsB!!1] ,,x -1;'
''' : ' i| ''*'"',T 'i!| '7 ;"''i, '"' "-"", ':!"""", '
i:iiiyi!iiii!!iiiiiiiiN;iiiiiiii iiiiiiiuliiiiisiliils iiJ1,,1!!!!!!11)!!1"1!!'!;!
li 4iil< s il': ! 'i»ii; !'| |i>L;,:: uit- v^
^ 11""'11'11"111'"
The Duck Creek Watershed is a
Clean Water Action Plan National
Showcase Watershed. Located
within the limits of the City and
Borough of Juneau, Alaska in the
MendenhaE Valley, the watershed
encompasses 4,000 acres of tidal
marsh and drains approximately
1080 acres, or 1.7 square miles.
Duck Creek itself is a small,
anadromous fish stream over 3
miles in length with two tributar-
ies, East Fork and El Camino.
The watershed is a valuable
resource for the City of Juneau. It
is used for recreation and aquatic
education, provides open space and
serves an important role in
stormwater and flood control. As a
result of its warm groundwater and
extensive pond habitat, Duck
Creek supports a large overwinter-
ing population of coho salmon
juveniles which migrate each fall
from the nearby Mendenhall estu-
arine wetlands.
Urban development has removed
most of the woody debris that pro-
vides natural structural diversity
and has led to a wider, shallower
and slower stream. The Alaska
Department of Environmental
Conservation lists Duck Creek as
impaired because of urban runoff,
water quality limitations and habi-
tat modifications resulting from
inadequate stewardship.
Cooperation in Alaska
In 1993, the Duck Creek Advisory
Group (DCAG) formed to coordi-
nate water quality and anadromous
fish habitat restoration activities.
Primarily through monthly meet-
ings and a newsletter, the group
organizes the efforts of 25 organi-
zations, including the City and
Borough of Juneau, state and feder-
al agencies, private businesses, con-
servation organizations and home-
owners. Using a watershed
approach focused on enforcement,
management and restoration,
DCAG completed a comprehensive
management plan and leads restora-
-------
w a
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
tion projects and pollution control
activities throughout the water-
shed. A pilot study was conducted
to determine the feasibility of
restoring salmon spawning habitat
by reconfiguring the stream chan-
nel, removing sediment and
increasing dissolved oxygen levels.
The Duck Creek Watershed stake-
holders employ innovative tech-
niques in supporting the restora-
tion of water quality and fish habi-
tat. A two-acre dredge pond from
the 1940s had become a source of
poor water quality and contributed
to the high mortality of overwin-
tering coho salmon. Near the East
Fork of Duck Creek, a stormwater
drainage system generated 20,000
cubic yards of fill material requir-
ing disposal. A cooperative part-
nership between the City and
Borough of Juneau, two area con-
struction firms, a local church and
the National Marine Fisheries
Service used the fill material from
the drainage system to convert the
pond into a stormwater treatment
marsh. The wetland's fill material
caps the source of iron-rich ground-
water, while the aquatic plants fil-
ter suspended sediment and iron
particles from the water.
In other projects, stream crossings
are being improved and experimen-
tal "snow fences," designed to limit
snow and road sand sedimentation,
are being installed. The Southeast
Alaska Guidance Association has
helped complete a number of
streambank revegetation and chan-
nel modification projects, including
willow stakes and grass plantings.
Several important restoration proj-
ects have been completed with
assistance from the US Fish and
Wildlife Service's Partners for
Wildlife Program.
The Duck Creek Advisory Group
received Coastal America's 1999
National Partnership Award in
This community-based project receives financial support from the federal gov-
ernment, State of Alaska, City and Borough of Juneau, Southeast Conference
Resource Conservation and Development Area and Mendenhall Watershed
Partnership. State partners include the Department of Environmental
Conservation, Department of Fish and Game, Department of Natural Resources,
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities and Governor's Office.
Federal support comes from the US Army Corps of Engineers, DOI Fish and
Wildlife Service, DOI Geological Survey, Department of Transportation, EPA,
USDA Forest Service, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service and NOAA
National Marine Fisheries Service.
recognition of its success in devel-
oping cooperative partnerships for
coastal resource restoration. The
endorsement helped obtain techni-
cal and financial assistance from
the US Army Corps of Engineers
for management plan projects.
The Duck Creek
Advisory Group
formed to coordinate
water quality and
anadromous fish
habitat restoration
activities and
organized the efforts
of 25 organizations
"S
"" " " "
>'*-_"T'srBr ~^^nX'>'
feM'
-------
The Ko'olaupoko Region in Hawaii
reaches from the Ko'olau moun-
tains to the reefs of Kane'ohe,
Kailua and Waimanalo Bays and
includes eleven watersheds.
Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH)
primary landholdings on O'ahu are
within the region. They include
the 187 acre Waikane Valley, 1,045
acre Marine Corps Training Area-
Bellows (MCTAB) in Waimanalo
and 2,951 acre Mokapu penisula,
which includes a 482-acre Nu'upia
Ponds wetland complex within the
Mokapu Central Drainage Basin.
Population growth and develop-
ment throughout the Ko'olaupoko
Region has increased erosion and
polluted stormwater runoff.
Concern about these nonpoint
source pollution issues led to the
inclusion of regional waterbodies,
such as the Waimanalo stream, in
the State of Hawaii's List of
Impaired Waters, which are subject
to a Total Maximum Daily Load
(TMDL) study. The Ko'olaupoko
Region has also been designated as
Priority 1 for watershed restoration
in the state's Unified Watershed
Assessment.
Nonpoint Source Pollution
Mitigation on the
Mokapu Peninsula
Until the mid-1990s, the focus of
MCBH's collaborative community
involvement and interagency part-
nership efforts was on projects to
improve water quality, water circu-
lation and endangered waterbird
habitat within the confines of the
Nu'upia Ponds wetland complex.
Resource management plans devel-
oped for Nu'upia Ponds in 1997 and
Mokapu Peninsula in 1998 expand-
ed the resource management strate-
gy to comprise the entire
Ko'olaupoko Region. The 1998
MCBH Mokapu Manual for
Watershed Health and Water
Quality provided technical guide-
lines for such activities as riparian
habitat restoration, community-
based water quality monitoring and
fluvial geomorphology.
Several projects along the Mokapu
Central Drainage Channel are being
implemented to alleviate nonpoint
source pollution and habitat prob-
lems. For instance, a drainage spill-
way next to a maintenance com-
pound has been redesigned to aug-
ment wetland creation while also
mitigating nonpoint source pollu-
tion, low groundwater table, runoff
and flooding problems. A 1999
streamside barracks complex project
includes native landscaping and con-
struction of a 3,200 square meter
sediment retention basin designed
to attract native waterbirds while
implementing Best Management
Practices (BMPs) for stormwater
management. A Golf Course Pond
Maintenance Manual addresses resi-
dent endangered waterbird needs in
three half-acre ponds.
-------
w a
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
u
c
c
e
s
s
Community Involvement
and Participation
Water quality and habitat restora-
tion projects in the Ko'olaupoko
Region benefit from cooperation
and coordination among federal,
state and local partners. In the past
year alone, over 700 volunteers
have participated in 15 watershed
service projects sponsored by
MCBH. As a result, counts of the
resident population of endangered
Hawaiian stilt in the ponds are more
than double what they were 20
years ago. Also, more than 300
individuals from schools and com-
munity organizations have taken
"watershed tours." The grass-roots
participation process enhances
stewardship and the sustainability
of the watershed restoration projects.
One innovative project especially
highlighted the positive effects of
community-based watershed
restoration. In this project, water-
shed partners installed several
native plant plots and used fluvial
geomorphology techniques to com-
bat erosion of approximately
25,000 square feet of riparian
streambank area on Mokapu and in
MCTAB. The project sponsored a
graduate-level University of Hawaii
course on Watershed Education in
which 16 Department of Education
teachers at the Mokapu and Aikahi
elementary schools received basic
training in watershed management
science. The teachers now satisfy
core teaching requirements by
involving their students in the
Pyramid Rock
Pacific Ocean
Hate Koa
Beach
Nu'upia
Basin
Ceo Insight, 1SS8 In
Mokapu Watershed Health
nil Water 00^1% Manual
Mokapu
Central
Drainage
Basin
Kailua Bay
Mokapu Central Watershed
In the past year
alone, over 700
volunteers have
participated in IS
watershed service
projects sponsored
by Marine Corps
Base Hawaii
implementation of special lesson
plans assisting MCBH in the
design, planting and maintenance
of riparian native plant gardens.
Such projects strengthen communi-
ty awareness and participation in
watershed restoration and lay the
foundation for future restoration
and protection actions in the entire
Ko'olaupoko Region of watersheds.
Photos courtesy of Diane Drigot
' The watershed restoration projects
_ receive financial support from the
federal government and the State of
Hawaii. Partner organizations in
state government include the
Department of Education,
Department of Land and Natural
Resources and University of Hawaii
Federal partners include the^USDA
Natural Resources Conservation
Service, EPA, US Marine Corps, US
Ail Force, US Army National Guard
and US Army Corps of Engineers.
-------
-------
www.cleanwater.gov
-------
------- |