EPA 910/9-90-004
United Stales
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle WA 98101
Alaska
Idaho
gon
Wa
Water Division
Nonpoint Sources
February 1990
Lessons Learned:
Rock Creek, Idaho and
Tillamook Bay, Oregon
Rural Clean Water Programs
-<*, ••-.
-------
Review of the Management and Water
Quality Lessons of the
Rural Clean Water Program
Review Team:
Bruce Cleland. Chief, Ambient Monitoring Section
Evan Homlg, Ambient Monitoring Section
Donald Martin, Idaho Nonpolnt Source Coordinator
Gerald-Montgomery, Soil Conservation Service Liaison
Elbert Moore, Regional Nonpolnt Source Coordinator
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10
Seattle, Washington
February 1990
-------
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
Rock Creek, Idaho 3
Management 3
Water Quality Monitoring and Evaluation 6
Observations 8
Remaining Challenges 10
Tillamook Bay, Oregon 12
Management 12
Water Quality Monitoring and Evaluation 16
Observations 21
Remaining Challenges 23
Recommendations for Future Projects 24
-------
INTRODUCTION
Background and Rationale
The Rock Creek, Idaho, and Tillamook Bay, Oregon, projects are two of 20
Rural Clean Water Programs (RCWP) nationally. The Rock Creek project is also one
of five projects nationwide selected for comprehensive water quality monitoring and
economic evaluations. The Rock Creek project began in 1980 and Tillamook in 1981.
These projects will be completed in 1995 and 1996.
Considerable water quality data and information have been collected and
analyzed during these projects. In addition to providing quantitative information, a
number of learning experiences related to designing and implementing water quality
projects have occurred. It is important to document these lessons to assist states,
USDA, EPA and others in better using the results from these projects.
The review of the RCWP projects in Region 10 is intended to provide definitive
information on the water quality results from these projects. The Regional Office of
EPA has been frequently asked in recent years what was learned from the two RCWP
projects? Annual reports have been generally helpful in responding to this question,
but more specific information is needed.
Objectives
1. To inventory, evaluate and document water quality lessons learned from the two
RCWP projects.
2. To develop recommendations for transferring RCWP technology and lessons to
other agricultural NPS controls in state NPS management programs.
Review Methodology
An interdisciplinary team of individuals with expertise in agricultural nonpoint
source controls and water quality monitoring was assembled to conduct the reviews.
Reviews were closely coordinated with state and local RCWP committees.
The methods used in evaluating the water quality and management aspects of
the Model Implementation Program (MIP) were used to focus the RCWP reviews. The
MIP evaluation was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Results from seven nationwide projects conducted
between 1978 and 1982 were evaluated.
The review team visited each project area to: (1) assess overall project results
with some of the interested and affected groups; (2) observe best management
practices applied and discuss their effectiveness; and (3) determine key measures of
environmental success, project status and future directions.
-------
Rock Creek, Idaho
Project Profile
Area: The Rock Creek RCWP is located in Southcentral Idaho near the city of
Twin Falls. The project area is 45,000 acres, of which 33,503 are cropland. Critical
acres are 28,159. Mean annual precipitation is 8.5 inches. Beans, wheat, alfalfa and
corn are the major crops. There are 272 farms in the project area; 182 are
participating in the project.
Water Quality Problem: Excessive sediment and nutrients impacting cold water
biota.
Project Cost: RCWP cost-sharing - $2.3 million; CM&E - $1.2 million.
Primary Best Management Practices: Improved Irrigation; Sediment Retention
Structures; Filter Strips and Conservation Tillage.
Water Quality Results: 75% reduction in suspended sediment.
Implementation Status: 182 approved contracts covering 21,147 acres.
Sixty-two (62) percent of BMPs applied.
Review Results
Management
Program Structure
The Rock Creek project used the basic structure required for RCWPs. A
state and local coordinating committee (SCC and LCC) provided overall
guidance and policy direction. The primary responsibility for implementation
was with the local committee. The interagency coordination and cooperation
are good for the project. This has been the case from early project planning up
to the present.
Project Selection
The excellent pre-project data base and institutional structure from a 208
project in the area were instrumental in Rock Creek's selection. Rock Creek
was identified as a high priority stream in Idaho's Agricultural Pollution
Abatement Plan, 1979. The Snake River and Twin Falls Soil Conservation
Districts received a 208 grant to develop a water quality management plan. The
plan was instrumental in providing a framework for the RCWP project.
-------
Project Planning
Project planning was based on national RCWP guidance. Objectives and
goals were established as part of the RCWP application. The goals were to
significantly reduce the amount of sediment, sediment related pollutants, and
animal waste discharging into Rock Creek.
