United States
                         Environmental Protection
                         Agency
                                                 July-August 1978
&EPA
208
Bulletin
Modification of
Roadway Designs  to
Protect  Florida  Waters
   Two water quality manage-
   ment agencies in Florida
were instrumental in modifying
road design plans to minimize
the impact of runoff from the
finished roads on surrounding
surface waters and drinking
water supplies.

Background
Road widening and road con-
struction plans in Dade County
and Winterhaven, in central
Florida, sparked  the concern of
citizens and areawide water
quality management staffs that
nearby surface waters and drink-
ing water supplies would be
degraded by oils and heavy
metals carried in runoff from the
roads. Both road projects are
sponsored by the Florida Depart-
ment of Transportation (DOT).
Citizens and WQM staff mem-
bers were able to address the
projects through reviews of DOT
permit applications to the Florida
Department of Environment
Regulation (DERI.

Central  Florida
A four-lane road planned for
construction through Winter-
haven was designed with drain-
age pipes running directly into
five lakes along the road. Three
of the lakes are very clean. Two
have limited nutrient problems.
The water quality management
staff of the Central Florida
Regional Planning Council
became concerned that the
drainage provisions would  result
in degradation of the lakes.
  The WQM staff initiated a
series of meetings with repre-
sentatives from DOT and DER to
reassess the road design. The
WQM staff received strong sup-
port from a citizens' Federation
of Lake Associations to ensure
that the road design was modi-
fied at all five lake sites.
 Through the review meetings,
all parties reached agreement to
modify the design plans in ac-
cordance with suggestions from
the WQM staff. The pipes will
be relocated, so that water drain-
ing from the roadways will be
filtered  through cypress bay
heads or diverted onto the land.
The DER issued the permit on
condition that the plan incor-
porate these modifications. Con-
struction is under way at four of
the five lakes. The site near the
fifth lake posed some engineer-
ing problems and the interagency
group and citizens are meeting
to develop alternative controls
for that site.

Dade County
In Dade County, the DOT Pro-
posed a project to widen US 27,
a two-lane highway which is a
major artery in the area and
poses a significant safety hazard.
Members of the Governmental
Liaison Committee (a subcom-
mittee of the citizens' WQM
Areawide Planning Advisory
Committee) raised the issue that
drainage and runoff control pro-
visions of the project were inade-
quate. The WQM staff of the
Dade County Department of En-
vironmental Resources Manage-

       continued  to page 11
                         Frederick County Farm
                         to  be  Renovated
                         in One  Day
  Frederick, Md. —If you've
  never been to a barn raising,
seen a pond built, or been on a
hay ride, you may have a chance
this August to do all three and
much more.
  The Catoctin Soil Conserva-
tion District, with the help of the
Frederick District, will completely
renovate a 245-acre farm located
at the foot of South Mountain in
Frederick County, Md. on
August 19, 1978.
  The District is calling the
event, which is a reenactment of
the Thrasher Field Day held 30
        continued to page 6
Paul Edwards of the Soil Conser-
vation Service examines field
gullies. Project Clearivater will
use techniques designed to
eliminate agricultural nonpoint
sources of pollution, pursuant to
the Clean Wafer Act and the Soil
Conservation Act.

-------
 Partnership  Against Nonpoint  Pollution
 11 is nearly 5 years since pas-
   sage of Public Law 92-500-
 the Federal Water Pollution Con-
 trol Act Amendments of 1972. In
 most respects, the law's objec-
 tive, "to restore and maintain the
 chemical, physical and biological
 integrity of the Nation's waters,"
 remains a distant goal rather
 than a reality. Many have grave
 doubts that the 1983 deadline for
 several of the objectives can be
 met.
   In one important area, how-
 ever, the mechanism for controll-
 ing  water pollution is already in
 place and the expertise is avail-
 able. That area is the control of
 pollution from so-called  nonpoint
 sources  required by Section 208
 of the 1972 Amendments.
   Point source pollution is easier
 to understand than nonpoint. It
 isn't hard to visualize raw ef-
 fluent or poisonous chemicals
 flowing from pipes into our lakes
 and rivers. Many Americans have
 seen them firsthand.  Nonpoint
 source pollution, on the other
 hand, is the result of storm
 water moving over thousands or
 even millions of acres at a time,
 washing particles of soil downhill
 into creeks, rivers or lakes.

