EPA-905/9-77-001
                          WASHINGTON  COUNTY  PROJECT
                                 (WORK PLAN)
     DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A SEDIMENT CONTROL ORDINANCE OR OTHER
     REGULATORY MECHANISM:   INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS NECESSARY FOR IMPLE-
     MENTATION OF CONTROL METHODOLOGY ON URBAN AND RURAL LANDS
                                 Prepared By

                      Thomas  C. Daniel - Project Director
                      Ralph H. Klassy - Project Specialist
                                     For

                   U,S,  ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY

                        Office of Great Lakes Coordinator
                            230 South Dearborn Street
                             Chicago, Illinois 60604
Ralph G.  Christensen                                         Ralph V. Nordstrom
Section 108(a) Program                                       Project Officer
                        Under U.S. EPA Grant No. G005139

                                      To

       WISCONSIN  BOARD  OF SOIL  AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS

-------
AGEMC?

-------
                      TABLE OF CONTENTS




TABLE OF CONTENTS 	

                                        	       iii
LIST OF TABLES  	

                                          	        iv
LIST OF FIGURES 	

SUMMARY OF PLANNING PHASE  	

                                          	         1
A.   INTRODUCTION   	

                                                   ...         6
B.   PROGRAM  ORGANIZATION   	

                                                   ...        9
C.   OBJECTIVES   	

D.   WASHINGTON  COUNTY WORK PLAN 	

     1.   Demonstrating Improvements in Water 	        ^

         Quality	    ...        10
          Watershed selection_ . .  •	        ^        20
          Location of monitoring sites 	            3Q

                                               '  '  '
                         	                     q q
                          monitoring equipment 	        ^

          Monitoring program .  .  •	'.'.'.        35
          Parameters to be measured	     ^        37
          Methods of analysis	;  •  •	        „.,
          Data analysis, borage and retrieval .  .  . .  .        37

          Bibliography  	

      2   Development of a  Planning and  Management

         Program  for Sediment  Control   	


      3.  Personnel, Technical  and  Financial	        ^

         Requirements   .  •  •  •  •  	

      4  Education and Information Program 	        ^
           Level of activity needed .  .  .  •  •  •  •  •  •
           General description  of proposed work .  .  .  •          ^

           Detailed operation 	


      5.  Application of Results to Other Areas .  .  .  -  •        51


  E.  TIME FRAME AND CONTRACTUAL ARRANGEMENTS 	        53

                                        	        56
  F.  SUMMARY 	
                                                                r o
  G.  BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION   	

                                               	       68
  H.   BUDGET   	
                                ill

-------
                      LIST OF TABLES


Table No.
                                                      Page No,

    1     Explanation of the abbreviations of             2
          agencies and organizations identified
          in the text

    2     Identification of roles  and responsi-           8
          bilities of those individuals  and
          organizations  identified in the  program
          management  outline  (Fig.  1)

    3      Distribution of the  agricultural land         12
          in the  Great Lakes Drainage Basin (U  S  )
          according to various agricultural
          enterprise  systems

    4      Conservation needs inventory and  estimated     32
          cost of  land treatment practices  in the
          bermantown  and  Kewaskum Watersheds

    5      Water quality parameters to be evaluated       36

    6      Examples of  target clientele and               Lf8
         respective audience groups
Example of a teaching and activity outline
                                                        50
                           iv

-------
                      LIST OF FIGURES


       *T                                               Page No.
Figure No.
                                   •    •                    7
    1      Program management organization.

    2      Map of Washington County,  Wisconsin,           13
           showing its geographical location
           and selected project sites in the
           Great Lakes Drainage Basin.

    3      Details of the Village of Germantown           15
           showing:  1. proximity to large
           metropolitan areas and major rivers
           draining into Lake Michigan, 2. region
           in the village identified as developing
           area.

    M.      Zoning restriction of the developing           16
           area serviced by the sanitary  sewer
           system.

    5      Details of the sanitary sewer  master_          16
           plan, identifying within  the developing
           area the locations most likely to undergo
           high density development  as a^result
           of sanitary sewer services being provided.

     6      Details of developing area, specifically       18
           identifying sites where plats  have  been
           approved for tKe  1975 construction  season
           and  proposed sites  for  future  development.

     7      Delineation of urbanizing watersheds.          18

     8      Kewaskum Watershed  depicting prime             19
           agricultural  land,  tributaries of
           Kewaskum Creek and  proximity to  the
           Village of Kewaskum.

     9     Portions of Jefferson Park and Industrial       22
           Park West  (shaded)  scheduled  for
            immediate  development.

    10     Developing portion of Jefferson  Park           23
            showing monitoring sites in relation_
            to treated and nontreated areas  within
            Legend Acres and Old Farm.

    11      Developing portion of Industrial Park          25
            West showing treate'd and nontreated
            areas to be monitored.

-------
Figure No.                                               _    _T
  6                                                     Page No.


   12       Kewaskum Watershed showing location           27
            (shaded) of K-North and K-South
            Subwatersheds.

   13       Kewaskum Subwatershed (K-North) showing       28
            location of monitoring sites.

   14       Kewaskum Subwatershed (K-South) showing       29
            location of monitoring sites.

   15       Contractual arrangements.                     5H

   16       Time schedule of activities.                   55
                               vi

-------
                 Summary of Planning Phase

     Initial contacts regarding the Washington County
Project were made in early 1973.   For the balance of that
year, through a series of meetings between local representa-
tives, state and federal agency personnel, and personnel of
the University of Wisconsin, ideas for a project to demonstrate
the development of a regulatory mechanism for sediment control
in Washington County, Wisconsin, were formulated and later in
the year a specific project proposal was developed under the
leadership of Dr. T. C. Daniel of the Department of Soil
Science of the University of Wisconsin.
     The project proposal was submitted to the Environmental
Protection Agency on February 28, 1974, and a grant for the
development of a project work plan was awarded on May 24,
1974.
     Following the award and acceptance of the grant, a small
project staff was assembled to coordinate the planning effort.
A good deal of time was spent initially in developing the
administrative relationships necessary for the proposed
interdisciplinary and  interagency project.  It was agreed
that the University of Wisconsin-Extension would serve as the
administering agency for the grantee—the State Board of Soil
and Water Conservation Districts.  Contractual arrangements
with cooperating agencies were to be handled by University of
Wisconsin-Extension.
     Meetings were held with officials of the Village of
Germantown  to plan for the  monitoring of  areas being developed
to meet growing  urban  needs.  Three sites in the village—one
an industrial park and two  scheduled for  subdivison develop-
ment—were  identified  as  sites  for  study  of  sediment problems
arising from urbanization.
      To study  sediment problems  on  rural  lands, two predomi-
nantly agricultural  watersheds  within  the Great  Lakes Basin
portion of  Washington  County were  suggested  to  the project
staff by the Washington  County  Board of  Soil  and Water
Conservation District  Supervisors.   Both  watersheds were
                              VII

-------
 reviewed by the  project  staff.   Characteristics  such  as  soils,
 physiography,  potentials for  monitoring,  and  needs  for land
 treatment were carefully analyzed  and  recommendations submitted
 to  the  District  Supervisors.  Following field hearings and
 their own review,  the  supervisors  selected the Kewaskum  Creek
 Watershed for  study.
     Selection of  monitoring  sites  in  both the agricultural
 and urban watersheds was  made in concert  by representatives
 of  the  U.S.  Geological Survey, the  Wisconsin  Department  of
 Natural Resources  and the University of Wisconsin.  Plans
 for the installation of  land treatment measures  in the agri-
 cultural  watersheds were  developed  through a  contractual
 arrangement  with the U.S. Soil Conservation Service.   Land
 treatment  plans for the urbanizing  watershed  were developed
 by  project  staff,  representatives of the  Village of German-
 town and  individuals involved in the planned  subdivisions.
     Critical  to the success of the proposed  project was
 putting together a team of social scientists  to handle the
 development  of a regulatory mechanism for sediment control.
 Leading social scientists at the University were contacted
 and a plan for the project developed.  Throughout the  project
 this group will work closely with selected local advisors
 and with appropriate state,  federal and university personnel.
     The project staff has,  through the planning period, done
much of the writing of the work plan although each section
 of the plan has been widely circulated to appropriate  cooper-
ating agencies and individuals for review and comment.  This
 extensive review process has been very time-consuming but it
 is felt by the project staff that this approach is essential
to insure the success of this type of a cooperative, inter-
disciplinary approach to problem solving.
                            viil

-------
                     A.   INTRODUCTION

     The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of
1972 (P.L. 92-500) deal  with the protection and improvement
of the quality of the nation's lakes and streams.   The leg-
islation is specific with respect to the types of pollution
to be investigated, the  mechanisms and time frame to be used
and the agency(ies) having primary responsibility for accom-
plishing the control aspects of the law.  In the past, the
US-EPA (see Table 1 for  abbreviations used throughout the
text) has directed efforts towards the control of point
sources of pollutions and guidelines are being developed with
respect to the quality of effluent discharge from industry,
municipal treatment plants and feedlots.  Additionally, the
US-EPA is focusing attention on nonpoint or diffuse sources
of pollution such as agricultural and urban runoff.  Because
of their diffuse character,  these pollutional sources are
more difficult to quantify and define.  Undoubtedly, control-
ling these pollutional sources is complicated by the inter-
related complexities and inherent variability in the systems
and the inexperience and lack of background information
required to cope with the problem.  However, control of non-
point sources is of great importance in maintaining the
quality of surface waters, and methods for minimizing their
discharge must be developed through strong control measures.
     Erosion and subsequent sedimentation are classic
examples of pollution arising from a diffuse source.  Nation-
ally, sediment is--by volume—the single largest pollutant
of the nation's surface  waters.  Aside from the objection of
sediment from an aesthetic standpoint, deposition of sediment
in surface waters can cause a degradation in water quality
resulting from increases in suspended and bed load sediment,
total dissolved solids and oxygen demand.  Eutrophying and
other components of the  eroded material--such as readily
available ortho-phosphate, soluble nitrogen and pesticides,

-------
    Table 1.  Explanation of the abbreviations of agencies
              and organizations identified in the text
Abbreviations
         Agencies and organizations
     BSWCD
     NACD
     SEWRPC

     USDA-ARS

     USDA-ASCS


     USDA-SCS

     US-EPA

     USGS
     UWEX
     UW-MAD
     UW-SNR

     UW-Soil Sci

     UW-WRC

     WCSWCD

     WDA
     WDNR
     WGNHS
Board of Soil and Water Conservation Districts
National Association of Conservation Districts
Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning
   Commission
United States Department of Agriculture -
   Agricultural Research Service
United States Department of Agriculture -
   Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation
   Service
United States Department of Agriculture -
   Soil Conservation Service
United States - Environmental Protection
   Agency
United States Geological Survey
University of Wisconsin-Extension
University of Wisconsin-Madison
University of Wisconsin - School of Natural
   Resources
University of Wisconsin - Department of Soil
   Science
University of Wisconsin - Water Resources
   Center
Washington County Soil and Water Conservation
   District
Wisconsin Department of Agriculture
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Wisconsin Geological and Natural History
   Survey

-------
etc.--are also released as a result of interaction between
eroded soil particles and surface waters.   Annually,  dredging
costs to keep the nation's streams and harbors open are con-
servatively estimated at $25 million.   Although erosion and
sedimentation are natural geological processes which cannot
be eliminated completely, man's activities can, and have,
greatly accelerated the process.  The rates of soil loss are
directly related to types of land use.  Sediment, with its
deleterious effect on water quality, has been identified as
the major pollution problem in seven of the seventeen chapters
describing the effect of different land use categories iden-
tified as potential sources of loading to the Great Lakes by
a Reference Group of the U.S.-Canada International Joint
Commission (1).  This comprehensive review of land use in
relation to pollutional loading into the surface waters of
the Great Lakes clearly identifies sediment as a major pol-
lutant and calls for new and innovative programs for its
control and prevention.
     The primary source of  sediments polluting surface waters
is agricultural and other rural land lacking  adequate conser-
vation practices.  However, a  second major source of sediment
is land undergoing changing land  use patterns  as exemplified
by areas of rapid urbanization (construction  sites).  This
source comprises a major hazard because it is  largely un-
abated due to  lack of application of conservation practices.
Rates of erosion from urbanizing  areas may exceed those  from
agricultural  lands by factors  from 100:1  to  200:1.   Sediment
loading  into  surface waters will  increase with time  due  to
the  increased  demand for  agricultural  production  involving
land which formerly  had been  idle and  to  continual urbaniza-
tion and other development  of  previously  rural lands.   The
land being newly brought  into  agricultural production  is
likely  to  be  critical when  evaluated  in terms of its poten-
tial erosional hazard  either  because  of the  slope  or shallow-
ness of the  soil.
      Historically,  the  problem of soil loss  has  been viewed
strictly as  a rural  problem controlled only  for  the  economic

-------
 benefit of the  landowners.   Presently,  and  to  a  greater  degree
 in  the  future,  deterioration in  water quality  arising  from  sedi-
 ment deposition either from rural or urban  areas must  be
 viewed  in light of the general public's right  to and desire
 for high quality surface water,  and included in  this evalua-
 tion must be the downstream cost and effect of sediment  depo-
 sition.
      Prior investigations and experience by agencies such as
 the USDA-SCS and USDA-ARS have led to the development  of an
 erosion control technology which,  if fully  implemented,  will
 dramatically reduce  soil loss from unprotected cropland  and
 construction site areas.   The major obstacle has  been  an in-
 ability to develop and implement programs which  provide  a
 uniformly high  degree  of land application of conservation
 practices.   Prior experience  has shown  that  the  voluntary
 and incentive mechanisms  have been successful  to  a point;
 however,  these  programs  do  not result in  a uniformly high
 degree  of implementation  of land practices,  especially in the
 major problem areas.   Erosion can  be controlled;  the problem
 is  development  of implementation methodologies to correct the
 inadequacies of a  strictly  voluntary-incentive program.
 Clearly the need  exists for developing  alternative mechanisms
 for the implementation of conservation  practices, with seri-
 ous consideration  being given to some form or combination of
 a regulatory approach.
     Solving the basic problems  of  implementation of conser-
 vation practices necessitates investigating the social,
 economic, legal,  and political aspects  of the issue as well
 as the technical components.  Answers to these questions can
 only be provided by multi-agency and interdisciplinary pro-
 grams devoted to problem-oriented research and demonstration.
 It is only through this mechanism that a forum of exchange
between those affected by regulatory programs and the agen-
cies (federal, state, local) required to develop and admin-
ister such programs that realistic guidelines and methods of
implementation can be developed.