The contracting phase for the RCWP ended in September 1986. A total
of 185 long term contracts were approved. Three were cancelled prior to the
contracting deadline. The 182 remaining contracts involve 21,147 acres.
BMP Selection
The LCC used the 208 plan as the primary support document for
selecting BMPs for the Rock Creek RCWP. Other information included the SCS
Field Office Technical Guide, Agricultural Research Service (ARS) reports, and
water quality data.
The LCC is comprised of members from the ASCS, SCS, CES, County
Conservation District, ASCS County Committee, DEQ, County Government,
FmHA, EPA, ERS, Twin Falls Canal Board, Idaho Department of Fish and Game,
and other local agencies and farmers organizations.
Originally, the LCC emphasized structural BMPs that intercepted and
stored sediment in the transport process. Their action was based on ARS
research reports that indicated a 90 percent efficiency in reducing sedimentation
with sediment basins. Structural practices were also more acceptable to
farmers in the early years. After a few years, management and maintenance
problems developed with many structural practices. Water quality data also
indicated the structural practices were not accomplishing the project goals.
Therefore, in 1985 the LCC changed it's emphasis to conservation tillage and
other BMPs designed to keep the soil on the field.
The LCC now believes that more emphasis should be placed on nutrient
and pest management practices.
Selections of BMPs for individual farms were based on site specific needs
and farmer preference.
The LCC set BMP funding priorities based on their priority sub-basins.
BMP Implementation
National RCWP procedures were used in developing the Rock Creek
RCWP project.
-------
The LCC developed a Plan of Work that was used to identify and allocate
resources (manpower and money) as well as a mechanism for their control.
Strategies were developed for obtaining farmer support, implementing
BMPs, communicating with the public, and interacting with the project team.
Goals were set for farmer participation and BMP implementation.
Funding for financial incentives was adequate to ensure voluntary
participation of critical acres.
Labor, BMP costs, financial incentives, and management preference were
important factors that influenced participation decisions.
Agencies assisted in identifying economic benefits associated with
specific BMPs.
Cost-share payments were made by reimbursement of a percentage of
actual incurred expenses. A maximum was placed on each BMP.
There was no evidence that the payment method affected participation.
BMPs are being installed as planned, however, many of the RCWP
contracts have been revised.
Approximately 70 percent of the high-priority farmers participated.
The educational/technical staffing was not adequate for the Cooperative
Extension Service. Other participating agencies picked up the slack for I & E
programs.
Educational and technical assistance was implemented through the use
of site visits, telephone calls, meetings, and the news media.
Contractors were available to undertake specialized BMP work.
Key individuals on the LCC, including farmers, were the primary
implementing agents for the project.
Farmers supported the water quality objectives of the project. Support
has grown throughout the life of the project.
The LCC was responsible for resolving any conflicts during
implementation. If they could not settle the conflict, the issue would be
forwarded to the appropriate agency for resolution.
No agency regulations were a barrier to implementation.
-------
Everyone seemed pleased with the way the project was implemented.
No improvements were suggested.
BMP Monitoring and Evaluation
SCS and ASCS have tracking systems to monitor BMP implementation.
Both agencies revised their tracking systems during the implementation phase
of the project because of lessons learned and the added availability of
computers.
Each agency developed their own strategy for follow up assistance. This
allowed them to stay abreast with the performance of each BMP.
No water quality monitoring plan was developed to evaluate individual
BMPs. The monitoring program was intended to only evaluate the total project
effectiveness.
No formal method was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness or net
benefits for the cost-sharing component of the RCWP. Economics and benefits
were discussed with each farmer as individual plans were being developed.
No criteria were used to assess the contribution of cost-sharing funds in
securing farmer participation, other than opinions of the LCC.
Cost-sharing funds were directed to the farms in the high-priority sub-
basins.
No formal method was used to evaluate the educational and technical
assistance programs.
Water Quality Monitoring and Evaluation
Pollutant Sources
There is a need to identify all major sources of pollutants and their
relative contributions prior to onset of a project. For the Rock Creek Project,
this would include the contribution of sediment from streambank erosion and
the contributions of nutrients from currently operated and planned trout
hatcheries. Such a full basin assessment approach would help direct project
plans to address all major pollutant sources within the project's jurisdiction,
develop realistic project water quality objectives, and allow a monitoring design
that takes into account external sources.
Although The Rock Creek Project did not provide initial estimates of the
relative contributions of pollutants from all important sources. However,
-------
corrections made after initiation of the project have in recent years allowed
investigators to focus on non-project (e.g., streambank erosion) sources and
thus improve interpretation of the project's water quality benefits.
Goals and Objectives
The initial goals and objectives of a project should specify water quality
improvements both on subbasins and on the major receiving waters.