 Sediment— Major Water
 Pollutant
 The impact of nonpoint pollu-
 tants on water quality is substan-
 tial.  Soil erosion and  sedimenta-
 tion are major problems nation-
 wide. By volume, sediment is the
 Nation's greatest single water
 pollutant—point or nonpoint.
 Several billion tons of soil erode
 annually  and much of this is
 deposited as sediment in lakes
 and  waterways.
   Sediment particles can carry
 such chemicals as phosphates
 and  pesticides.  Runoff from
 farmland may wash pesticides in-
 to lakes and streams in amounts
 sufficient to poison fish.  Nitrates
 and  phosphates from fertilizers
 also  may wash off land into
 streams and lakes, stimulating
algae growth and creating other
 undesirable effects. Animal
 wastes left on the ground may
 become a nonpoint water pollu-
tants as well,  contaminating sur-
face and  groundwater and creat-
ing a greater menace  in some
areas than human sewage.
   Some of these pollutants
 become linked with the soil after
 they are applied to farmlands;
 and, when soil erosion is
 stopped, their movement into
 waterways is halted as well.
   Controlling nonpoint sources
 of pollution is not new to
 America's farmers, ranchers and
 foresters.  They are aware that
 soil erosion is a cause of non-
 point pollution and have been
 working for decades to control
 the problem.
   The Soil Conservation Service
 (SCSI is a component of the
 U.S. Department of Agriculture
 (USDA).  Formed in 1935, the
 Service is dedicated to the con-
 servation,  development and pro-
 ductive use of our soil and water
 resources and has assisted in
 this work. For more than 40
 years,  SCS professionals have
 worked with land users in local
 conservation districts throughout
 the Nation to protect our soil
 and water base.
   It is this combination of forces
 — America's farmers, the Soil
 Conservation  Service and local
 conservation districts together
with the various Section 208
planning agencies—that can pro-
vide a solution to the problem of
nonpoint pollution.  As Section
208 of  P.L. 92-500 is
 implemented, promising new ap-
 proaches to achieving soil con-
 servation are expected to
 emerge.

 A Grass Roots Approach
 The Service has more than
 13,000 employees based at ap-
 proximately 3,600 SCS field of-
 fices nationwide who help land
 users. They include soil and
 water conservationists, soil
 scientists, engineers,
 agronomists, range con-
 servationists, biologists,
 economists and foresters.
  SCS works through conserva-
 tion districts that are legal sub-
 divisions of State government
 responsible under State law for
 conservation work within their
 districts. There 2,950 conserva-
 tion districts in the U.S. Most
 cover one or more counties and
 are directed by an elected or ap-
 pointed unsalaried board of local
 citizens.
  Through agreements with the
 districts, SCS provides the ser-
 vices of professional men and
women who help districts plan
 and carry out a wide range of
soil and water conservation pro-
grams.  Other USDA agencies,
such as the Forest Service, also
provide assistance. Districts
 channel the services of profes-
 sional conservationists to in-
 dividual farmers, ranchers and
 other land users as well as to
 groups and units of government
 who need SCS help. The person
 or group who receives assistance
 in planning and carrying  out soil
 and water conservation work
 through the districts is called a
 "Cooperator." SCS and  the
 districts are helping more than
 two million cooperators nation-
 wide—a remarkable record for a
 voluntary program.
  The ongoing, grass roots pro-
 gram of conservation planning
 and application of conservation
 practices by farmers and other
 land users with the help of SCS
 professionals and conservation
 districts is one of the Nation's
 best available means for controll-
 ing nonpoint sources of pollu-
 tion.

 Readymade Potential
 Traditionally SCS, the conserva-
 tion districts and other cooperat-
 ing agencies have worked pri-
 marily in the broad  field of
 natural resource conservation
rather than specifically  on water
pollution control. Water quality
agencies, on the other  hand,
have concentrated primarily on