-------
     The remaining portion of the report consists of:
a.  demonstrating that the essential interdisciplinary  and
interagency program components are incorporated and directed
toward solving the basic problem of erosion and sediment
control in a results-oriented approach, b.  detailing the
objectives of the program, and c. describing mechanisms for
accomplishing specific objectives.

-------
                  B.   PROGRAM ORGANIZATION

      In  order  for a  project  of this  size  and  complexity to
 function properly, the roles  of individuals,  committees  and
 agencies.involved must be  identified and  described  as  clearly
 as  possible.   Figure  1 identifies the participants  and out-
 lines a  structure showing  the interrelationships between pro-
 gram components.   The roles and responsibilities of agencies
 in  the implementation of the  program objectives are shown in
 Table 2.
     The  necessity for developing and maintaining local  in-
 volvement and  participation throughout the program  is  essen-
 tial.  Local participation must  involve rural and urban
 interests, including participation of citizens and the local
 units of  government (county,  city and  village), in  such a
manner that input from these  diverse  interest groups is  con-
tinually  sought and obtained.  The WCSWCD supervisors have
demonstrated their ability to accept a leadership role in
developing local involvement through  several meetings involv-
ing local citizens, civic organizations, the Washington
County Board,  and the Germantown Village Board.   As a result
of these meetings, strong local support and advice have been
obtained and have played  an important role in the  formula-
tion of the major concepts on which this project is based.

-------
                                                      BSMCD
                                         Members

                                  M. Stellrecht  (Chran)
                                  B. Berg
                                  T. Lorbetske
                                  C. Much
                                  E. Ott
                                  f. Sam
                                  R. Scullion
                                 Advisors

                            J. Hytr-y   (USDA-SCS)
                            J. Beale  (WDNR)
                            M. Beatty  (UWEX)
                            L. Engelbert  (UW-MAD)
                            K. Kreul  (USDA-ASCS)
                            A. Kurtz  (WDA)
    (Provides recommendations, advice and assistance.)
                EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
G. Chesters  (Chran)(UW-WRC)
J. Hytry  (USDA-SCS)
M. Beatty (UWEX)
T. Daniel (UW-Soil Soi)
V. Barnwell  (USGS)
W. Horvath  (NACD)
J. Konrad (WDNR)
C. Runge (UW-MAD)
W. McElwee  (SEWRPC)
M. Ostrom  (WGNHS}
E. Ott  (BSWCD)
H. Ryan  (WCSWCD)
E. Savage  (BSWCD)
R. Sohmahl  (WCSWCD)
S. Smith (UW-SNR)
   LOCAL COORDINATOR

        H.  Ryan
                TECHNICAL COORDINATOR

                      T. Daniel
              (Principal Investigator)
                          Water Quality
                          Interpretation
    P.  McGuire
   (J.  Peterson)
                                                 TECHNICAL  COMMITTEE


                                            Chairpersons of Work Units
                      County
                    Activities

                       H. Ryan

                    (D.  Stoffel)
                                      Members

                                 R. Schmahl  (Chran)
                                 N. MttBann
                                 W. Heppe
                                 J. Kohl
                                 H. Schwulst
Education and
 Information
                       WCSWCD

                           Project Advisors

                       D. Wilson  (UWEX)
                       D. Kurer  (USDA-SCS)
                       V. Kauth  (Germantown)
                       M. Thompson  (Kewaskum)
                                      F1g.  1     Program  organization

-------
                   Table 2.    Identification  of  roles  and  responsibilities  of  those  individuals  and
                              organizations identified in  the  program  management  outline.   (Fig.  1).
 Organization,
 agency,  or
 individual
 Rationale  for  incorporating
 or  creating  those agencies,
 organizations, or individual
                                                   Responsibility toward  implementation
                                                   of obj ectives
 BSWCD
                        Lengthy history and involvement
                        in  erosion  control programs.
                        Primarily responsible for
                        coordinating  erosion control
                        programs throughout the state
                                                  Serves as prime contractors with overall
                                                  responsibilities for implementation
                                                  of the work plan
                                                  Facilitates the implementation of the
                                                  findings throughout the state and region
 Executive
   Committee
Provides forum of exchange
between agencies , organizations
and individuals affected by
program
                                                  Provides recommendations on major policy
                                                  matters to the prime contractors (State Board)
                                                  Provides advice and assistance to the Technical
                                                  Coordinator in facilitating the day to day operation
 Technical
   Coordinator
Provides overall coordination
                                                  Is responsible for the day to day operation of
                                                  the work plan
                                                  Assists the Executive Committee in formulating
                                                  recommendations
                                                  Facilitates information flow and acts in a liaison
                                                  capacity between project personnel
                                                  Works closely with the Washington County SWCD
                                                  Supervisor through the Local Coordinator
                                                  Serves as chairperson to the Technical Committee
Local
  Coordinator
Provides local identity and input
toward implementation of objectives
                                                  Maintains local support of proj ect through
                                                  the Washington County SWCD Supervisors
                                                  Provides local input into the implementation
                                                  of the work plan at all levels
                                                  Is responsbile for the day to day operations
                                                  of the project at the local level
                                                  Serves as local contact person through which all
                                                  aspects of the proj ect at the local level
                                                  must be channelled
                                                  Acts in a liaison capacity between local interest
                                                  and project personnel
Technical
  Committee
Assures a mechanism for facilitating
coordination of efforts between the
five basic work units
                                                  Assists the Technical  Coordinator in the  day  to
                                                  day implementation of work plan
                                                  Coordinates activities between units
                                                  Is responsible for report preparation on a quarterly
                                                  basis
                                                  Members serve as chairpersons of the respective
                                                  work units
Work units:
  Monitoring
  Land treatment
  Ordinance  and
    institutional
  Educational
  Water quality
Provides a mechanism for implementing
work unit activities
                                                  Chairperson serves on the Technical Committee
                                                  Coordinate activities between units
                                                  All activities at the local level will be directed
                                                  through the Local  Coordinator
Washington County
  SWCD Supervisors
Forum for local input and review
                                                  Provides a mechanism for local implementation
                                                  of objectives
                                                  Provides a forum of exchange  between local interest
                                                  and project participants
                                                  Maintains local  support  of  the proj ect
                                                  Review  and revise the  ordinance at the  local  level
                                                  Assists  Local  Coordinator in  developing and
                                                  maintaining local identity  for the proj ect

-------
                      C.   OBJECTIVES


     As a result of input from the participants identified

in Figure 1,  the overall  objectives of the program are to demon-

strate the effectiveness  of land treatment measures in im-

proving water quality and to devise the necessary institu-
tional arrangements required for the preparation, acceptance

and implementation of a sediment control ordinance or other

regulatory program applicable to incorporated and unincorpo-

rated areas on a county-wide basis.  Specific objectives

deemed necessary for the  successful attainment of the overall

objectives are:
     1.  Demonstrate through a monitoring program
         the effectiveness of sediment and erosion
         control techniques for improving water
         quality.
     2.  Develop a sediment control ordinance or
         other regulatory mechanism acceptable to
         landowners and the several governmental
         authorities responsible for implementing
         such measures and determine the combina-
         tion(s) of institutional arrangements in
         the form of laws and intergovernmental
         relationships involving federal, state,
         county, and municipal governments required
         for implementing regulatory programs in
         incorporated and unincorporated areas on
         a county-wide basis.

     3.  Develop a model of the personnel required
         and the technical and financial assistance
         needed to implement a sediment control
         program using a regulatory approach.
     4.  Develop and systemize the educational and
         information dissemination effort to the
         appropriate user groups required for
         implementing a sediment control program
         using a regulatory approach.

     5.  Provide an evaluation of  the  feasibility
         of implementing regulatory sediment and
         erosion control programs  in the Great
         Lakes Basin States and other  areas where
         applicable.

-------
              D.   WASHINGTON  COUNTY WORK  PLAN

      This  section of  the work  plan will  provide  detailed
 procedures  for accomplishing the  stated  objectives.   Each
 objective  is  addressed  separately and  appears  in numerical
 sequence identified in  Section C  (page 9).
1.
DEMONSTRATING IMPROVEMENTS IN WATER QUALITY
     In orde-r to accomplish this objective it was deemed
necessary to select land areas to be investigated, determine
the land treatments to be employed and establish a water
quality monitoring and analytical program.  Each factor is
closely related and must be evaluated in terms of potential
for demonstrating changes in water quality as a result of
implementation of conservation techniques.  This concept has
been incorporated into the remainder of this section, appear-
ing as follows:  a. watershed selection, b. location of
monitoring sites, c. land treatment, d. installation of moni-
toring equipment, e. sampling program, f. parameters to be
measured, g.  methods of analysis, and h. data analysis, stor-
age and retrieval.

                   Watershed Selection

     Two watersheds in the Great Lakes Drainage Basin (herein-
after "Basin")  portion of Washington County were selected as
being representative of an agricultural and rapidly urbaniz-
ing area.   Watershed selection commensurate with the first
objective necessitates an evaluation in the framework of the
following criteria:
     °Watersheds must be confined to the Basin
     °The agricultural watershed should reflect the
      predominant types of agrarian enterprise found
      in the  Basin.
                            10

-------
     °The  urbanizing  watershed  must  include  a  high
      density  developing  area within the  corporate
      boundary of  a village  or  city.
     °Both watersheds must contain a high potential
      for  demonstrating improvements in water  quality
      as a result  of  implementing erosion control
      techniques.   Factors determining  this  feature
      include  the  following:
        °°Existing problems  of  soil  erosion  or
          other sources of water pollution
          attributable to topography, soil
          type or  present and proposed  land
          use  activities.
        °°Inherent water quality monitoring
          capabilities as determined by stream
          characteristics in relation to  land
          treatment needs and application
          feasibility.
     °Public support  for the program must be demon-
      strable  in the  selected watersheds.


     The distribution of agricultural land with respect to

type of enterprise in the Basin (U.S. only)  is shown in
Table 3.   Dairy farms and other livestock operations account

for 54.2%, grain and row crops  36.6%, and truck farming 9.0%

of the agricultural land use in the  Basin (2).
     Alternative watersheds  which met the first four criteria

were selected from that portion of Washington County which

lies in the Basin  (Fig.  2).   Information upon which to base
selection decision was developed by utilizing:  a.  population
forecasts, b.  on site investigations, c.  base maps depicting

watershed boundaries, soil  properties, stream characteristics,
topography, and prime agricultural land, and  d. present and
proposed high density construction activity (3).  Review and

evaluation of alternative watersheds with respect to the
last criterion by  the WCSWCD Supervisors and  the Village Board

of Germantown resulted in the  selection  of two watersheds

which satisfy all  criteria.   Study  sites selected are the

Germantown and the Kewaskum Watersheds,  representative of

urbanizing and agricultural watersheds respectively  (Fig. 2).