With a project directed to irrigated croplands, objectives and subsequent
monitoring of the irrigation return canals/ditches (as was done on the Rock
Creek Project) is very important in that it is analogous to source monitoring.
This directly addresses loads from specific portions of the projects, and is a
relatively straightforward way to stipulate specific goals and to measure
progress towards these goals.
Specifying goals and measuring progress in downstream receiving
waters, although more difficult due to external factors, is nevertheless very
important in that it directly addresses the actual water quality benefits to the
beneficial uses, and hence to the state water quality standards. However, the
initial goals of the project did not directly address water quality in Rock Creek or
the Snake River.
When water quality goals are initially stated, there is a greater possibility
of considering and including an initial whole basin assessment (as suggested in
above section). This in turn should trigger and direct a monitoring program that
directly addresses state water quality standards and takes into account external
factors. Fortunately, the Rock Creek monitoring program included the main
stream of Rock Creek and directly measured beneficial use status (i.e. biota).
Monitoring System
There are good to excellent features of the Rock Creek Monitoring
Program that are model examples for directing similar future projects. These
include:
• The design of the system covered both irrigation returns (i.e.
sources to the receiving water) and well-placed receiving water
sites.
• Both sampling frequency and selection of pollutants were quite
adequate to address any changes that might have occurred in the
subbasins and Rock Creek.
-------
Beneficial uses (e.g. salmonids and other cold water biota and
fishermen surveys) were directly evaluated.
The monitoring program allowed flexibility over the years, and was
thus able to add important elements (e.g. salmonid spawning
measures) and external factors (e.g. streambank erosion).
The Quality Control/Quality Assurance Program was excellent. It
could serve as a standard for reviewing project proposals and
results of future monitoring projects.
Data Management and Analysis
Budgeting specifically for ongoing data management and analysis should
be specified at the onset of a project. This will help to assure that results can
constantly be used in a "feedback loop" for both the monitoring program and
the project's land management practices. The effectiveness of "feedback" was
demonstrated on the Rock Creek Project when emphasis shifted in 1985 from
off-site controls to upland (e.g. conservation tillage) controls after its
effectiveness was documented. Specific budgeting for data analysis will also
prevent having to seek additional funds towards the end of a project.
In addition to data management and analysis, presentation is also
important in this kind of project. As has been done throughout the Rock Creek
Project, summary briefs with clear graphics, photos, videos, and on-site
demonstrations for operators and other citizens, project managers, and
interested agencies should be included.
In terms of the Rock Creek Project, a large amount of data (land use,
chemical/physical, and biological) have been collected over the years that will
be very useful in making judgments on the relationships between land uses,
source loading, and beneficial uses. Unfortunately, the analyses of these data
have not yet been adequate in documenting these relationships.
Observations
Adequate funding and a functional delivery system were helpful in obtaining
good participation.
The project staff and cooperating agencies recognize the need for a post
project evaluation on the link between land treatment and water quality. In
future projects, this needs to be factored into the front end of projects.
8
-------
A complete water quality problem assessment needs to be performed
throughout the project watershed before land treatment is started. This project
failed to recognize the magnitude and contribution of all nonpoint sources, like
streambank erosion, which has masked the instream success of the RCWP land
treatment effort. There is a need to insure that a holistic evaluation of nonpoint
source impacts is done.
The amount of land controlled by absentee landlords and/or leased farms in a
project generally make implementaiton more difficult. Future projects should
develop ways of addressing this land management condition to ensure that
contracts and plans are implemented in a timely manner.
There is concern in the Rock Creek RCWP that management practices may not
be continued after their project life (contract commitment) is fulfilled. It was
noted that good follow-up by SCS/ASCS after the project is over may prevent
the abandonment of practices.
The use of a local coordinating committee and technical advisory committee
approach appears to be key components for project success. Inclusion of all
agencies and interested parties is also key to project acceptance. Cooperation
is a must!
The focus on improvement of instream beneficial uses, such as fisheries and
primary contact recreation has been a critical point in getting local support for
the project. Public support is strong for improved fishing. Water quality
violators are now being turned in regularly by the public due to an increased
awareness of Rock Creek's improved beneficial uses.
Having a Technical Advisory Committee (TAG) in place, has been helpful in
resolving technical problems of the project, as well as providing
recommendations to the Local Coordinating Committee (LCC).
The close proximity and involvement of the ARS-Kimberly Research Station has
been a real plus for the project's credibility with the farmers in the project area.
Practice evaluation (BMP effectiveness) has taken place on field plots in the
project watershed.
A plan for Information and Education (I & E) activities should be a must in a
project's scope of work. Prior to 1985 I & E efforts were not adequate. Since
1985 the Soil Conservation District has conducted the I & E program.