-------
pollution control, and mainly on
pollution from municipal and in-
dustrial sources.
  There has been insufficient
communication over the years
between soil conservation and
water quality agencies, and a
lack of understanding of each
other's problems and potential
contributions. Local conservation
districts, backed by SCS field of-
fices, had readymade potential to
assist in developing and im-
plementing 208 nonpoint water
quality management plans im-
mediately when  PL-92-500 was
passed in  1972. Yet for several
years following the law's enact-
ment, most of the various agen-
cies designed to develop water
quality management plans fo-
cused their energies almost ex-
clusively on point source pollu-
tion control.
  This is understandable. Pre-
vious water quality legislation
had dealt  almost exclusively with
point source pollution, as had
state inspection  procedures.
Therefore, professional water
quality planners  continued to
concentrate on municipal and in-
dustrial  problems.
"No-till" farming, in which a
new crop is planted through the
residue of an old crop killed by
herbicides,  reduces soil erosion
to practically zero.
   Now the focus is changing.
 More 208 planners are aware of
 the existence of soil and water
 conservation districts. They also
 know that the districts, in con-
 cert with SCS conservationists
 and other USDA professionals,
 can  give them invaluable im-
 mediate and  long-range help in
 formulating nonpoint pollution
 control plans. A variety of other
 Federal, State and local groups
 also work with districts and can
 provide help.
   With this new awareness, we
 see an emerging partnership be-
 tween conservation districts, the
 U.S. Environmental Protection
 Agency (EPA), SCS and other
 USDA agencies, and State and
 areawide water quality agencies.
 We believe that this partnership
 can formulate the dominant
 strategy for effective nonpoint
 pollution control in rural America
 in the decades ahead.
   The ultimate success of this
 partnership and the resulting
 water quality management will
 depend in large measure on the
 continued strengthening of com-
 munication, cooperation and un-
 derstanding between the various
 water quality groups.
   SCS is taking steps to rein-
force this partnership. There are
39 SCS professionals now
assigned to various state and
areawide 208 agencies. The Ser-
 vice also has professional conser-
 vationists assigned to EPA in
 Washington, D.C., and to EPA
 regional offices in Philadelphia,
 Dallas,  Kansas City,  Denver,
 Seattle and Atlanta.1 In fiscal
 year 1976, SCS contributed 42
 man-years to help 208 planners,
 and SCS  state conservationists
 expect the Service to contribute
 154 man-years to 208 planning in
 1977. It bears mentioning that no
 208 monies have  come directly
 to SCS for this purpose.

 Cooperation on  EPA
 Demonstration Projects
 The U.S.  Environmental Protec-
 tion Agency is funding three
 demonstration projects under
 Section 1082 of Public Law
92-500.  All are coming up with
 new methods and techniques for
eliminating or controlling pollu-
tion in watersheds of the Great
 Lakes. The prime contractor in
each project is a local soil and
water conservation district.
  The Black Creek Project, in In-
diana, is reducing the amount of
sediment and other agricultural
pollutants such as pesticides that
move into the Maumee River  and
eventually into Lake Erie. Ap-
proaches to promote the project
range from minimum tillage to a
study of farmer attitudes
towards conservation. The prime
contractor is the Allen County
  '
 Soil and Water Conservation
 District,  aided by Purdue Univer-
 sity, SCS and other agenices.
   The Red Clay Project, covering
 five counties in Minnesota and
 Wisconsin, is aimed at reducing
 soil erosion to keep the hard-to-
 manage, local red clay soil out of
 Lake Superior. The red  clay is a
 shrink-swell soil  that fractures
 easily when disturbed and then
 moves into streams and rivers.
 Once in the water, it remains
 suspended for long periods. For
 as much as several hundred
 yards into Lake Superior the
 water is  colored bright red by its
 sediment.
   The prime  contractor for the
 Red Clay Project is the Douglas
 County,  (Wisconsin) Soil and
 Water Conservation  District.
 Four other conservation districts
 also are involved, along with the
 Wisconsin Department of Natural
 Resources, the Minnesota Pollu-
 tion Control Agency and other
 agencies. Demonstrators are try-
 ing "everything in the book,"
 from hydroseeding to paving
 with bricks, to keep the soil  from
 breaking up and getting into
 waterways. Cost-sharing is used
 to induce local farmers to keep
 cattle from disturbing stream-
 banks and to develop alternate
 sources of water for livestock.
   The Washington County Proj-
 ect, near Milwaukee, is showing
 local people ways  to keep sedi-
 ment washed from urbanizing
 areas out of Lake Michigan. The
 Washington County  Soil and
 Water  Conservation District  is
 the prime contractor, assisted  by
 the Southeast Wisconsin
 Regional Planning Commission,
 the Wisconsin Department of
 Natural Resources, and other
 agencies. Tours, brochures,  and
 new institutional arrangements
 are used to secure the local in-
 volvement and participation
 needed to make a  success of the
 program.
  These  projects got under way
 about 3 years ago and should
 conclude within the next year or
 two. The experience gained
should be useful in 208 planning
throughout the Great Lakes
 Region.