The remainder of this  section  is directed toward providing
                            11

-------
    Table  3.   Distribution of  the  agricultural  land  in  the
               Great Lakes Drainage Basin  (U.S.) according
               to various agricultural enterprise systems3
Enterprise
Acrescx 103
Agricultural land attributed
to specific crops and
enterprise systems, %
Dairying  & livestock
  Oats
  Misc. small grains
  Corn silage
  Alfalfa hay
  Cl-tim-other-hay
  Cropland pasture
  Pasture
Grain or row crop
  Wheat
  Rye
  Barley
  Corn
  Soybeans
Truck farming
  Sugar beets
  Potatoes
  Fruit
  Common vegetables
  Commercial sod
  Dry edible beans
                             "13,127
                              8,834
                             54.2
                             36.6
                              1,688
                              9.0
aFrom the Great Lakes Basin Framework Study.  1971.  Land Use
 and Management.  Great Lakes Basin Commission, Ann Arbor, Mich.,
 Appendix 13, pp. 13-91.
"Allocation of individual crops within specific enterprise
 systems was accomplished on the basis of the particular
 crop being more related to that specific enterprise.
cLand use within the United States only.
                               12

-------
                                      LEGEHD
Great Lakes Drainage Divide

Study Watershed Boundary

Watershed Streams
                    Great
                    Lakes
                    Drainage
                    "Basin
FIG.  2   Map of  Washington County, Wisconsin,  showing  its
         geographical  location  and selected project sites
         in the  Great  Lakes Drainage  Basin.
                              13

-------
 detailed  information on the  selected watersheds.

 Germantown - urbanizing watershed

     The  urbanizing watershed selected lies in the Village of
 Germantown, located in southeastern Washington County  (Fig. 2)
 The Village of Germantown encompasses most of the township of
 Germantown (36 sections) and is in the headwaters of the
 Menomonee River, which flows into Lake Michigan via the Mil-
 waukee River (Fig. 3).
     The metropolitan Milwaukee area is exerting heavy popu-
 lation pressure on the Village of Germantown.  It is antici-
 pated that the most rapid and concentrated urbanization in
 Washington County will occur in this general area.  Tech-
 Search, Inc.  of Wilmette, Illinois, in their Comprehensive
 Plan for Germantown, estimated that the population of the
 Village, which is presently 8,200 (1974- Census), will have
 increased to 30,700 by 1990, i.e., almost 35% of the entire
 projected population of Washington County (4).
     An area of approximately 7,000 acres bounded on the
 north, south, east, and west by Freistadt Road, County Line
 Road, Wausaukee Road,  and Highway 41, respectively (Fig. 3),
 has been identified by the Village Board and Planning Commis-
 sion as that part of the Village where concentrated develop-
ment will occur in the near future.   In order to regulate and
plan the types of construction to occur in the "developing
area", the area identified in Fig. 3 has been zoned into
 five residential neighborhoods (4,800 acres) and two indus-
trial parks (2,200 acres) as shown in Fig. 4.   Detailed plan-
ning and development is centered in this area as a result of
the present and planned service by sanitary sewers (Fig. 5).
Little construction activity is anticipated outside the devel-
oping area, other than low density and random development.
     Specific delineation of a watershed in the developing
area necessitates identifying the time sequence of construc-
tion activity and interpreting this information with respect
to watershed boundaries and stream monitoring capabilities.
                            14

-------
                                   LEGEND
                                      Municipalities > 10,000
                                      Incorporated Boundary
                                      Major River
                                      Tributaries
                                      Developing Area
  WASHINGTON
     COUNTY


 German town
                     V County Line Road
•-' l\
! S
s *

1
1
A
^ ' t




Hwy
145


o
o;
«j
o>
j£
A]
I/I
S
3:

V
FIG.  3.   Details of  the Village of Germantown  showing:
          1.   proximity  to large metropolitan areas and
          major  rivers draining  into Lake Michigan,
          2. region in village  identified as developing
          area.
                             15

-------
              Jeffersdyi P^-Hr;
                       —"   •
  0»

Revere Hill
                                    Donges
                                      Bay
LEGEND
      Industrial

      Residential

           Sanitary Sewers

      Existing  Gravity Mains

      Proposed  Gravity Mains

      Existing  Forced Main

      Proposed  Forced Main

      Existing  Lift Station

      Proposed  Lift Station


                    SCALE
              L
J
             ooooooo
                    MILES
FIG. 4   Zoning restrictions of the developing area
   & 5   serviced by the sanitary sewer system.
         Details of the sanitary sewer master plan.
         Identifying within the developing area
         the locations most liKely to undergo high
         density development as a result of sanitary
         sewer services being provided.
                     16

-------
Future construction activity (Summer of 1975) is concentrated
in the areas identified in Fig.  6.   Approximately 200 acres
of land in the area zoned as residential are scheduled for
development during 1975 and 1976.   Three areas, totalling
approximately 120 acres, have preliminary plans that have
been submitted to the Village for approval.  Construction
activity in the Industrial Park-West is presently taking
place, with continued activity expected during the summer of
1975.  It is anticipated that construction activity will be
initially confined to the area identified in Fig. 6. with
expansion occurring in the remaining portion of the develop-
ing area at a later date, but within the time frame of the
project.
     Intermittent tributaries of the Menomonee River are lo-
cated throughout the developing area (Fig. 6).  The residen-
tial area undergoing the most rapid development in the near
future is drained north by predominantly one intermittent
stream which originates near County Line Road and discharges
into the Menomonee River near Highway 41.  Drainage from the
Industrial Park-West is predominantly restricted to one
stream which intersects Mequon Road, drains south and flows
into the Menomonee River through a drainage ditch along
Highway m.  Monitoring of these intermittent streams, geo-
graphically located in close proximity to high density con-
struction activity, will provide background information
concerning water quality and erosion rates from urbanizing
areas.  The watershed boundaries encompassing these streams
and future construction activity were delineated from 2-foot
vertical interval contour maps (Fig. 7).

Kewaskum Creek - agricultural watershed

     The agricultural watershed selected is located southwest
of the town of Kewaskum  (Fig. 2) and covers areas in the
Townships of Kewaskum, Wayne and Barton.  North and south
accesses through the area are by County Roads B, D, and
BD, respectfully (Fig. 8).  The Kewaskum Creek is the major
                             17

-------
Freistadt Road
                                         Legend Acres
                 Farm
                    Annex I
                    Old Farm
Plats Submitted
Plats Approved
Plats Constructed
Menomonee River
Intermittent Streams

Urbanizing Watersheds
Watershed Boundary
                                           Park View Hills
                                         County Line  Road
                                                                  QJ
                                                                  (/>
                                                                  O>
                                                                  c
                                                                  7^-
                                                                  fD
                                                                  to

                                                                  70
                                                                  O
                                                                  Cu
                                                                  ex.
           FIG. 6 & 7
Details of developing area, specifically
identifying Jefferson Park; sites where
plats have been approved for construction
and proposed sites for future development.
Included is delineation of the urbanizing
watershed.

-------
LEGEND
      Watershed Boundary
      County Roads
      Kewaskum Creek
      Prime Agricultural
        Land
FIG.  8  Kewaskum Watershed depicting prime agricultural land,
        tributaries of Kewaskum Creek and proximity to the
        Village of Kewaskum.
                                 19

-------
natural waterway, flowing north through Kewaskum and into
Lake Michigan via the Milwaukee River.
     The soils, topography and type of agriculture in the
Kewaskum Creek watershed are fairly representative of the
entire county.  The watershed encompasses 7,936 acres, about
40% of which is prime agricultural land (5).  The northern
part of the watershed is dominated by a broad floodplain,
which is poorly drained and overgrown with natural vegetation.
The active agricultural land has a gently-rolling topography
with potential erosion problems.  The steep slope/flat
valley nature of the Kewaskum Creek watershed has produced
a landscape of agricultural land interrupted by areas either
too steep or too wet to support this enterprise.
     The watershed is dominated by dairy farming with lesser
acreages of cash crops.  Adequate soil conservation measures
are estimated to be in effect on 60% of the land in the
watershed, with 40% requiring further treatment.
     The dominant soils in the watershed are the Hochheim-
Theresa Soil Association, which cover nearly 50% of Wash-
ington County (6).  The Soil Conservation Service in its
land capability classification system designates these soils
as Class I and II with only limited restrictions due to water
and erosion hazards.  These soils, from an agricultural
standpoint:, are potentially the most productive soils in the
county.
     Lesser acreages are occupied by the Casco-Fox-Rodman
Soil Association which are somewhat more shallow than the
Hochheim-Theresa soils and are formed in glacial outwash--
materials varying in texture from sand to fairly coarse
gravel.  These soils may have high agricultural potential
but must be managed very carefully.

               Location of Monitoring Sites

Germantown watershed

     Within the Germantown Watershed the areas which will
be undergoing development in the near future are the
                             20

-------
residential Jefferson Park Neighborhood and the Industrial
Park-West (Fig. 9).
     In Jefferson Park, two areas are scheduled for develop-
ment during the first year of the project, namely, Old Farm,
about 45 acres, and Legend Acres, about 80 acres (Fig. 10).
To demonstrate changes in sediment load and water quality
due to the application of conservation measures in an urban-
izing area, surface water will be monitored at five sites in
Jefferson Park.  The location of these sites is shown in
Fig. 10.
     Station Gl will be located on the main drainage channel
through Jefferson Park, just after it passes under South
Division Road.  This station will monitor runoff from ap-
proximately 75% of that portion of the Germantown Watershed
that will eventually undergo residential development.  The
station will be constructed, instrumented and maintained by
USGS under a subcontractual agreement.
     In the urbanizing area where changes are being made in
the physical characteristics of the landscape and in the type
of land use, monitoring water quality before and after the
implementation of conservation measures would not yield the
desired information.  Therefore, it will be necessary to
monitor similar developing areas, simultaneously, with some
areas receiving high intensity conservation practices (treat-
ment) and other areas undergoing normal construction activity
(nontreatment).
     Monitoring stations G2 and G3 will be located at the
outfalls of the two enclosed storm drains which will emanate
from the Old Farm subdivision (Fig. 10).  Soil conservation
and sediment control practices will be implemented on the
area monitored by station G3, while the area monitored by G2
will not be treated.  Stations G4 and G5 will be located on
enclosed storm sewer and surface drains, respectively, which
receive runoff from the southern and northern halves of
Legend Acres.   Soil conservation and sediment control prac-
tices will be implemented only on the southern portion of
Legend Acres.

                            21

-------
ro
to
                 Industrial  Park
                        v.
                                                                X
Jefferson   ark
                                                               p

                                                       x'*':*'::£:&*:vS*:*':*':::
                                                       •:-:vjiw:-:-:f-:-:-:-:-:-:*:*:*vi
                                                       M.-«<-.vj.-.-.r:*:v:*:*:*Xv,
                                                                         V,.
                                                                     I
                                                                     \
                                                                       \
                SCALE
                MILES
           FIG.   9   Portions of  Jefferson Park  and  Industrial  Park  West  (shaded) scheduled
                     for  immediate  development.

-------
                                                                                                        South  Division Road
ro
GO
           C7J
~n 3  3  o
fu O  O  fD
-S 3  3  <
3 rh _.. rt>
'  -S  Pi-  —«
   fD  O  O
   cu  T -a

   fD  3  3
   Q.UD in

   CU  (/i "o
   -J  -i.  O
   fD  ph  -5
   CU  fD  pt-
   01  oo  —i.
         O
   S  -"•  3
   -1-  3
   Pt-    O
   3"  -S -I,
   -J-  fD
   3  —• C_
      CU fD
   I— Ph -h
   fD -•• -t,
  (Q O fD
   fD 3 -S
   3    to
   Q. rt- O
     O 3

  n rt- -o
  -S T Q>
  fD ft> -J

     rt-
  Qj {^ ^^
  3 a. 3-
  a.   o
     cu ^
  O 3 -J.
  —• D. 3
  D.   IQ
G
00
-o
o
mj.
3
pf-

O
-t»

-n
— *
o
5£

73
fD
<
fD
1
CU
— J

— 1
O

T3
-s
o
T3
o
(/}
fD
Q.
0
-s
CU
3
fD
CU
•XI
-s
o
•o
o
V)
fD
Q.

O
~i
cu
«-j»
3
CU
IQ
fD
^
CU




















— 1
o

CO
fD

O
fD
<
fD
_-j
O
T3
fD
Q.

s:

rt
3"
O
C
Ph

—1
-I
fD
CU
Pi-
3
tD
3
pt-







-H
O

oo
fD

O
fD
<
fD
•^4
O
•a
fD
Q.

y-
_j.
Pi-
3"
—1
•^
fD
Q)
pi-
3
fD
3
pt-










3S
O
3

rt-
O
-J

3

-------
     The area to the west of the Menomonee River that is
zoned as an industrial park is presently undergoing develop-
ment and will continue to be developed during the course of
the project.  The area still to be developed in the Indus-
trial Park is divided approximately in half by a surface
watershed divide (Fig. 11).  Stations G6 and G7 will be
located on open and closed drains, respectively, and will
monitor runoff from the southern and northern portions of the
developing area respectively.  The southern portion will
receive land treatment to reduce sediment losses.  Unlike a
residential area, an industrial park is not developed all at
once, but rather construction activities are concentrated at
individual sites as each industry makes the decision to build
in the park.  Consequently, two or three additional monitor-
ing stations will be installed as the need arises to collect
runoff from individual construction sites.  Decisions regard-
ing the placement of these site specific stations cannot be
made at this time.