The involvement of the purchasers of farm products (commodities) produced in
the project area on the Local Coordinating Committee and/or the Technical
Advisory Committee may have been helpful in increasing project participation,
implementation of practices/management systems and long term commitments
to conservation and water quality improvement.
-------
There was good flexibility at the project level with regard to development of
practices unique to the project area and the region. Also, the ability for the
project to redirect resources contributed to the project's success.
Future NFS Control projects need to have the objectives of enhanced water
quality/beneficial use values well defined in the proposal and the plan of work.
With seventy-five percent of the critical area treated, expected decreases in
pollutant loads to Rock Creek are estimated at 70 percent sediment, 70 percent
total Phosphorus and 65 percent toxics, mostly pesticides.
The Rock Creek project has had a positive influence on farming practices
throughout the Magic Valley.
The Rock Creek experience has spread throughout the entire state of Idaho.
Idaho has developed a State Agricultural Water Quality Program (cost-share)
designed after RCWP with 25 implementation projects and 21 planning projects.
The financial commitment by the state of Idaho is presently approximately $19
million.
Remaining Challenges
Streambank erosion and hydrological modifications are significant pollution
sources impacting Rock Creek. These sources were not addressed as part of the
RCWP. These sources may be masking the results from the application of BMPs in
the RCWP. It is important that effective approaches for addressing these problems be
identified and implemented. This is essential to ensure that water quality
improvements gained from the RCWP are maintained.
No formal procedure was established for evaluating BMP effectiveness in
contracts implemented. The ARS-Kimberly Research Station evaluated a number of
practices in research plots in the watershed. This research information was used in
promoting the implementation of sediment reduction practices.
It is recognized that BMP effectiveness is site specific. Effectiveness usually
depends upon implementation of a combination of practices that constitutes a
Resource Management System. A more structured approach to evaluating BMP
effectiveness would have provided valuable information to assist in interpreting water
quality data and results.
The LCC recognizes the need to better analyze and document the results of
applied land treatment and the results from water quality monitoring. Good data bases
exist from project implementation to complete this task. The LCC has requested
funding to complete this critical component of the RCWP.
10
-------
The LCC's request for additional funding to support doing a thorough analysis
and summary of the water quality and land use data should be supported by all
agencies. It should be approved by the National Coordinating Committee.
Local Coordinating Committees should be made up of only local individuals.
Agency representatives outside of the local area should serve on the state
coordinating committee, if appropriate.
11
-------
Tillamook Bay, Oregon
Project Profile
Area: The Tillamook Bay drainage basin is located in Northwestern Oregon bounded
on the east by the Cascade Mountains and on the west by the Pacific Ocean. Mean
annual precipitation is 90-150 inches. The basin contains 363,520 acres; 323,050
acres of forest land; 23,540 acres of agricultural lands; and the bay is 8,839 acres.
The agricultural lands constitute the RCWP area. The application identified 8,723 acres
as critical. The project includes 123 dairy farms.
Water Quality Problem: Fecal contamination impacting shellfish harvesting and water
contact recreation.
Project Cost: RCWP - $4.5 million; Farmers - $3.5 million.
Primary Best Management Practices: Animal Waste Management Systems.
Water Quality Results: 65% reduction in fecal contamination.
Implementation Status: 98% of the critical areas are under contract; application of
BMPs is 75%.
Review Results
Management
Program Structure
The Tillamook project used the basic structure required for RCWPs. A
state and local coordinating committee provided overall guidance and policy
direction. The primary responsibility for implementation was with the local
committee. The interagency coordination and cooperation were outstanding for
the project. This has been the case from early project planning up to the
present.
Project Selection
The excellent pre-project data base and institutional structure from a 208
project in the area were instrumental in Tillamook's selection. The Tillamook
Bay Fecal Waste Management Plan developed by Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality and the Tillamook Bay Agricultural Pollution Abatement
12
-------
Plan developed by the Tillamook Soil and Water Conservation District provided
the strong basis for the RCWP project. Geographic boundaries of the project
were determined largely from the Agricultural Plan.
Project Planning
Project planning was based on national RCWP guidance. Clear
objectives and goals were established as part of the RCWP application. The
goal is to achieve a 70 percent reduction in fecal coliform bacteria entering
waterbodies. Annual evaluations and reports were commitments in the project
applications.
BMP Selection
The LCC used the 208 plan as the primary support document for
selecting BMPs. Other information included the SCS Field Office Technical
Guide and water quality data.
The LCC was comprised of members from the ASCS, SCS, ES, County
Soil and Water Conservation District, ASCS County Committee, DEQ, Tillamook
Creamery Association, the shellfish industry, Tillamook County, and other local
agencies and farmers' organizations.