 ' Since the writing of this article, an
 SCS professional conservationist has
 been assigned  to the EPA regional
 office in New York City.
 J Section  108 of P.L. 92-500 pertains
 specifically to the watersheds of the
 Great Lakes.
          continued to page 7

-------
 Towpath
 Trail  Has
 Many
 Friends
    The Association of New Jer-
     sey Environmental Commis-
 sion (ANJEC) and the New Jer-
 sey Conservation Foundation are
 working with the U.S. Environ-
 mental Protection Agency in a
 pilot program in Morris County,
 New Jersey, to incorporate open
 space and recreational areas into
 wastewater facilities construction
 plans. The Association has
 assisted with the formation  of a
 regional citizen's  group, the
 Friends of Towpath Trail, that is
 working to implement the man-
 date for open space and recrea-
 tional planning in the Federal
 Clean Water Act.
   In Section 201 (f) and (g) of
 the Clean Water Act of 1977,
 Congress emphasized the impor-
 tance of making the lands upon
 which wastewater facilities are
 built open to the  public for
 recreational and educational ac-
 tivities, and required that future
 facility plans address the provi-
 sion for public access to our
 newly-cleaned rivers and
 streams.
  The Friends of  Towpath Trail,
 staffed by ANJEC, is working
 with the Rockaway Valley

 The route of the towpath trail
 across the Rockaway River in
 Rockaway Borough.  The tow-
 path trail is already popular with
joggers, walkers and those who
 enjoy the beautiful out-of-doors.
Regional Sewerage Authority,
local civic organizations, and
landowners to build a 13-mile-
long linear greenbelt  park along
the Rockaway Valley Regional in-
terceptor line. The interceptor
line parallels the Rockaway River
and the historic Morris Canal, an
abandoned  19th Century supply
line which once provided coal
from Pennsylvania for New
Jersey's iron mines.
  When the towpath trail is
completed,  it will be an earthen
footpath suitable for walking,
jogging, and cross-county skiing.
  The towpath trail will be built
by using the restored and land-
scaped interceptor right-of-way
and by retaining the undisturbed
natural vegetation along the
path. The Friends of Towpath
Trail are asking private land-
owners along the path to
dedicate portions of their proper-
ties for the trail by conveying a
public use easement to the local
municipalities or to the Conser-
vation Foundation. The group
emphasizes the substantial State
and Federal tax advantage to the
landowners of donating the
lands for public use.
  ANJEC gained CETA monies
to hire a director to coordinate
plans for the towpath-. The direc-
tor and members of the Friends
of Towpath Trail have met with
civic groups, historical societies
and hiking groups to acquaint
them with  the proposed linear
Park and to enlist their member-
ship in the group. They plans to
work with  municipalities along
the path to integrate their local
plans into the overall scheme,
and to assist the municipalities
with applications for State and
Federal funds.
  ANJEC will assist other
Public  Participation  in  Non- Designated Areas
A      pilot program in Region IV
      of public participation
grants to environmental coali-
tions has been successful in pro-
moting public involvement in
water quality management in
non-designated 208 areas. Six
conservation coalitions in  Region
IV have been funded by the
Washington-based Conservation
Foundation to encourage public
involvement and develop public
information systems in non-
designated 208 areas.
  In Georgia, the program has
been so well  received that the
State  Department of Natural
Resources intends to supply ad-
ditional appropriations to extend
the program through October.
The South Carolina Clean Water
Coalition has been granted
$19,000 from the State to con-
tinue its program. In Tennessee,
members of the 208 Coalition
were appointed to the Statewide
Citizens Advisory Committee.
  The Georgia Clean Water
Coalition is sponsoring Regional
seminars about water quality
issues in non-designated parts of
the State. The coalition is
divided into task forces, each of
which addresses a different
water quality problem: forestry,
mining, construction, land
disposal, agriculture and irriga-
tion.  With additional support
from  the State, the coalition
hopes to hire a part-time staff
and to establish office space in
which to work.
  The South Carolina Water
Coalition is sponsoring "Clean
Water Days" during the Spring
to involve citizens in the plan-
ning process and to enlist volun-
tary assistance in holding meet-
ings and making mass mailings.
Conservation authorities, water
user associations, environmen-
talists and  designated-area
representatives are involved in
the "Clean Water Days" presen-
tations.
  The Florida Coalition for  Clean
Water plans to appoint a coali-
tion steering  committee to  iden-
tify water quality issues, set
priorities for solutions, and
assess cost and benefits of solu-
tions.
  The North Carolina Project
Committee is planning a slide
program for presentation to con-
servation and environmental
groups. The group is also plan-
ning an exhibit for shopping
centers.  The group will circulate
pamphlets, news features and
public service announcements.