Kewaskum watershed

     Only a portion of the approximately 8,000  acre Kewaskum
Creek Watershed  is amenable to monitoring the effects of con-
servation treatments.  The lowland area occupying the center
of  the watershed, on  either  side  of Kewaskum Creek, has no
significant erosion problem.  Much of  it is not actively
farmed and is relatively flat.  The slopes along the eastern
edge of the watershed and  in  the  southern tip are  steep
enough to have  severe erosion problems, but  surface runoff
from these  areas is quite  diffuse and,  consequently,  does  not
lend itself to  monitoring.
     The  uplands west of Kewaskum Creek offer the  best  possi-
bilities  for  demonstrating improvements in  water quality
resulting from  implementation of  conservation techniques.
This area is  actively farmed and  includes row  crops,  small
grains, hay,  and livestock operations.  The  slopes are  steep
 enough to constitute  an  erosion hazard, and waterways are

                             24

-------
                                    Mequon Road
   LEGEND
        Monitoring Site
        To Be Developed With Treatment
        To Be Developed Without Treatment
        Developed Lot
o
                       SCALE
                         y.
                       MILES
FIG.  11  Developing portion of Industrial Park West showing
         treated and nontreated areas to be monitored.

                               25

-------
sufficiently well-defined to allow monitoring.  An SCS Con-
servation Needs Inventory accomplished during the planning
phase of this project identified those upland areas which
are most in need of conservation practices and eliminated
from consideration those lands which are presently being
farmed under SCS guidelines and on which water quality would,
consequently, be difficult to improve.  From this informa-
tion two small upland subwatersheds were selected for moni-
toring.  Figure 12 shows the selected subwatersheds and their
locations in the Kewaskum Watershed.
     The sites at which monitoring stations will be installed
in the Kewaskum North (K-North) and the Kewaskum South (K-
South) subwatersheds are shown in Figs. 13 and Hf, respec-
tively.  Station Kl will be used to monitor drainage from
all of K-North—an area of about 34-0 acres—and K6 will
monitor drainage from the 275 acre watershed of K-South.
These subwatersheds contain mostly cropland, with some con-
centration of livestock in feedlots and barnyards.  Runoff
from eroding cropland is characterized by high suspended
sediment loads and moderate concentration of nutrients.
Water draining from feedlots and barnyards generally con-
tains high levels of nutrients and oxygen demanding materials.
The sediment load from livestock areas can be quite variable.
The water quality data collected at sites Kl and K6 will
represent the composite effects of these land uses.
     In order to separate the water quality effects of crop-
land and livestock operations, several additional stations
will be specifically located on drainage ways emanating from
lands having a predominant single use.  Station K2 will be
located in a gully draining through cattle and hog feedlots.
Station K3 will monitor runoff from about 165 acres of cropland
with no concentration of livestock.  Station KU will be installed
directly below a large barnyard area.  While this area does not
actually lie in the K-North subwatershed, it will be a worth-
while  site to monitor because it has both an animal waste problem
and an erosion problem due to the animals being confined on a
steep, bare  slope.  Station K5 will be situated on a gully in the

                             26

-------
FIG. 12  Kewaskum Watershed showing location (shaded) of
        K-North and K-South Subwatersheds.
                          27

-------
SCALE
MILES
                                20 Ft.  Contour
                                    Interval
     LEGEND
          Monitoring Site
          Livestock Concentration
          Contributing Areas
          Intermittent Streams
          County Highways
                                          o
FIG. 13   Kewaskum Subwatershed
         monitoring sites.
                         (K-North) showing location of
                     28

-------
                                   10 ft. contour interval
          LEGEND
               Monitoring Site           O

               Livestock Concentration   @
                       SCALE

                         x
                       MILES
FIG. 14  Kewaskum Subwatershed (K-South) showing location
         of monitoring  sites.
                          29

-------
K-South subwatershed which carries runoff from an area of about
70 acres of cropland which presently has severe erosion problems
and which receives applications of animal manure during the
winter months.
     These six monitoring stations will be installed during the
spring and early summer of 1975.  The implementation of the
selected conservation practices will be delayed until late summer
and fall of 1976.  This will allow the collection of a year's
runoff data from untreated land and will provide a comparison of
water quality before and after the application of conservation
techniques and an evaluation of the effectiveness of these
techniques in improving water quality.

                       Land Treatment

Germantown watershed

     Land treatment measures to be employed in  the urbaniz-
ing watersheds include not only soil  conservation and  sedi-
ment control practices but also the modification of  existing
drainage ways to facilitate monitoring.
     The main drainage channel  through  Jefferson Park,  which
carries runoff from a  substantial area  south  of Jefferson
Park,  presently  follows  a meandering  path through the  south-
ern end of  Legend Acres.   The  existing  channel will  be
blocked before it enters Legend Acres,  and a  new drainage
way will  be constructed  to shorten the  course of this  chan-
nel and bypass  Legend  Acres.   As  a result of  this reversal
of drainage,  site G4 will be  examining  only the southern
half  of Legend Acres  (see Fig.  10).   The entire channel
 through Jefferson Park will be modified to improve  flow,
 including a provision  for additional culverts under South
 Division Road,  and  will be stabilized with vegetation,
 mulches,  and rock riprap.  The Village of Germantown had
 planned to make these  modifications eventually, perhaps over
 a period of several years, as development of the area dic-
 tated.  To provide a stable channel that will not be subject

                             30

-------
to future modifications, and thus to facilitate the collection
of meaningful water quality data, this work will be completed
at the earliest possible date and before the installation
of sites G2 and G4-.  Similar channel modification and stabi-
lization, on a smaller scale, will be carried out on the
drainage ways serving the northern portion of Legend Acres
and the industrial park.
     The measures to control erosion and sediment will con-
sist basically of mulches and vegetation to reduce erosion
and sediment settling basins to remove eroded materials
from the runoff water.  Initially, a protective cover of
vegetation will be established on the entire area to be
treated.  This will be followed by grading, sloping, fertil-
izing, mulching, seeding, and sodding as required to re-
establish vegetation on lands disturbed in street construc-
tion, installation of public utility services, and the exca-
vation of basements.  Disturbed areas that are scheduled for
additional disturbance within a short period of time will be
proteced by mulches alone, with no attempt to establish a
plant cover.
     Since some erosion is probably unavoidable, sediment
retention basins will be constructed at the exit of the
drainage ways from the treated areas.  These structures will
temporarily detain and thereby dissipate the energy of sur-
face runoff, allowing much of the suspended sediment to
settle out.   Diversion channels to direct runoff waters into
sediment basins to reduce the erosion capacity of runoff
waters by shortening the effective slope length, or for such
other purposes as circumstances and project objectives may
dictate, may also be constructed.  A tabulation of the esti-
mated land treatment and water pollution abatement measures
to be employed in the urbanizing watershed is given in
Table 4.  Urban development in Germantown proceeds in a
controlled and orderly manner, in accord with a detailed and
comprehensive plan.  Land treatment measures and water
quality monitoring are therefore constrained both in space

                            31

-------
                              Table 4.   Conservation needs  inventory and estimated  cost  of  land  treatment  practices  in the German town and Kcyaskum Watersheds
Preliminary treatments
Engineering Flood routine8 Earthmovine Finish grading
Site cost, $ cost, $ ftxlOJ $ ft^xlO-5 $
Main drainageway 4,800 1,300 26 17,300 528 8,500
North Legend Acres
drainageway 880 - 7 4,700 66 1,100
South Legend Acres 1,400 - - - 80 1,300
Middle Old Farm
(27 lots) 1,100 - - - 50 800
Drainageway 1,300 - 10 6,700 100 1,600
Treated area - - - - 100 1,600
Conservation Residue Contour Diversion or
cropping, management, strip-cropping field terraces
Farm no. acres acres acres $ ft' $
U>
N)
1 60 60 60 640
2 61 61 15 160
3 85 - 60 640 1,100 1,200
4 6 -----
5 - -----
6 - - 90 960
7 57 37 400
8 - - - - 650 700
9 - 48
10 25 -----
11 75 - 75 800

aFlood routing to be accomplished by SEWRPC.
Final treatments
Seeding Mulching Sodding Sediment basin Diversion terraces
ft^xlO3 $ ftxlO-1 $ ft^xlO-3 $ No. $ ft $
GERMANTOWN WATERSHED
Jefferson Park
528 15,700 295 6,600 -----
66 2,000 66 1,500 -----
125 14,400b 300 6,700 5 1,300 1 4,000 1,000 1,100
95 6,800b 180 4,000 3 700 1 4,000 250 300
100 3,000 100 2,200 1 300
626 33,200b 1,200 26,700 1 3,000 1 4,000 1,000 1,100
GERMANTOWN TOTAL
Minimum Grassed Manure storage Stone fence
tillage waterways facilities removalc Ponds
acres $ ft $ No. $ ft $ No. $
KEWASKUM CREEK WATERSHED
Kewaskum North (K-North)
400 400 - - 3,300 6,600 1 2,700
61 450 650 650 - - - -
3,500 3,500 1 10,700 2,200 4,400
1,100 1,100 1 10,700 -
1 10,700 -
800 800 1 10,700 -
Kewaskum South (K-South)
1,000 2,000
1 2,700
1 10,700 -
1,500 1,500 -
KEWASKUM TOTAL
PROGRAM GRAND TOTALa




Total $
54,200
10,180
30,200
17.700
112,280
15,100
69.600
84.700
196,980

Total $

10,340
1,260
20,440
11,800
10,700
12.460
67,000
2,400
700
2,700
10,700
2.300
18.800
85,800
$28_2_J80


"istone fence removal to allow installation of contour strip-cropping systems or diversion terraces.
 Differs from land treatment total shown in budget ($310,000) to allow $27,220 as a contingency for  land treatments which cannot be predicted.

-------
Technical assistance will be provided by UWEX.  The UWEX staff
is knowledgeable in the monitoring of small watersheds and
has successfully installed and operated similar monitoring
stations on the White Clay Lake Watershed in Shawano County.
     These stations, like Gl, will contain a flow control
structure such as a weir or flume with a continuous stage
height recorder on an automatic water sampler.  The flow con-
trol device will be calibrated so that flow volume can  be
derived  directly from stage height.  The sampler will be
triggered by  stage height.
                     Monitoring Program
       All of the monitoring sites will be on intermittent
 streams or drains on streams with very low base flow.   Most,
 if not all, of the flow at these sites will consist of storm
 water or snow melt runoff.  The volume of flow will be measured
 continuously at all sites.  To insure the accuracy of^the^
 data the monitoring equipment will be designed and maintained
 and the measurements made in accordance with standard USGS
 methods and/or procedures outlined in Agriculture Handbooks
 Nos. 224 (7) and 268 (8).
      An  increase  in stage height  above any  base  flow due  to
 a  runoff event will activate an  automatic water  sampler  which
 will  collect  samples at  predetermined intervals  until  the
 flow  subsides.   The samplers will have the  capability  to
 increase or decrease  sampling  frequency  in  proportion  to
 flow   and  the relationship  between sampling frequency  and flow
 at each site will be  determined by the characteristic  hydro-
  graph at the site.  Sampling frequency will be higher on
  streams or drains with steeper gradients or which drain
  smaller areas,  or areas  with a higher proportion of impervious
  surface.  At sites on continuously flowing streams, base flow
  will also be sampled periodically, perhaps twice a month,
  depending upon variability of flow and water quality parameters.
        Immediately  after  each runoff event,  i.e., within  24
  hours,  samples will be  picked up  from each monitoring site  by
                              34

-------
  and  in time by circumstances beyond the control or influence
  of project participants.
  Kewaskum watershed
       The land treatment measures to be evaluated by water
  quality monitoring include techniques for controlling pollu-
  tants from both cropland and livestock operations.   Erosion
  control measures generally consist of crop cultural prac-
  tices,  special uses of living and dead vegetative materials
  the use of structures  for controlling the  flow of surface
  waters,  and  combinations  of  these.  Protection of water
  quality from the deleterious effects  of the  great amounts of
  manure  and bedding  produced  by concentrating livestock in
  barns,  barnyards  and feedlots will be  achieved  through the
  use of manure  storage facilities, surface water control prac-
  tices and properly  timed disposal by field spreading
      A tabulation of the land treatments and water pollution
 abatement measures  to be employed is given in Table 4
 These measures will be designed and applied in accordance
 with the SCS Technical Guide.  Manure  storage facilities will
 be^designed and installed in accordance with SCS engineering
 criteria and WDNR regulations.