Originally, the LCC felt that only one BMP was needed to solve the
pollution problem (animal waste management system). This resulted in a
conflict with the SCC and NCC. The LCC then agreed to select additional
BMPs for the project.
Since the most serious pollutant in Tillamook Bay was identified as animal
wastes from the many dairy farms in the watershed, and since the only project
goal was to reduce the fecal coliform bacteria load, the LCC selected only those
BMPs that addressed animal wastes from dairies.
Selection of BMPs for individual dairies was based on site specific needs
and farmer preference.
The LCC set funding priorities on BMPs based on their opinion of
effectiveness.
The LCC adjusted the funding limitations on BMPs based on early
experience in the program.
Priorities were revised and refined within the watershed based on water
quality monitoring data and agency tracking systems, however, there was no
revisions of approved BMPs.
13
-------
BMP Implementation
National RCWP procedures were used in developing the Tillamook Bay
RCWP project.
The LCC developed a Plan of Work that was used to identify and allocate
resources (manpower and money) as well as a mechanism for their control.
Strategies were developed for obtaining farmer support, implementing
BMPs, communicating with the public, and interacting with the project team.
Goals were set for farmer participation and BMP implementation.
Funding for financial incentives was adequate to ensure voluntary
participation of priority dairies.
Labor, BMP costs, financial incentives, and management preference were
important factors that influenced participation decisions.
More efficient management (drier barnyards, less labor, etc.) and
farmstead esthetics were common non-water quality improvement benefits that
led to farmer participation. Agencies assisted in identifying economic benefits
associated with specific BMPs.
Incentive payments were made by reimbursement of a percentage of
actual incurred expenses. A maximum was placed on each BMP.
Prompt cost-share reimbursement to the producers expedited
implementation.
All BMPs are being installed as planned. There was one instance of a
participant that installed the planned BMPs but is not following the management
plan. The LCC could not resolve the conflict and turned it over to ASCS. ASCS
has initiated their procedure for levying a penalty on this individual for being out
of compliance on a RCWP contract.
99 percent of the high-priority farmers participated.
The education/technical assistance staffing in the participating agencies
was adequate to implement the RCWP.
Educational and technical assistance was implemented through the use
of site visits, telephone calls, meetings, and the news media.
Contractors were available to undertake specialized BMP work.
14
-------
Key individuals on the LCC, including farmers, were the primary
implementing agents for the project.
Farmers supported the water quality objectives of the project. They now
take pride in the observable water quality improvements.
The LCC was responsible for resolving any conflicts during
implementation. If they could not settle the conflict, the issue would be
forwarded to the appropriate agency for resolution.
No agency regulations were a barrier to implementation.
Everyone seemed pleased with the way the project was implemented.
BMP Monitoring and Evaluation
SCS and ASCS have tracking systems to monitor BMP implementation.
Both agencies revised their tracking systems during the implementation phase
of the project because of lessons learned and the added availability of
computers.
Each agency developed their own strategy for follow-up assistance. This
allowed them to stay abreast with the performance of each BMP.
No water quality monitoring plan was developed to evaluate individual
BMPs. The water quality monitoring program was used to refine priorities within
the project area, but it was intended to only evaluate the total project
effectiveness.
No formal method was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness or net
benefits of the cost-sharing component of the RCWP. Economics and benefits
were discussed with each farmer as individual plans were being developed.
No criteria were used to assess the contribution of cost-sharing funds in
securing farmer participation, other than opinions of the LCC. The LCC did
estimate the impact of cost-sharing during the planning phase of the project.
Cost-sharing funds were directed to the high-priority farms. These funds
were also directed to the high-priority BMPs.
No formal method was used to evaluate the educational and technical
assistance programs.
15
-------
Water Quality Monitoring and Evaluation
Problem Definition
Intended Use of Waters
The intended uses of waters within the Tillamook Bay project area
are described in state regulations. Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR)
Chapter 340, Division 41, Rule 202 lists the beneficial uses for which
water quality will be protected in the North Coast - Lower Columbia
basin. The intended uses dependent on water quality within the
Tillamook Bay project area are resident fish & aquatic life including
shellfish growing, industrial water supply, water contact recreation,
salmonid fish spawning & rearing, and aesthetic quality. Applicable water
quality standards for Tillamook Bay which protect these uses are found in
OAR 340-41-205. Several of these standards are summarized in
Table 1.1.