-------
The feature area of Boontown
Ironworks Historic District along
the proposed towpath trail. The
trail not only passes areas of
scenic beauty, but cultural enjoy-
ment as well.
municipalities who are planning
wastewater treatment facilities in
New Jersey to  use the ex-
perience of the Towpath pilot
project as a model for future
facilities construction involving
open space and linear park plan-
ning and in-plant educational ac-
tivities.

          The restored section of the Mor-
          ris Canal in the Borough of
          Wharton is a popular fishing
          spot.
National Conference on  Lake  Restoration  Scheduled
for  Minneapolis  August  22-24
    How local and state govern-
    ments can best conduct
programs for restoring lakes will
be discussed in a national con-
ference sponsored by the U.S.
EPA in Minneapolis on August
22-24.
  The conference is designed to
enhance the effectiveness of the
Federal  Water Pollution Control
Act, Section 314, which provides
Federal  grants to municipal and
state governments to restore
publicly-owned freshwater lakes.
Representatives of municipal and
state government agencies work-
ing on pollution control and
recognized experts on lakes will
be attending.
  During the Conference, spe-
cialists from government
research organizations, and
academic institutions will present
information needed to prepare a
comprehensive lake restoration
plan. Speakers will discuss how
to transfer experimental or
theoretical knowledge into prac-
tical applications to meet Federal
water quality goals for 1983.
  Methods by which local
authorities can protect lakes will
be presented and the successful
state restoration programs con-
ducted in Minnesota, Florida,
South Dakota, and Vermont will
be explored. Federal experts will
present an overview of govern-
mental grant programs for pollu-
tion control. Small waste treat-
ment systems as well as point
and non-point source controls
will be discussed with emphasis
on achieving water quality stan-
dards.
  Methods of assessing lake
restoration problems and in-lake
treatments will also be examined:
• Measurements of lake char-
  acteristics
• Treatment of domestic wastes
• Hydraulic and nutrient budgets
• Dredging
• Dilution
• Treatment of inflowing
  waters.
  As a special conference fea-
ture, experts will examine state-
of-the-art restoration. Presenta-
tions will include biological
management of lakes and meth-
ods of evaluating the effective-
ness of restorative techniques.
  The conference, which is be-
ing coordinated by Battelle's Col-
umbus Laboratories, will be held
August 22-24, Tuesday through
Thursday, at the Sheraton Ritz
Hotel, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Additional information may be
obtained  from Susan Armstrong,
Battelle's Columbus Labora-
tories, 505 King Avenue, Colum-
bus, Ohio 43201, Telephone
614-424-7769.
                                                                                                                 5