            Installation of Monitoring  Equipment

      Station  Gl (Fig. 10)  will be  constructed,  instrumented
 and  maintained  under a  subcontracts!  agreement with the USGS
 Itwxii  consist of:  a. a concrete weir  or flume and associated
 embankments to  control flow, b. a digital stage recorder
 stripchart recorder, timer, and bubble-gage monometer to'
 record flow, c. an automatic stage-activated water sampler to
 take water and  suspended sediment samples,  and d. a 10x12x8 ft
 heated, insulated building, provided with electrical power
 for housing the electronic monitoring equipment.
     The installation and maintenance of the remaining
stations will be subcontracted to  Washington County.
                             33

-------
a Washington County employee, and the samples transported
for analysis to the laboratory services section of the WDNR.
Sample analysis will be subcontracted to WDNR after pick-
up, and prior to analysis, the samples will be maintamed at

     Precipitation frequency, intensity, duration, and volume
will be monitored with recording rain gages placed at sev-
eral sites throughout the watersheds.  Periodically, freshly
collected precipitation samples will also be sent to the
laboratory for  analysis.

                    Parameters to be  Measured

      Stage recorders  will provide  quantified  flow data;
 samples  of  base flow  and  of  runoff events  will be analyzed
 for a variety of parameters  to  determine the  loading  of
 suspended sediment, the major dissolved salts, nutrients,
 and organic carbon.  On a seasonal basis the organic  carbon
 content and resultant oxygen demand of the runoff water  will
 be further quantified, and concentrations  of pesticides  and
 heavy metals will be determined.
      The concentrations of substances in runoff water result
 from the many varied processes by which these materials  are
 transported across the sediment (or soil)-water interface.
 By coordinating the project's efforts with those of investi-
 gators in other disciplines at the University of Wisconsin,
 attempts will  be made to quantify these processes.  To tins
 end,  samples of watershed soils and streambed sediments will
 be taken and characterized  in the laboratory.
       Periodically, precipitation  samples will also be analyzed
 for  nutrients,  organic carbon,  pesticides,  and heavy metals.
       The specific  analyses  to be  carried  out  on  runoff water,
 sediment,  soil,  and  precipitation are  detailed in  Table  5.
                               35

-------
          Table  5.    Water  quality  parameters  to be  evaluated

Frequency of
Analyses

Unfiltered
Routinely Total solids
Total N

Analyses8
On water samples
Filtered1*
Dissolved solids
Dissolved NHi,-N



By Difference
Suspended solids
Organic Nc
 Seasonally
 Seasonally
Initial
characterization
of soils
and annual or
semi-annual
characterization
of strea.mbed
sediments
                     Total P
                     Total organic C
                     Chemical oxygen demand


                     Total pesticides8
                     Total heavy metalsh
        Dissolved  (N02+N03)-N
        Dissolved N02-Nd
        Dissolved reactive P
        Dissolved organic C
        Dissolved chlorides
        Conductivity
       Alkalinity
       Dissolved Ca.Mg, JJa, K
       Dissolved SO^-S
       Dissolved N02-Nf
       Dissolved pesticides2
                                                                       Particulate Pe
                                Particulate pesticides8
       Dissolved  heavy netalsh   Particulate heavy metalsh
Unfiltered
Total N
                    Total P
                    Total pesticides8
                    Total heavy metalsf
                                         On precipitation samples
       Filtered
       Dissolved NHt,-N
       Dissolved (N02+N03)-N
       Dissolved reactive P
                                        On soil and sediment samples
By difference
Organic Nc

Particulate  Pe
          Air Dried
 Particle size distribution
 Total N
 Exchangeable NHi,-N
 (N03+N02)-N
Available P
Organic matter
Cation exchange  capacity
pH
Pesticides8
Heavy metals
                        scesan
Which Will be carried Lt by  the Unl
filtered through No. i)2 Whatman.
Total N minus inorganic N forms.
     stations monitoring drainage from livestock operations

                                                                               *ho..
                                                                                        P.
Pb, Cd,  Cu,  Hg,  Zn,  Cr, B.
                           WlU be ""ermined  by history of pesticide applications  in  the
                                             36

-------
                    Methods of Analysis

      As previously mentioned, sample analysis will be carried
out by WDNR.  Laboratory analytical techniques will follow
the standardized procedure described in the U.S.  EPA Analyt-
ical Methods Manual (9).  These same procedures will be used
by WDNR in the analytical work for the 1JC Menomonee River
pilot watershed study.  The adoption of standard techniques
will ensure data comparability between the two projects and
provide the greatest opportunity for integration of data on
a region-wide basis.

            Data Analysis,  Storage and Retrieval

       The  stream flow  data will be subjected  to statistical
analysis to develop flow  duration  curves  and  high  and low
flow discharge  frequency  relationships, which will be corre-
lated with precipitation  patterns.
       From this information and the  concentrations of various
constituents  in the water, calculations will  be made  of the
 loading rates of sediment, nutrients,  etc., per unit  of water-
 shed area, as a function of precipitation and stream flow
 characteristics.   These relationships will be evaluated and
 compared for runoff from treated  and untreated watersheds.
 Coordination of data processing will be provided  by the WDNR.
 In order to be compatible with related Basin studies, all
 data from the project will be formatted in compliance with
 EPA guidelines and will be submitted on a regular basis to
 the EPA STORET system, in the Decimal Input  (DIP) format.
 Tape or disk files will provide security backup for preven-
 tion of accidental data destruction and will be available for
 in-house  data  analysis and simulation.
        In  addition  to  raw  data files,  it  is envisioned  that
 summary files, subfiles  of specific parts of the  data  and
 other  files  as necessary  for informational analysis  will  be
 created as needed  by  project participants.   Suitable  forms
                               37

-------
of data reporting and computer analyzed output, including
tables and plots, will be supplied as needed to support
project objectives and will be available for project reports
                           38

-------
                       Bibliography


1   International Reference Group on Great Lakes Pollution
      from Land Use Activity, November 1974.  Prepared by
      the U.S.  Section of Task Group A for the Pollution
      from Land Use Activities Reference Group of the
      International Joint Commission.
2   Great Lakes Basin Framework Study.  1971.  Land Use and
      Management—Appendix 13.  Great Lakes Basin Commission,
      Ann Arbor, Mich.  pp. 13-91.  Draft copy.
3   Daniel, T.  C.  1974.  Watershed Selection—Agricultural
      and Urbanizing Areas.  Water Resources Center, Univ.
      of Wisconsin-Madison, Wis.  Mimeo Report.
4.  Anonymous.   1969.  Germantown, Wisconsin...Comprehensive
      Plan.  Tech-Search, Inc., Wilmette, 111.  p. 16.
5.  SEWRPC Land Use Transportation Study.   1966 (November).
      SEWRPC, Waukesha, Wis.  Vol. 3  (#6).
6   U.S. SCS Soil  Survey—Washington  County, Wisconsin.
      'l971.  U.S.  Government  Printing Office,  Washington,
      D.C.
7   Holtan, H. N., N. E. Minshall  and L.  L.  Harrold.   1962.
      Field Manual for  Research  in Agricultural Hydrology.
      Agriculture  Handbook No.  224.   Soil and  Water
      Conservation Research  Division, USDA-ARS.

 8.  Reinhart,  K.  G.  and R. S.  Pierce.  1964.   Stream-Gaging
      Stations  for Research  on  Small Watersheds.   Agriculture
      Handbook  No.  268.  USDA For.  Serv.
 9.  National Environmental Research  Center, Cincinnati.
      1974.  Methods for Chemical Analysis  of Water  and
      Wastes.   U.S.  EPA, Off.  Tech.  Trans., Washington,
      D.C.
                             39

-------
 2.  DEVELOPMENT OF A PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR
     SEDIMENT CONTROL

      This objective is concerned with the development of a
 planning and management program for sediment control on a
 county-wide basis under the guidance of appropriate state
 and federal institutions.   This will involve basically the
 preparation of an array of alternatives for the consideration
 of decision makers at appropriate levels of government cover-
 ing such things as institutional mechanisms, legal frameworks,
 regulatory approaches,  and methodologies for implementation
 developed by project personnel in working associations with
 local  leaders and staffs  of state agencies and  institutions.
     At this time,  the  legal framework under which sediment
 regulation might  best operate is not defined.   The problem
 might  be handled  directly  by county  government  with increased
 professional support staff to provide  technical backup and
 with policy direction coming from the  soil and  water conser-
 vation  district supervisors whose membership can be broadened
 to  insure urban representation under Chapter 92,  Wisconsin
 Statutes,  "Soil and  Water  Conservation District Law".   It  is
 possible,  however, that the best long-range  mechanism for
 sediment control might be  one  similar  to  Wisconsin's  shore-
 land-floodplain management  program which  was  initiated  by
 the state  and obliges each  county  to develop  its  own  programs
 within  overall  state  guidelines.   These two  alternatives,  as
 well as  other possibile approaches to  the  sediment  control
 problem,  have pros and cons, and  the objective  of the project
 will be  to evaluate the several  approaches from an  economic,
 governmental, legal, and technical standpoint in order to
 arrive at a  feasible process for resolving the  sediment con-
 trol problem.
     Initially, a review and evaluation of the  existing
 statutory framework within the State of Wisconsin will be
undertaken.  Questions to be analyzed include,  "What
constraints, if any, exist at the state level to the develop-
ment of a county-wide regulatory mechanism?" and "What legal

-------
constraints, if any, exist at the county level to the devel-
opment of a regulatory mechanism which will cover both
incorporated and unincorporated areas?"
     The examination will propose legal solutions to any
statutory problems that might exist and will outline the
legal framework necessary for establishing a regulatory
mechanism.  Further, the work will examine existing govern-
mental organization, particularly county level government,
and suggest possible approaches to implementation.
     A second review effort will be aimed at analyzing on-
going sediment control programs in other states and their
counties.  Primary emphasis will be on those areas located
within the Basin although it may be necessary to review
experiences in other areas such as the states of Maryland,
Iowa and Fairfax County, Virginia.  Representative programs
will be  selected for detailed study.  Legislative histories
of these programs will be reviewed, support and opposition
will be  identified, and  institutional conflicts encountered
during enactment will be analyzed.
     These  operative statutes and administrative regulations
will be  examined to determine the breadth of their coverage
and the  processes of implementation.  Analyses of enforcement
powers granted regulatory agencies and  inducements for accom-
plishing program objectives  will  also be made.  The  effective-
ness of  the specific programs will be  looked at in detail,  and
their  successes and failures documented.
     It  is  also within the  scope  of this  study to review,
in  selected instances, sediment  control proposals that
failed to be  enacted into law.   Again,  interest groups,  both
pro and  con,  should be identified and  an  effort made to  deter-
mine why specific proposals  were  defeated.
     An  analysis of the  possible  impact of  related  state and
federal  programs on the  Washington  County  Project would  also  be
germane  to  this review.   Examples of  such  programs  are  the
Coastal  Zone  Management  Act (P.L.  92-583),  the  Federal  Water
Pollution Control Act  Amendments of 1972  (P.L.  92-500),  and
any federal land  use  planning  legislation,  if enacted.

                              41

-------
      This study will  be  based  on  reviews  of  legislative
 histories,  interviews with  key legislative staff  people  and
 elected  officials  and with  agency personnel  charged with
 administering  sediment control programs,  and on-site visits
 to  selected program areas.
      A summary to  be  developed will take  into consideration
 the  full array of  alternatives that have  been identified for
 sediment control so that the policymakers to whom this
 material is presented for action  can make their decisions
 based on their review of several  feasible options.  This
 summary  will include  supporting legal documentation.
      To  aid policymakers in their  deliberations,  additional
 background  information on the  social, political,  and economic
 implications of the proposed sediment control alternatives
 must  also be developed.  Attitudes of local  people toward
 environmental  problems in general  and sediment pollution
 problems  specifically must be  carefully examined.  A thorough
 analysis  of the costs  and benefits of various sediment control
 alternatives will  be  made and  a range of inducement possi-
 bilities  suggested.
     Potentials for funding, both  public and  private, must be
 evaluated.  In  this context, it is essential  to review
 existing cost  sharing  programs in rural areas to  determine
 their strong and weak  points and their successes  and failures.
 Information gleaned from this review of regulatory programs
 in other areas will also be of value in this effort.
     It  is  anticipated that much of the previously described
 background  information will be assembled within the first
 year of the project.   Development of an effective planning
 and management program for sediment control  should be viewed
 as a continuing problem-solving process involving project
 personnel,  state agency staff,  decision makers,  and local
 citizens.  To assist  project personnel,  a group of advisors,
consisting of officials of the  town of Kewaskum, the  Village
of Germantown,  the  Washington County Board,  and the State Board
of Soil and Water Conservation  Districts,  will be utilized.

-------
     The goal of this part of the project,  therefore, will be
to provide those public officials responsible for establishing
a regulatory mechanism for sediment control with a series of
alternatives for dealing with sediment control problems and
with sufficient backup information on these alternatives to
assist them in selecting the most feasible approach to
solving their particular sediment control problem.  Clearly,
the process involves continuous participation of project
personnel with citizens and decision makers.  Time frames for
these activities are difficult to predict although decisxons
can and will be reached through  coordinated  efforts  of  all
involved  parties.