Table 1.1 Ambient Water Quality Criteria for the Tillamook Basin
Salmonid Fish
& Cold Water
Biota
Dissolved Oxygen
(freshwater)
(estuarine)
pH (estuarine)
> 90% saturation at seasonal low
% saturation during spawning
> 6 mg/L
7.0 - 8.5
Shellfish
Harvesting
Fecal Coliform
< 14/100 ml median and
< 43/100 ml in 90% of samples
Water Contact
Recreation
Fecal Coliform
< 200/100 ml 30-day log mean and
< 400/100 ml in 90% of samples
Impairment
The predominant impaired uses in the Tillamook Bay project area
are shellfish growing for both commercial and recreational harvesting
and water contact recreation. Tillamook Bay, Oregon's most
16
-------
productive oyster and clam growing area, supports a shellfish harvesting
industry with an estimated economic value of one to two million dollars
annually. Affected along with the commercial oyster industry is
recreational clam digging, fishing, boating, and other activities which
attract more than a million tourists and sportmen to the area each year.
The impairment was the result of a gradual change over many years.
However, it was not until 1979 that actions began through the realization
that this longtime problem needed to be addressed. Following moderate
to large storms, bacterial problems created a serious human health
problem and threatened an important industry.
Water use impairment has been well defined with substantial
supporting background data. In 1981, the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) completed a study funded under §208
which provided detailed documentation on water quality problems in the
basin. Before the project started, there were severe in-stream water
quality problems which were creating health risks in the Tillamook basin
stream system and in Tillamook Bay where shellfish are grown for local
consumption and interstate shipment. Shellfish harvesting had been
closed down during periods of high fecal contamination and health
hazards existed in the tributaries used for water contact recreation.
Information collected during the §208 study provided the
foundation for a comprehensive, quantitative data base. Initial data
collection efforts consisted of both routine monthly ambient monitoring
complemented with several intensive surveys conducted during storm
events. Following the initial §208 study, DEQ and Tillamook County have
continued a routine monitoring program to provide addition
documentation on use impairment.
Pollutant
The major use impairment in Tillamook Bay is the result of fecal
coliform bacteria. Fecal coliform concentrations historically exceeded
Oregon State Water Quality Standards. Bacterial contamination has been
explicitly matched to adverse effects on shellfish harvesting and water
contact recreation. Fecal coliform is one of the basic parameters used to
address sanitation concerns. The determination of a problem and the
pollutant for Tillamook Bay was identified by routine monitoring which is
needed to certify the bay for commercial shellfish harvesting. Extensive
documentation exists which describes recurring incidents of bacterial
contamination which adversely affects both shellfish harvesting and water
contact recreation.
17
-------
Source of Pollutant
The §208 study was set up to monitor water quality in the bay and
in major tributaries. The study included a review of existing data and
collection of additional data. A major objective was to specifically identify
the sources, extent, and dynamics of fecal coliform pollution in the bay
and the watershed. During this process, major potential fecal sources
were examined which included:
sewage treatment plants
recreation (i.e. boats on the bay)
forestry activities
industries
agricultural operations (i.e. dairy waste
management practices)
on-site subsurface sewage disposal systems
The §208 study included a number of wet weather intensive
surveys. Results of the sampling efforts indicated that fecal coliform
bacteria detected in the bay predominantly originated from farms (poor
manure management practices) and malfunctioning sewage treatment
plants in the basin.
Goals and Objectives
The water quality monitoring goals and objectives focused on
describing conditions in Tillamook Bay and on describing inputs to the
Bay from major tributary streams. This focus satisfies the need to
document water quality in a manner which can be related to the overall
RCWP project goals and objectives. The predominant water quality
monitoring goal was to quantitatively detect the overall effects of
treatment methods used for dairy waste management in the Tillamook
basin. The monitoring program for the project set out to create an
accurate picture of BMP effectiveness on overall water quality in
Tillamook Bay.
The water quality data collected by the project is basically
quantitative. In addition to routine monthly sampling, intensive surveys
have been conducted. The purpose of the intensive surveys was to
quantitatively describe water quality conditions during extreme wet
weather events, when closure of the bay is most likely to occur.
18
-------
Description of Monitoring System
The monitoring scheme employed for the Tillamook RCWP project should
document progress in achieving water quality objectives. The focus on bacterial
contamination in the water column is extremely relevant to use impairments
occuring in the drainage system. No major difficulties exist in terms of quality
assurance as bacteriological testing to address sanitation concerns has long
been a part of the water quality monitoring program.
Design
The monitoring system used in the Tillamook basin is basically
appropriate for determining changes in water quality due to the reduction
of nonpoint source agricultural pollution. Monitoring stations were placed
in strategic locations within the watershed which included sites in the bay
as well as sites on major tributary streams. Minor modifications have
been made to the monitoring system based on the results of previous
sampling. This has included changes mainly in locations and
frequencies.