-------
 Frederick County Farm
 Continued from page 1

 years ago, "Project: Clear-
 water." According to Catoctin
 District Chairman Henry D.
 Lakin, Sr., the purpose is to
 demonstrate to rural and urban
 folks alike that soil and water
 conservation is vital to maintain
 the fertility of the nation's soil
 and to help clean up its  rivers
 and streams.
   Daniel C. Poole, a Catoctin
 District supervisor and farmer,
 has been appointed to coor-
 dinate and oversee the day's ac-
 tivities.
   Although there'll be plenty of
 fun things to see and do, there'll
 also be some serious conserva-
 tion going on.  The farm's facelift
 will be based around a scientific
 conservation plan prepared by
 the USDA, Soil Conservation
 Service.
   According to SCS District
 Conservationist Paul Edwards,
 the conservation  plan calls for in-
 stalling contour strip cropping,
 reseeding the pasture, and put-
 ting in waterways and diversions
 to control runoff  and prevent
 erosion. A wet, low-lying area
 will be converted into a pond
 which can then be used for
 stock water and fish and wildlife.
   A new animal waste manage-
 ment system will  be installed.
 Fences will be realigned to con-
 form to the contour of the land
 to control livestock's grazing and
 keep them out of the stream.
  The Maryland Forest Service
 will prepare a forestry manage-
 ment plan for the 95 acres of
 woodland on the farm. The
 woods will be thinned and the
 poor quality trees cut into
 lumber which will be used to
 repair the barn and for building
 fences.
  Although the emphasis will be
 on  making better use of the
 land, the social and economic
 aspects of farm life won't be ig-
 nored. The old stone farm
 house, built in the late 1800s,
 will be insulated and repaired.
 The barn, too, will get new
 siding  and a fresh coat of paint.
  The  Maryland Cooperative Ex-
 tension Service is advising the
 owner as to the relative merits of
 various crop and livestock opera-
tions. Extension's home econo-
 mists and urban agriculturalists
will modernize the home and
help landscape the lawn.
   The Thrasher Field Day, held
 August 18, 1948, occurred at a
 time when erosion and poor
 farm practices were threatening
 the country's agricultural produc-
 tion. The emphasis during that
 event was on conserving the soil
 to maintain and increase produc-
 tivity.
   This year's field day will have
 a dual message: controlling
 runoff and preventing erosion
 not only maintains productivity,
 it helps prevent water pollution.
  The new emphasis on water
 quality came about as the result
 of Federal legislation mandating
 that farmers  do something to
 keep agricultural pollutants con-
 tained in runoff from reaching
 streams.
  The legislation was the so-
 called Clean Water Act passed in
 1972, and amended in 1977. Sec-
 tion 208 is the part which  most
 concerns farmers.
  Edwards says erosion in
 Frederick County, as well as in
 other parts of the state, has in-
 creased noticeably in the past 10
 years. "Some people have for-
 gotten that plowed soil needs
 special treatment."
  The worst  culprits are often
 people who buy farms with the
intention of developing or selling
them a few years later. The
 owners rent to other farmers
 who have little vested interest in
 conserving the soil.
   Also to blame for increased
 erosion, says Edwards, are
 farmers who stepped up produc-
 tion to meet world food
 demands without stepping up
 protection. "We've got some
 farmers around here who think
 fertilizer is the cure-all for poor
 farm practices. They keep apply-
 ing more and more fertilizer
 without realizing much of it is
 getting washed off with the top-
 soil anyway.
   "If they'd practice soil conser-
 vation," continued Edwards,
 "they'd find they'd also be sav-
 ing on their fertilizer  bill.  And
 we'd have less chemicals getting
 into our streams."
   "Soil conservation districts
 have been advocating farm con-
 servation practices since  the
 1930s," says Lakin. "If you con-
 trol runoff and prevent erosion,
 then pollutants such  as sedi-
 ment, agri-chemicals and animal
 wastes won't get into streams.
 You'll cut down on agricultural
 pollution tremendously."
  Thousands of farmers
 throughout the state and nation
do practice conservation  volun-
tarily, he continued. He added,
 however, that  he  hoped the field
 day would help prod farmers
 who've been careless or lax to
 clean up their act.
   The farm that will be
 renovated belongs to Warren
 Roelkey of Knoxville, Md. Two
 streams on his property eventual-
 ly flow into the Potomac River.
 Lakin said the farm has good
 potential and that Roelkey was
 enthused about the event.
 Neighboring farmers have agreed
 to allow parking on their fields.
 Visitors will be shuttled from
 parking areas to the farm via
 trailers drawn  by antique
 tractors.
   The Thrasher field day drew
 more  than 40,000 persons. Over
 500 volunteers with 200
 machines from the area donated
 their time and help to make that
 day a success.
   Asked if  he thinks the 1978
field day can match its
predecessor, Lakin said that its
success will depend on the help
received from businesses, indi-
viduals, government agencies,
and civic organizations as well as
the media.
Segmentation and unsightly gar-
bage dumps will be eliminated by
Project Clearwater on August 18,
1978.


-------
Over 400,000 people came to
watch the transformation. The
pond being built attracted a large
crowd.
  But, he added, judging from
the enthusiasm of those already
contacted, the District fully ex-
pects to outdo the Thrasher
event.
                                 7575:  The Roe/key farm in
                                 Frederick, Maryland, which will
                                 be transformed by Project Clear-
                                 water to dramaticize control of
                                 agricultural nonpoint sources of
                                 pollution.