-------
  3.   PERSONNEL,  TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS

       This section of the report is  concerned with identifying
  resources at the  local,  state and regional  level  required to
  implement the various alternatives  developed as a result  of
  Objective 2  and necessitates  close  collaboration  between
  all  participants  involved.   The importance  of this  component
  cannot be overlooked,  for in  part it will determine the
  economic  acceptability of the  different alternatives and
  become increasingly  more critical when the results of this
  project are  implemented on a regional basis.  In  general  it
  may be assumed that  these resources will consist  of personnel
  and backup support.  The amount or level of personnel
  required at the local, state or regional level is less well-
  known than the type of personnel required.   Potential areas
 of need might include legal, technical, clerical,  administra-
 tive, regulatory or enforcement, education  and information
 dissemination, and political.   Not  only is  it necessary for
 the  project participants  to  define  the  level and  types  of
 new  personnel required, it is perhaps most  important to
 clearly define their  roles and relationship  to existing
 personnel  presently employed by such agencies as  SCS,  SEWRPC
 UWEX,  WDNR,  and  BSWCD.  Identification  of the resources
 required must be evaluated closely so that coordination at
 the  local,  state and  regional  level  is  insured.  Obviously,
 identification of  these resources at this time is  prematurl;
 however, the  methodology  used  in identifying  these resources
 can be described.
     Development of the resource needs will be accomplished
 by the project staff  in collaboration with project
 participants.  This needs inventory, not only  from a personnel
 requirement but cost  of program  administration, will be
 developed for each alternative identified and will include
 needs at the local, state and regional level in Objective  2.
 Information and input  into this objective will be  derived
 from consultations, conferences, workshops,  and educational
programs involving  local,  state and  federal  agencies,

-------
organizations, and interested citizens.   Continuous review
and revision of this aspect will result  as new information
is developed through activities directly associated with
this or closely related objectives.

-------
  4.   EDUCATION AND INFORMATION  PROGRAM


       The  goal of  the  educational  phases  of  the  project  Is  to
  have  a  diverse group  of  target  audiences-local,  state, multi-

  state and national-be made aware of  alternative  solutions to
  the sediment  problem  in  rural and urbanizing areas.  The

  purpose is to  have these audiences modify their attitudes

  and behavior  on a long-term basis so  that sediment control

  is substantially increased and  sediment pollution of the
  nation's waters is reduced.

      Within this broad goal several specific operational
  objectives become important.

      °Increase public awareness and understanding
       o± the problems caused  by sediment in streams.
      0Increase public awareness and understanding
       of the full  range of possible preventive
       and corrective  measures  for solving these
       problems.

      0Improve  public  awareness  among a wide  variety
       of individuals  and  groups  of the purposes
       progress and significant  findings of the
       Washington County Project.

      °Provide  opportunities through  which various
       segments of  the  public can observe  results
       of the project  and  project activities.

      0Provide  forums  through which the public can
       participate  in  formulating and reviewing
       specific aspects of the project.

     0Provide  forums through which the public can
       participate  in implementing  specific program
       recommendations  such  as land use planning
       and land  use regulations.

     0Provide  educational materials which can
       serve to  transfer information and method-
      ology to  other appropriate geographic areas.


                 Level of Activity Needed


     M. Frank Hersman, Director of the Office of Intergovern-
mental Science and Research Utilization, National Science
Foundation, has pointed out clearly the need for active

programs  to disseminate new information from research and

-------
demonstration projects and has encouraged less reliance upon
the passive techniques of collecting, indexing and dissemi-
nating scientific and technical information upon the specific
request of a potential user.  The educational phase of this
project is designed to be dynamic and active.  Hersman has
also pointed out the pitifully small level of support for
educational phases of research and development projects.  In
this connection a portion of the recent publication, "Technol-
ogy Transferring Utilization:  Recommendations for Redirecting
the Emphasis and Correcting the Imbalance", by the National
Academy of Engineering is relevant.
     "The federal government should  not simply_tell you
     all there is about promising technology; it  should
     concentrate instead on actually transforming tech-
     nical information into ultimate uses that fulfill
     public or private socio-economic needs.  This will
     likely require  one billion dollars annually, not
     the forty three million currently being  spent."
     The education and information phase of  this  project  is
 planned to be an active and practical multi-level program in
 the  sense  described  in the  material  quoted above.

           General Description of  Proposed Work

     An  active,  client-centered,  problem-oriented educational
 program requires six major steps:
      0Identification of  target audiences or  clientele
       groups.
      0Identification of  needed learning experiences_
       to bring about changes in attitudes and behavior
       for each target audience.
      0Planning of educational programs with selected
       members of each target audience.
      °Development of necessary educational materials
       in a form comprehensible to the user.
      °Systemative execution of the  planned educational
       program.
      "Continual evaluation of the program.
      A project such  as the one in Washington County must
 relate to a large number of target  groups and clientele.  A
 preliminary listing of these  is identified  in Table  6.

-------
                 Table 6.  Examples of target clientele and respective audience
                                                                                 groups
                                              Target Clientele^
  News media

  Service Clubs

  Voluntary organizations
    concerned with environment,
    natural resources, community
    development, taxation, etc.
   LOCAL  (Within  Washington County)

 Committees  of  the  Washington
   County  Board

 00  Soil and  Water  Conservation
     District Supervisors
 00  Planning  and  Zoning  Committee
 00  Extension Education  Committee
                                    0 Town Boards

                                    0 City and Village Councils

                                    0 Schools - primary and
                                       secondary

                                    0 Others (to be selected)
  Regional Planning Commission
  Area Association of Soil and
    Water Conservation Districts

  Southeast District - Wisconsin
    Association of Agriculture
    and Extension Education
    Committees, Inc.
    Southeast  Wisconsin Counties

County Boards  in  Southeastern
  Wisconsin

Multi-county watershed
  as sociations

District office of Wisconsin
  Department of Natural Resources
                                      Region-wide voluntary
                                        organizations
                                      Federal  and state agencies
                                        dealing with natural resources
                                                   STATE
  Wisconsin  Agricultural  and
    Extension  Education
    Committees,  Inc.

  Wisconsin  County  Boards
    Association

  Wisconsin  Association of
    Conservation  Districts
  League of  Women Voters  of
    Wisconsin
00 Department of Natural
     Resources
00 Department of Local Affairs
     and Development
00 Department of Administration
00 Department of Public
     Instruction
Natural Resources
  State Agencies
                                                       Council  of
                                      Wisconsin  Environmental
                                        Education  Council

                                      Federal  agencies  dealing with
                                        natural  resources
                                      Statewide  news media
    SWC Districts
    throughout the Great Lakes
    Region
           HULTI -STATE

Upper Mississippi Area of NACD
                                     Federal and state agencies
                                       in Great Lakes Basin
 National Association of
   Counties

 National Association of
   Conservation Districts

 Federal agencies dealing with
   natural resources

 U.S. Environmental
   Protection Agency
             NATIONAL

US Department of Agriculture
00 So.il Conservation Service
00 Agricultural Stabilization
     and Conservation Service
00 Farmers Home Administration
00 Federal Extension Service

US Department of the Interior

00 Geological Survey
00 Bureau of Sport Fisheries and
     Wildlife
                                     US Army Corps of Engineers
                                     US Department of Health,
                                       Education and Welfare

                                     US Dept.  of Housing and
                                       Urban Development
                                               INTERNATIONAL

                            International Joint Commission and related entitle
For full definition of abbreviations see Table 1 (page 2).
                                                    48

-------
     Most of these groups will require a unique educational
program in order to achieve the goals and objectives.   There-
fore, one operational education plan cannot be written—now
or in the future.  Instead, a series of plans must be pre-
pared as the project proceeds with the people in the target
clientele group as definitive participants in the development
of the program.
     The process for this is transferable.  It is demonstrated
in Table 7, using the county boards as an example, how this
methodology of education and information dissemination can be
expanded from a local target audience through the national
level.  The educational needs for each audience or client
group would be developed jointly in a practical manner.
Following this, the activities and events, such as tours,
briefings, meetings, and mass media presentations, would be
developed and presented  in  sequences appropriate  to the
teaching objectives previously identified.  Evaluation--
both formal and  informal--would be carried on  throughout.
Table  7  also lists the approximate duration of  each activity
or event as well  as the  responsibilities  to be  assumed.  A
similar  kind of  planning and  scheduling  format  will be  devel-
oped for each  target client or audience  group  (or for
appropriate closely related groups)  such as those listed  in
Table 6.   The  education  and information  work  unit of  the
project  will develop overall  plans  and work with staff  of  the
project  and cooperating  agencies  to  ensure completion.
      This  active, analytical  and  systemized  approach  to adult
education  is one which has high potential for producing
behavioral changes among individuals and groups needed  to
more adequately control  sediment  pollution of not only  streams
 in Washington  County but throughout the state, Basin and
 nation.

-------
                                                Table  7    Example  of  a  Teaching  and  Activity  Outline
Ul
o


Audience or client group
o Washington County Board
Committees
oo SWCD
00 Planning
oo Ext. Education
0 County Board






° Wisconsin County
Boards Association








o National Association
of Counties
o National Association
of Conservation
Districts








Local coordinator is res

Needs for
education
o Understand Project
o Advise 6 Counsel in
project development
o Consider facts on
policies S issues
and their
consequences






o Become generally
familiar with
proj ect
o Understand impli-
cations of project
for state





o Become familiar
with the impli-
cations of the
Washington
County Project
for nationwide
uses by counties
and states
o Become familiar
with sources of
factual information
£ teaching aids


;DOnsible for wnrkina T,TI


Teaching objectives
o Acquaint County
Board Members
with project
o Allow Board to
advise on pro-
ject develop-
ment
o Give facts on
project find-
ings in terms
of alternate
policies £
their conse-
quences
o Acquaint key
county board
members
(statewide)
with project
o In-depth
education for
key committees
of Wisconsin
County Boards
Association


o Desserninate
project
findings
throughout
the nation



o Promote
nationwide
action of
local govern-
ments on sedi-
ment control
th 1 f>=tr\
Activities £ events

Time or
Type and scope duration
0 Tours, briefings, and o Throughout
reports to committees project
o Advisors Committee o Throughout
meetings project
o "Public policy" o 1976
meetings for com- 1977
mittees £ entire
county board




o Articles ° 1976
o Presentations at
state meetings
o Tours
° Television

o Movies
o One or more con- o Late
ferences £ work- 1976
shops on policy 1977
issues £ conse-
quences .
o Presentations at o 1977
national meetings, 1978
publications in
national magazines,
use of films, TV
shorts, slides, etc.


o Conferences 6 work-
shops for in-depth
consideration of
project findings



Responsibility

Lead Cooperators
o County Ext. 0 A11 agen_
staff cies
o Local o County
Coordl- Extension
natora SEWRPC
o County SCS
Ext. o Total
Staff project
staff £
contrac-
tors

o Project o UWEX
Director BSWCD staff
SCS




o Project o UWEX
Director BSWCD staff


o Project o UWEX
Director o Extension
Service
US DA
o EPA
o NACD
o SCS






         agencies to set priorities and general program thrusts.

-------
                     Detailed Operations

     Even though a large number of audience groups are
identified in Table 6 and detailed plans for working with
each have not been worked out, some general directions are
clear.   An active program of information and education for
landowners in the selected watersheds is underway, and educa-
tion efforts via mass media are ongoing throughout Washington
County.  On the basis of these and previous experiences the
project needs would be developed as follows:
     °A series of bulletins, pamphlets and brochures
      on various institutional and technical phases
      of the project for local, state and national
      usage.
     0 Slide-tape and television series showing tech-
      nical and institutional phases of project
      results and activities as an aid to widespread
      dissemination of project findings.
     °A sound, color, 16mm motion picture  (suitable
      for use throughout the Basin and for television
      viewing) demonstrating the  significance of
      this  and similar projects to improve water
      quality in the Great Lakes.
     °Workshops and educational conferences on
       significant project activities and findings.