Parameters
Parameters measured include physical (flow, temperature),
chemical (salinity, dissolved oxygen, some nutrients), and biological (fecal
coliform, some oyster tissue). The primary parameter monitored, fecal
coliform, reflects the basic water quality problem being addressed by the
project. Other parameters included in the monitoring program, such as
salinity and stream discharge, are also critical for conducting data
analysis in the Tillamook system. The project also gathered additional
information aimed at answering other logical questions (which did arise
during the review), such as the role of nutrients in the system.
Frequency
The frequency and timing of water quality sampling consisted of
two components: routine monthly sampling to monitor basic status and
intensive surveys to address critical conditions. Both components are
appropriate and will be sufficient to document changes in the system.
This sampling frequency pattern has been conducted for both bay and
stream sites. The intensive surveys conducted were based on sampling
a predetermined number of runoff events.
19
-------
Sampling Sites
The location of water quality sampling sites was oriented towards
the detection of overall water quality trends. The sampling scheme has
focused on strategic locations in Tillamook Bay and strategic locations on
major tributaries to the bay. Several limited sites were also established to
evaluate water quality effects of specific BMP systems. This was
accomplished by sampling at sites above and below the area of concern.
Improvements could be made in the area of evaluating the effectiveness
of specific BMP systems. SCS and ASCS staff have been building a data
base which relates specific farms and BMP implementation activities to
existing and potential stream sampling points.
During the §208 study, sewage treatment plants discharging to the
bay were sampled during intensive surveys. Sampling of these point
sources continued as part of NPDES permit requirements rather than the
RCWP project. In addition, all of Tillamook Bay's sewage treatment
plants have been monitored monthly since the Spring of 1988. This
activity results from a recommendation of the LCC. Sampling for
nonpoint sources generally occurs on major tributary streams which tend
to aggregate the effects of many farms. Very limited sampling has
occured which has been focused towards specific farms.
Data Management and Analysis
A large amount of data has been collected in the Tillamook basin. The
water quality data has shown improvements with respect to an overall reduction
in fecal coliform concentrations. Likewise, data on land use has documented
the locations and types of BMPs implemented. However, it appears that better
correlations could be made between land use activities and water quality results.
RCWP project staff are developing data bases which can better relate land use
activities to specific receiving water locations. These efforts should be
continued and water monitoring locations modified, if needed.
The water quality data has been put into the STORET system. The
information also exists on PC systems for statistical and graphic analyses.
Some land use data has been stored on a PC. This is largely the locations and
types of BMPs which have been implemented. BMP needs which have been
identified and remain to be completed are also on the data base.
20
-------
Observations and Lessons Learned
Observations
Threat of closure of the commercial oyster fishery for the past 10 years has
been critical to success of the project.
Financial disincentives from the Tillamook County Creamery Association were
critical for 1 or 2 operators with identified manure management problems to
implement the management phase of the contracts.
Adequate funding was available for the delivery system to get the BMPs on the
ground in a timely manner.
Objectives were well defined for the land treatment component of the project.
They were somewhat less defined for the water quality component, particularly
for bacteria.
Innovation and local flexibility were utilized.
Recognition that management is now key to make the project work over the
long haul.
The use of the Coordinated Resource Management Planning process is a good
vehicle to transfer the RCWP approach into the state's 319 NPS Management
Programs while incorporating a water quality based approach.
There is a need to develop statistically meaningful monitoring systems which
key on a few parameters before the land treatment project begins; this would
allow for the measure of changes in the environment without having to spend
lots of money.
The local influence on neighboring watersheds by the Tillamook RCWP Project
has been exceptional and other projects are proceeding.
This project has worked well due to the involvement of all interested publics and
lots of committee and subcommittee work.
The project has also involved the key people in the community, agencies and
industry.
Follow-up with the operators by the Soil and Water Conservation District has
been critical to the success of the project.
Industry cooperated with the agencies to encourage participation by their
producers.
21
-------
The land treatment experts (SCS/ASCS) have had no problem providing land
treatment data by watershed subunits to the water quality experts.
The Tillamook RCWP Project was not designed to meet State Water Quality
Standards, but to lessen the use impairment in Tillamook Bay. The water
quality data indicates water quality standards violations occur regularly for
bacteria.
Swifter enforcement mechanisms are needed to make the Project effective in
achieving state water quality standards.
There is a need for a loan program to assist some of the remaining operators
with their portion of the cost sharing.
There was ample data available to indicate a specific problem (excessive fecal
coliform bacteria) in Tillamook Bay.
The problem threatened an important local industry (commercial shellfishery).
The major source of pollution was easily identified (the numerous dairies in the
watershed).
There was local support from influential dairymen.
The RCWP was a well designed program to obtain water quality improvements
in watersheds like Tillamook Bay.
There was fine agency support for the program, especially from SCS and ASCS.
There was excellent interagency coordination and cooperation.
