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 naturalized—they
 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 tons—a 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
 riffles—instream structures that
 reduce water velocity and create
 slackwater areas—and bendway
 weirs—upstream-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

-------

-------