 5.   APPLICATION OF RESULTS TO  OTHER AREAS

     The  development of  a sediment control  management  plan
 for Washington  County will  serve  as  a  demonstration of
 technical and  institutional  mechanisms  for conducting  a
 county-wide, rural-urban program.  The  demonstration must,
 however,  achieve  the  goal of being implementable  on a much
 broader geographic  scale,  i.e.,  statewide,  Great  Lakes
 region or national.   It  is  fully  understood that  this
 demonstration  can only  serve as  a basic prototype since  other
 areas  will have to develop  programs  taking into account
 political,  legal and economic constraints  placed  upon them.
      The important role that project personnel  can play  in
 disseminating  information on the  Washington County Project

                             51

-------
 has already been alluded to in the description of the
 education program.   Workshops  oriented to very practical
 considerations of such a program could be developed and
 presented in appropriate locations after the  clientele
 needing and using the  information have been identified.
 The practical types  of workshops would include discussions
 of  the  technical  and institutional mechanisms  attempted
 with evaluations  of  those  processes that led to successful
 implementation and those processes that did not.   In  cases
 where information has  been obtained relating to institutional
 arrangements  in other  states,  these would  be highlighted  in
 relationship  to the  success or failure  that such  arrangements
 might have  encountered  in  Washington County.   Field demonstra-
 tions would be  made  an  important  aspect  of the  workshops.
 At  the  national level,  attempts  would be made to  hold a
 symposium on  erosion control methodologies (technical and
 institutional)  concomitant with  the  annual meeting of the
 Soil Science  Society of America  in  1979.
     In line  with the role of  the Water Resources Center in
 disseminating information through the office of Water
Research and Technology network and the role of NACD in
providing information to states on a regional basis,
audiences for sediment control information will be carefully
defined and the information packaged in a form that is
comprehensible to the particular audience identified.
Information is frequently packaged in forms that are so
technical as to be unintelligible to the recipient, and a
particular effort will  be made in the Washington County
program to avoid these  pitfalls.
                            52

-------
       E.   TIME FRAME AND CONTRACTURAL ARRANGEMENTS

     Individuals representing agencies, organizations and
interest groups have been identified and incorporated into
work units directed toward accomplishing specific objectives.
Contractual arrangements are identified for accomplishing
certain functions required of the program (Fig. 15).  Careful
planning and coordination of activities have been demonstrated,
and Fig. 16 provides a broad time sequence through which the
project will operate.
                              53

-------
                                       Monitoring
                                 Land treatment:
                                 implementation of
                                 conservation measures
                                 Development of
                                 regulatory mechanisms
                                 and institutional
                                 arrangements for
                                 implementation
                                    Education and
                                 information program
                                                                                        Installation  and maintenance of one
                                                                                        monitoring  station
                                                                                        Installation of 13 monitoring stations--
                                                                                        design, maintenance, and supervision  of
                                                                                        installation provided by project  staff
                                                                                       Analysis of water and precipitation
                                                                                       samples, except for pesticides  and
                                                                                       heavy metals
                                                                                       Characterization of soils  and  sediments
                                                                                       and all pesticide and heavy metal
                                                                                       analyses
                                                                                       Design,  supervision, and implementation
                                                                                       of identified conservation practices,
                                                                                       through  a  coordinated effort between
                                                                                       WCSWCD,  USDA-SCS, Village of Germantown.
                                                                                       and  SEWRPC
 Study  of background information, and
 development and required revision of
 regulatory mechanisms and institutional
 arrangements for implementation, in
 cooperation with appropriate UW
 departments, SEWRPC, and project staff
Increase public  awareness and
understanding  of sediment problems, the
range of preventive and corrective
measures,  and  the  significance of this
project
By Wisconsin  statutes, UW  administers   and  provides staff for BSWCD.
                         Figure 15  Contractual  Arrangements

                                                           54

-------
Ul
Ln

ACTIVITY

Conceptualize project 	
Initial contact with cooperating agencies 	
rtrite initial proposal
Define relationships with cooperating agencies
Develope and write work plan 	 	 	 	 	
DEMONSTRATION OF WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
Select watersheds 	 	 __
Select water quality parameters*
Select monitoring sites'
Select land treatments
Modify drainageways in urbanizing watershed
Install monitoring sites
Collect and analyse samples
Implement land treatments in urbanizing watershed
Implement land treatments in agricultural watershed
nFVFIOPMENT OF SEDIMENT CONTROL ORDINANCE OR OTHER REGULATORY MECHANISMS
Evaluate existing statutory authority in Wisconsin
Review experiences in other states
Study social and economic implications of regulatory programs
Draft new regulatory program and/or ammendments to existing legislation
Review program with local decision makers 	 ^_ 	 	
Public review process
STUDY OF INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR LEGISLATION IMPLEMENTATION
Evaluate alternative mechanisms for program development
Evaluate personnel requirements for implementation
Evaluate financial requirements for implementation
EDUCATION AND INFORMATION DISSEMINATION PROGRAM
Define audiences
Package and disseminate information 	
ASSESSMENT OF PROGRAM APPLICABILITY ON REGIONWIDE BASIS
SUPPLEMENTAL ACTIVITIES
Computer storage of data 	
Data evaluation 	 	 	 	 	
Transfer of data to STORET ^ 	 	 	 	
Interim reports 	 	 	 	 	 .
Final report
1973
"? 3

linn
nun











" 1974
4 1

^-














in










1975




1 1
III













II
1 Illl
1 III
III
Illl
III
II,
II,


Illl
ri

1976 1977






1 III!
i nil
1 Illl
ii in
ii in


nun
ii HI
i ii

2341234



II 1 	
II II II II 1 1 II II
II
Illl
III
Illl III II II II II
III III II Illl II 1 1
Illl III Illl II II 1
1 1 Illl 1 II
1111 ill ill ill mum i
III 1 1 III IN 1 I


in in HI in 	
iiiniii in minium i
-Ff 	 f^\ 	
in 'mi in mi in in i
ii ii ii ii ii n i

1978 1979




~n in mini 	
n n ii i n n

n n i n n i i
11 i ii
m m mi inn
miiiii 	 n mi


iniinii 	 in


                calender year
                quarter
              c actually part  of planning phase
              d continuous,  as  land  is  disturbed
              e continuous  process of review  and modification
                                                                    FIG. 15.  Time schedule of activities.

-------
                        F.   SUMMARY

      The Washington County (Wisconsin) Project has been
 designed to conduct a reasearch-demonstration program dealing
 with the control of diffuse sources of pollution to surface
 waters.   The program will  demonstrate new and existing
 effective land treatment measures designed to control ero-
 sional and runoff losses from rural and urban lands.   The
 demonstration includes a monitoring program to evaluate the
 effectiveness of land treatment  measures in improving the
 water quality of the receiving streams.
      Of  major importance is the  necessity for developing a
 county-wide management plan for  the control of sediment in
 urban and rural  settings in an integrated manner,  and this is
 best  approached  by  developing alternative schemes  which are
 thoroughly evaluated from  the standpoint of the  social,  legal,
 economic,  and political  ramifications  each  alternative  may
 hold.  This can  only be  done  wisely and  effectively if  the
 local public  and particularly their representatives are
 involved  in the  process  from  the  outset  and on a continuing
 basis.   Strong local support  has  been  developed during  the
 conceptualization of the project, and the willingness with
 which  agency  personnel and  government representatives and
 officials  have given of  their  time  and effort to meet the
 program needs has been particularly  gratifying.  Clearly to
 be an  effective  program, the  economic feasibility of  its
 implementation is of primary  concern.  In this regard, each
 alternative will be  evaluated  in terms of the personnel
 needs  and  financial  obligation that will be  incurred  in its
 implementation,  and only the economically feasible alternatives
will be recommended  as viable management schemes.
     The project involves an educational program designed to
provide information  to the  public and governmental officials
with material packaged in a form that is comprehensible to
the particular clientele group under consideration.  The
education program will be pursued vigorously in Washington
                            56

-------
County from the outset of the project to keep a continuous
connection and stream of information flowing to the public
and their representatives in local government.   As information
on the project is gathered, the flow of information and educa-
tional materials must be expanded to inform statewide and
eventually Great Lakes region and national audiences.  For
the Washington County Project to be completely successful, the
management methodologies proposed must be implementable on
a much broader geographic base.
                              57

-------
               G.  BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

     Following are summaries of biographical information on
the principal investigator and those persons designated as
leaders of the various work units.
                            58

-------
Name:                T. C.  Daniel

Title:               Assistant Professor-Soil Science; Technical
                    Coordinator, Washington County Project

Education:

     Degree              University             Date Awarded

      B.S.          Texas A £ M University          1963
      M.S.          University of Wisconsin         1966
      Ph.D.         University of Wisconsin         1972
      Postdoc.      University of Wisconsin         1972

Professional and/or Research Experience:

Teacher,  Soil Science and Chemistry, School
     of Agriculture,  Ibadan, Nigera. _          1966-68
Assistant  Professor,  Dept. of Soil Science,
     University of Wisconsin.                   1972--

Selected  Publications:

     Daniel, T. C.  1969.  Soils of Western Nigeria, In
     Introductory Soils by D. Schmidt.  Odutola Printing
     Works Ekotedo, Ibadan, Nigeria.

     Graetz, D. A., G. Chesters, T. C.  Daniel, L. W.
     Newland, and G.  B. Lee.  1970.  Parathion degradation
     in lake sediments.   J. Water Poll. Control.  Fed.
     42:R76-R94.

     Daniel, T. C., and G. Chesters.   1971.   Design  and
     construction of  a shallow  water sediment core
     sampler.  Environ. Letters  1:225-228.

     Simsiman, G. V., G.  Chesters, and T.  C.  Daniel.   1972.
     Chemical control of  aquatic weeds and its effect  on
     the  nutrient and redox  status of  water and  sediment.
     15th Conf. I.A.G.L.R.   University of  Wisconsin,
     Madison, Wis.

     Chesters, G.,  H. B.  Pionke, and T.  C.  Daniel. _  1974.
     Sampling of  soil, water and sediment  for pesticide
     analysis, In W.  D. Guenzi, ed., Pesticides  and
     Their Effect on  Soil and Water.   Soil Sci.  Soc. Amer.,
     Madison, Wis.

     Daniel,  T. C., and J.  Bouma.   1974.   Column studies  of
     soil clogging  in slowly permeable soils  as  a function
     of  effluent  quality.   J. of Env.  Quality.   4:321-326.
                              59

-------
Daniel, T. C.,  S. Nichols, and W. Clark.  1974.
Controlling waterweeds.  University of Wisconsin-
Extension, Madison, Wis.
                      60

-------
Name:

Title:
Gordon Chesters

Director, Water Resources Center: Professor-
Soil Science, University of Wisconsin;
Chairman-Water Chemistry Program
Education:

     Degree

      B.S.
      M.S.
      Ph.D.
      University

University of Wales, G.B.
University of Wisconsin
University of Wisconsin
Professional and/or Research Experience

Research Assistant, Dept. of Soil Science,
     University of Wisconsin.
Postdoctoral Fellow, Dept._of  Soil Science,
     University of Wisconsin.
Assistant  Professor, Dept. _of  Soil Science,
     University of Wisconsin.
Associate  Professor, Dept._of  Soil Science,
     University of Wisconsin.
Professor,  Dept.  of  Soil  Science, Univer-
     sity  of Wisconsin.
Chairman,  Dept. of Soil  Science,  Univer-
     sity  of Wisconsin.
Chairman,  Water Chemistry Program,
     Advisory  Committee,  University
     of Wisconsin.
Director,  Wisconsin  Water Resources_
     Center.   University of  Wisconsin.
Chairman,  Water  Chemistry Program,
     Executive Committee, University
     of Wisconsin.

 Selected Publications:  (Total 100)
Date Awareded

    1954
    1956
    1959
                            1954-59

                            1959-61

                            1961-64

                            1964-67

                            1967--

                            1971-73


                            1972-73

                            1972 —


                             1973--
      Konrad, J.  G.,  G. Chesters, and D. R. Keeney.  1970
      Determination of organic- and carbonate-carbon in
      freshwater lake sediments by a microcombustion
      procedure.   J.  Thermal Anal.  2:199-208.

      Graetz, D.  A.,  G. Chesters, T. C. Daniel, L. W. Newland,
      and G. B. Lee.   1970.  Parathion degradation in lake
      sediments.   J.  Water Poll. Control Fed.  42:R76-R94.

      Chesters, G., and J. G. Konrad.  1971._ Effects of
      pesticide usage on water quality.  Invitational
      Symposium paper presented at the 1st National
      Biological Congress, Nov. 1970, Detroit, Mich.,
      BioScience 21:565-569.
                              61

-------
Chesters, G., J. G. Konrad, G. D. Schrag, and
L. Everett.  1971.  Gas chromatography:  Techniques
and_uses in  soil, plant and water analysis
Invitational chapter In:  ASA Special Publication,
 Instrumental methods for analysis of soil and
plant tissue," pp. 129-183.


Pionke  H  B   and G.  Chesters.   1972.  Sediment-
Water-Pesticide Interactions.   J. Environ.  Qual.,
Vol.  2, No.  1, pp. 29-45.
                      62

-------
Name:

Title:


Education:

     Degree

      B.A.
      M.A.
      Ph.D.
 Henry C.  Hart

 Professor-Political Science, University
 of Wisconsin
       University

 Vanderbilt University
 University of Wisconsin
 University of Wisconsin
Professional and/or Research Experience:

Instructor, Dept. of Political Science,
     University of Wisconsin.
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Political
     Science, University of Wisconsin.
Associate Professor, Dept. of Political
     Science, University of Wisconsin.
Professor,  Dept.  of Political Science,
     University of Wisconsin.
Director, Indian  Language  and Area_
     Center, University of Wisconsin.
Chairman, Dept. of Indian  Studies,
     University of Wisconsin.

Selected Publications:
Date Awarded

    1936
    1947
    1950
                             1948-50

                             1950-55

                             1955-59

                             1959 —

                             1960-63

                             1966-69
      Hart,  H.  C.   ADMINISTRATIVE ASPECTS OF RIVER VALLEY
      DEVELOPMENT.   (Delhi:   Indian Institute of Public
      Administration,  1961).