There was ample funding for an appropriate level of cost sharing assistance to
dairymen for BMP installation.
Since only one parameter was identified as a pollutant, it was easy for the LCC
to identify BMPs to solve the problem.
The LCC had the control and flexibility to "fine tune" and adjust the program as
needed.
There was excellent peer promotion among the dairymen.
There was good follow-up from agencies concerning management of BMPs.
Approximately 72 percent of the committed funding has been spent. It is
assumed that approximately 72 percent of the BMPs have been installed.
22
-------
• There were numerous "spin-offs" from the project such as additional facilities
improvements that were funded by the dairymen, and interest by dairymen in
other communities to develop similar projects.
• Agency personnel, shellfishermen, the creamery, and most importantly the
dairymen are pleased with the program and offer few suggestions for
improvement. This, along with the high rate of participation and the apparent
pollution reduction that will exceed the original goal, indicates that the project is
highly successful.
• Framing the water quality problem in terms of impacts on water uses (Shellfish,
recreation) were important in building support and participating.
• Soil and Water Conservation District Supervisors (peer education) were very
instrumental in getting farmers to participate in the program.
Remaining Challenges
One of the most mentioned problems identified with the Tillamook Bay RCWP
was the lack of funding for water quality monitoring. Since the water quality problem
was relatively simple to identify, and only one parameter was involved, monitoring
requirements were less complicated than for many other agricultural NFS projects.
However, some degree of monitoring was necessary to evaluate program effectiveness
and to identify pollutant sources. Oregon DEQ was able to obtain funding from
various sources to carry out a basic monitoring program. An appropriate amount of
funding should be included in any NFS implementation program.
Another problem identified during the review concerned the lack of regulations
to require participation in the RCWP. The project may not have been as successful as
it was if it had been mandatory. However, the state should have an effective separate
regulatory program for dairies that are found to exceed water quality standards. This
would take care of the few polluters who refuse to participate in voluntary programs
and should be used only as a last resort. A regulatory program would also cause
more dairymen to want to participate in a voluntary program. Voluntary programs
would then be more popular with dairymen and probably result in desired water quality
improvements.
There was concern over the effectiveness of the enforcement mechanism used
by ASCS when a participant is found to be in violation of their RCWP contract. Only
one instance of this was reported during the review. In this case, ASCS is proceeding
with their procedure, but no action has yet been taken. Thus, the concern is still valid.
No formal procedure was established for evaluating BMP effectiveness. A
strategy should be implemented to evaluate the effectiveness of selected BMPs. More
importantly, this strategy should evaluate the effectiveness of the combinations of
BMPs that constitute a Resource Management System. The strategy should be
designed to provide information on effects of systems on water quality. It should be
tied into the overall water quality monitoring plan.
23
-------
Recommendations for Future Projects
The Rock Creek and Tillamook Bay RCWP are good examples of how a NFS
water quality implementation program should be designed and implemented.
• Water quality problems should be addressed on a watershed basis, including
adequately addressing non-agricultural impacts.
• The local people (who are most knowledgeable of the situation) should have the
freedom to operate the program with guidance from the state and federal level.
• Agency roles should be well defined and a structure for coordination and
accountability established.
• A thorough watershed investigation that identifies pollution sources should be a
component of the program.
• A strategy for evaluating practice and project effectiveness should be carried out
throughout the implementation phase of the program. The strategy should
evaluate the effectiveness of the combinations of BMPs that constitute a
Resource Management System.
• Adequate funding should be provided for agency technical assistance
(inventorying, I & E, planning, design, layout, follow-up, administration).
• Adequate funding should be provided to producers for BMP cost-sharing
assistance.
• Adequate funding should be provided for carrying out an appropriate water
quality monitoring program.
• A compliance provision should be specific and enforced.
• A separate, regulatory program should be utilized as a last resort.
• Program objectives should include receiving water beneficial uses. This will
assure that monitoring objectives and measures directly address the benefits of
the project in terms of state water quality standards.
• Beneficial use assessments (particularly fish population) need to be sufficiently
rigorous that any changes in the game fish can be clearly documented. This
includes sampling the fish at an adequate frequency and addressing external
factors such as increased fishing pressure or effects of other than project-
directed sources of impairment.
• Water quality/land use modelers should closely coordinate with the monitoring
staff in designing the monitoring program so as to assure that data collected will
be useful inputs to models and for periodic on-site verification of the models.
24
-------
Pesticides use data in the project area should be an integral part of the
monitoring program.
Paired watersheds should be included in the monitoring design. This would
allow evaluations to be made in terms of improvements or changes in
watershed conditions.
Selected "farm specific" monitoring of soil loss and water quality relationships
should be an integral part of the monitoring design for future RCWP type
projects.
25
------- |