      Hart  H  C.   "Valley Development and Valley Adminis-
      tration in the Missouri Basin."  PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
      REVIEW, Vol.  41, pp.  1-11 (1948).
"Legislative Abdication in Regional
  JOURNAL OF POLITICS, Vol.  13, pp. 393-
      Hart  H  C.
      Development."
      417 (1951).

      Hart, H. C.  "Governing the Missouri."  IOWA LAW REVIEW,
      Vol. \1, pp. 198-215 (1956).

      Hart  H  C   "Crisis, Community and Consent in Water
      Politics."  LAW AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS, Vol. 22,
      pp. 510-537 (1957).
                              63

-------
Name:

Title:


Education:

     Degree

      B.A.
      M.S.
      Ph.D.
                     Frederick W.  Madison,  Jr.

                     Specialist,  Department of  Soil Science
                     University of Wisconsin               '
                          University

                     University  of  Wisconsin
                     University  of  Wisconsin
                     University  of  Wisconsin

Professional and/or  Research Experience:

Project Assistant, Federal Project #912
      (Research on Prairie and Red  Clay
      Soils of Wisconsin).
Teaching Assistant, Kept, of Soil  Science
      University of Wisconsin.
Research Assistant, Soil Survey Division
      of Wisconsin Geologic and Natural
      History Survey.
Legislative Assistant to Senator Gaylord
     Nelson.
Special Assistant to the Federal Co-chair-
     man, _ Upper Great Lakes  Regional
     Commission.
Specialist, Dept.  of Soil Science,
     University of Wisconsin.
Date Awarded

    1961
    1963
    1972
                                                1961

                                                1962-63


                                                1962-64

                                                1967-68


                                                1969-73

                                                1973 —

-------
Name:               Patrick E. McGuire

                    Natural Resources Specialist
                    Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources


Education:

     Degree               University             Date Awarded

          B S.      University of Wisconsin         1970
   double M'.S.      University of Wisconsin         1975


Professional  and/or Research  Experience:

Specialist, Dept.  of  Soil  Science,               1a^n-l^
       University  of Wisconsin                   •*-*'"
Research Assistant, Dept.  of  Soil  Science
       University  of Wisconsin        _           xa/a
Natural Resources Specialist, Wisconsin
       Department  of Natural Resources           ia/&
                               65

-------
 Name :

 Title:


 Education:

     Degree

      Ph.B.
      LL.B.
Carlisle P. Runge

Professor-Urban and Regional Planning,
University of Wisconsin
      University

University of Wisconsin
University of Wisconsin
Professional and/or Research Experience:

Lake Superior Project participant.
Wisconsin Land Resources Committee
     Staff.
University of Wisconsin Extension
    • Specialist.
Project Manager United.Nations-
     Yugoslavia Development Program
Professor,_Dept. of Urban and Regional
     Planning,  University of Wisconsin.

Selected Publications:
Date Awarded

    1946
    1948
                            1971-73

                            1972-73

                            1973

                            1973-74

                            1974--
     Runge,  C.  P.,  and W.  L. Church.  New Directions in
     Regionalism:   A Case  Study of Intergovernmental
     Relations  in Northwestern Wisconsin.

     Runge,  C.  P. ed.   Conclusions and Recommendations
     for Strengthened  State  Planning and Management of
     Wisconsin  Lands.

     Runge,  C.  P.   A Proposal  for Improving  the Manage-
     ment of the Great Lakes of the U.S.  and Canada.
     (Canada-United States University Seminar).

     Clarenbach, F.  A., H. C.  Jordahl Jr., and  C.  P.  Runge.
     Maintaining Wisconsin:  State/Regional/Local  Planning
     Arrangements for  Land Development and Environmental
     Protection.
                            66

-------
Name:               Harold F. Ryan

Title:              County Board Supervisor-Washington County


Education:
                          Hnivprsitv            Date Awarded
     Degree               univerbJ-Ly            	__	

      B S.          University of Wisconsin-        1953
                         Platteville

Professional and/or Research Experience:

District  Conservationist, U.S.D.A.  Soil          1944.73
      Conservation  Service.
Interim Coordinator,  Washington  County           1974__
      Project.
County Board  Supervisor, Washington             1974__
      County.
                               67

-------
                        H.  BUDGET

     The estimated budgets for the project are presented on
the following pages:

     Budget by Agency:                    Page Number
          BSWCD                               6g
          UWEX                                6 g
          WRC                                 7Q
          WDNR                                y Q
          WCSWCD                              ?1
          SEWRPC                              ?1
          USGS
    Summary of  Budget  for  Project             72
                           68

-------
                   BUD3ET




BOARD OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS



Personnel
Fringe Benefits
Indirect Costs
Total

5/24/74
to
6/30/75
$ 36,745
6,614
20,577
$ 63,936

7/01/75
to
6/30/76
$ 32,504
5,851
18,202
$ 56,557

7/01/76
to
6/30/77
$ 34,130
6,143
19,113
$ 59,386
BUDGET
7/01/77
to
6/30/78
$ 35,836
6,450
20,068
$ 62,354

7/01/78
to
12/31/78
$ 18,813
3,386
10,535
$ 32,734



Total
$ 158,028
28,444
88,495
$ 274,967

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-EXTENSION



Personnel
Fringe Benefits
Indirect Costs
Supplies
Travel
Equipment
Oth
Total
5/24/74
to
6/30/75
$ 36,017
6,686
18,175
2,900
3,950
500
1,000
$ 69,228
7/01/75
to
6/30/76
$ 78,770
13,912
36,917
4,000
5,000
10,000
30,500
$179,099
7/01/76
to
6/30/77
$ 84,213
14,608
39,607
5,000
7,000
5,000
32,000
$187,428
7/01/77
to
6/30/78
$ 86,860
15,339
40,711
5,000
6,500
2,000
12,000
$168,410
7/01/78
to
12/31/78
$ 44,771
8,066
20,907
2,000
2,500
-
7,500
$ 85,744


Total
$ 330,631
53,611
156,317-
18,900
24,950
17,500
83,000
$ 689,909
                    69

-------
                    BUDGET




UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN WATER RESOURCES CENTER

Personnel
Fringe Benefits
Indirect Costs
Supplies
Travel
Equipment
Other
Total

5/21/74
to
6/30/75
$ 57,906
8,652
36,689
3,300
2,000
2,000
6,500
$117,047

7/01/75
to
6/30/76
$191,462
22,251
no, 970
11,500
9,000
51,400
17,000
$413,583

7/01/76
to
6/30/77
$202,536
23,366
117,383
11,500
7,000
5,000
18,000
$384,785
BUDGET
7/01/77
to
6/30/78
$203,689
23,211
118,958
11,300
5,000
5,000
18,000
$385,158

7/01/78
to
12/31/78
$ 96,776
10,517
56,105
8,000
4,000
2,000
8,500
$185,898

Total
$ 752,369
87,997
440,105
45,600
27,000
65,400
68,000
$1,486,471

WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES



Personnel
Fringe Benefits
Indirect Costs
Supplies
Travel
EquipiTient
Other
Total
5/24/74
to
6/30/75
$ 10,222
2,045
2,058
2,000
250
20,000
500
$ 37,075
7/01/75
to
6/30/76
$ 33,538
6,707
7,981
7,000
1,000
21,000
7,000
$ 84,226
7/01/76
to
6/30/77
$ 35,209
7,041
8,114
6,000
1,000
4,000
7,000
$ 68,364
7/01/77
to
6/30/78
$ 47,168
9,437
10,246
6,000
1,000
2,000
7,000
$ 82,851
7/01/78
to
12/31/78
$ 30,107
6,023
6,660
3,500
1,000
1,000
5,000
$ 53,290


Total
$ 156,244
31,253
35,059
24,500
4,250
48,000
26,500
$ 325,806
                       70

-------
                        BUDGET
WASHINGTON COUNTY SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT


Personnel
Fringe Benefits
Indirect Costs
Supplies
Travel
Equipment
Total

5/24/74
to
6/30/75
$ 2,580
591
345
200
400
58,200
25,000
$ 87,316

7/01/75
to
6/30/76
$ 16,232
3,716
2,173
1,000
1,200
300
247,000
$271,621

7/01/76
to
6/30/77
$ 17,046
3,904
2,282
1,000
1,200
300
60,000
$ 85,732
BUDGET
7/01/77
to
6/30/78
$ 17,896
4,096
2,396
1,000
1,200
100
25,000
$ 51,688

7/01/78
to
12/31/78
$ 9,393
2,149
1,258
200
600
100
_1S,000
$28,700


Total
$ 63,147
14,456
8,454
3,400
4,600
59,000
372,000
$ 525,057

SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION


Personnel
Fringe Benefits
Indirect Costs
Supplies
Travel
Equipment
Total
5/24/74
to
6/30/75
$ 6,535
1,305
1,960
300
400
200
$ 10,700
7/01/75
to
6/30/76
$ 8,000
1,600
2,400
1,000
800
500
$ 14,300
7/01/76
to
6/30/77
$ 8,400
1,680
2,520
1,000
800
500
$ 14,900
7/01/77
to
6/30/78
$ 8,820
1,765
2,645
1,000
800
500
$ 15,530
7/01/78
to
12/31/78
$ 4,630
925
1,390
1,000
800
_
$ 8,745

Total
$ 36,385
7,275
10,915
4,300
3,600
1,700
$ 64,175
                           71

-------
        BUDGET




U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY



Supplies
Equipment

Other





BSWCD
UKEX
UW-WRC
WDNR
WCSWCD
SEWRPC
uses

5/2U/74
to
6/30/75
$ 500
8,000

9,500
Total $ 18,000

5/24/74
to
6/30/75
$ 63,936
69,228
117,047
37,075
87,316
10,700
18,000
Total $403,302
7/01/75
to
6/30/76
$ 1,000


7,000
$ 8,000
SUMMARY
7/01/75
to
6/30/76
$ 56,557
179,099
413,583
84,226
271,621
14,300
8,000
$1,027,386
7/01/76
to
6/30/77
$ 1,000

_
7,000
$ 8,000
7/01/77
to
6/30/78
$ 1,000

—
7,000
$ 8,000
7/01/78
"to
12/31/78
$ 500

—
3,500
$ 4,000


_ .
$ 4,000

8,000
34,000
$ 46,000
OF PROJECT BUDGET
7/01/76
to
6/30/77
$ 59,386
187,428
384,785
68,364
85,732
14,900
8,000
$808,595
7/01/77
to
6/30/78
$ 62,354
168,410
385,158
82,851
51,688
15,530
8,000
$773,991
7/01/78
to
12/31/78
$ 32,734
85,744
185,898
53,290
28,700
8,745
4,000
$399,111


Total
$ 274,967
689,909
1,486,471
325,806
525,057
64,175
46,000
$3,412,335
          72

-------
1. REPORT NO
 EPA-905/9-T7-001
                                  TECHNICAL REPORT DATA    .
                           (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing/
                           ' ^__	._^————             I  nr- r
                   Washington County  Project"
4 TITLE AND SUBTITLE   ,,«.^i.*—"O-	  	./     ^
 Development  and Implementation  of  a Sediment Control
 Ordinance or other Regulatory Mechanism: Institutional
 Arrangements Necessary for Implementation of Control
7.AUTHOR(S)Methology on Urban and  Kural Lands.
 Thomas  C. Daniel
 Ralph H.  Klassy	.	coc  •	•	
9 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
 Wisconsin Bd. of Soil & Water Conservation Districts
  1815 University Avenue
 Madison,  Wisconsin 53706
                                                           . RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
                                                           . PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
                                                          8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
                                                           10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NU.
                                                            2BA645
                                                           11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
                                                            G-005139
                                                            13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                                                             Work Plan-May  '7&-Ttec.  '78	
                                                            14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
 U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency
 Office of  Great Lakes  Coordinator
 230 South  Dearborn  Street
 Chicago, Illinois 60604
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
 Section 108 (a) Program - Ralph G.  Christensen
 U.S. EPA Project  Officer - Ralph V. Nordstrom
16. ABSTRACT
 The primary  objective of this project  is to demonstrate  the effectiveness_of land
 control measures  in improving water quality, and to devise  the necessary  institu-
 tional arrangements for the preparation, acceptance, adoption, and implementation
 of a sediment  control ordinance applicable to incorporated  and unincorporated
 areas on a county-wide basis.
 17.
                                 KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                   DESCRIPTORS
                                                .IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDEDTERMS
                                                                          c.  COS AT I Field/Group
   Sediment
   Erosion
   Water Quality
   Institutional
   Socio-Economic
   Nutrients
   Land Treatment
  13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
   Document available  from  performing office
   or NTIS, Springfield, Virginia 22151
                                                                   cport)
                                                                           21. NO. OF PAGES
                                               20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
                                                                          22. PRICE
  EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
                                             73
                                                                                   GPO 814—949-3

-------