                                                                                             '
Partnership
Continued from page 3

   Cooperation is growing in
other ways. EPA has given the
National Association of Conser-
vation Districts a grant to foster
even closer relationships  be-
tween conservation districts and
water quality officials as they
develop their water quality man-
agement plans.
   The recent publication, "Con-
servation Districts and 208 Water
Quality Management," was fi-
nanced by this grant. It details
potential conservation district in-
volvement  in the preparation and
implementation of  State and
areawide water quality manage-
ment plans. The pamphlet
reviews nonpoint source  identi-
fication and assessment,  selec-
tion of "Best Management  Prac-
tices," and management  agen-
cies and regulatory programs.
EPA printed 10,000 copies of this
publication and sent them to
EPA regional offices, State and
areawide 208 agencies, SCS field
offices, and all conservation
district offices.
   Gus Dornbusch, former SCS
State Conservation Engineer in
Georgia, is now on 208 assign-
ment at EPA's Region IV in
Atlanta. His EPA colleague is
James Crooks, hydrologist and
nonpoint source specialist. The
two-man team covers an eight-
State region: Alabama, Missis-
sippi, Georgia, Florida, North
Carolina, South Carolina, Ten-
nessee and Kentucky. In the past
4 months, they have visited
seven of these States and met
with water quality agencies
designated by governors to
develop the various State and
areawide water quality manage-
ment plans.
  "Our most important task,"
Dornbusch explains, "has been
to show the agencies that the
mechanism for 208 nonpoint
pollution control planning and
implementation is already in
place. It exists in successful,
ongoing soil and water conserva-
tion  programs throughout the
United States. The help we need
is available right now from con-
servation districts, the Soil Con-
servation Service, Extension  Ser-
vice, Agricultural Stabilization
and Conservation  Service, Forest
service and others. Another im-
portant part of the apparatus is
to be found among the many
State and county pollution con-
trol and environmental conserva-
tion groups."
   Dornbusch stresses the impor-
tance of keeping the 208 Water
Quality Program simple. By this
he means that scrupulous care
must be taken to avoid costly
gathering  of information and
data that is not necessary.
   "What good can come from
compiling an immense amount of
expensive data in a 3-inch
volume and then ignoring it" he
asks. "If we recognize that the
means to  accomplish our work
are already at hand, we will be
able to plan efficiently, then
more quickly direct our energies
to applying needed water quality
conservation measures on the
land."

Challenge to Districts
Bob Hibbard, president of the
New Hampshire Association of
Conservation Districts, agrees
that the 208 Program must be
kept simple. Hibbard farms 1,500
acres—a livestock and forest
products operation —in the cen-
tral New Hampshire town of
Loudon. He is supervisor of New
Hampshire's Merrimack County
Conservation District and has
been a district Cooperator for 25
years.
  "Nonpoint source pollution
control offers a real opportunity
to conservation districts," Hib-
bard says. "The problems being
studied are to a large extent the
problems which districts have
been working on so successfully
for the past 30 years."
  According to this New Hamp-
shire farmer, the chief difference
between the present effort to
control nonpoint source pollution
and the traditional work of the
conservaion districts lies in the
scope of the attack.
  "Districts have  struggled  along
for years solving the problems
with meager funds, contributions
of time and effort, and, through
necessity,  a well-developed  abili-
ty to scrounge help from a num-
ber of sources—especially the
voluntary cooperation of land-
owners on  the basis of enlight-
ened self-interest.
  "Now," he continues, "with
hundreds of millions of dollars
allocated to the study and con-
trol of nonpoint pollution, it is
evident that the problems involv-

-------
Partnership
Continued from page 7

ed are those with which districts
are most familiar: erosion,
sedimentation, uncontrolled
runoff, inadequate stormwater
management and septic system
failures. And as districts have
demonstrated, their solution is
found in most of the old conser-
vation  standbys, conservation
practices that districts have pro-
moted for years —stripcropping,
grassed waterways, contour
plowing, no-till cultivation, close-
growing vegetation on steep
slopes  and the like."
  Hibbard points out that the
change in-scope lies in the num-
ber of people who have to be
reached to make the necessary
changes in land use management
within the time allotted. "Where
districts have worked primarily
with farmers, the increased scale
of the problem will bring in many
others—suburbanites and city
people, loggers, builders,
developers and engineers."
  Hibbard adds that it may be
necessary to use new methods
to convince people of the need
to adopt soil and water conser-
vation practices for water pollu-
tion control. "Districts have
relied on the voluntary coopera-
tion of land users, with the in-
centive of technical assistance
and very limited cost-sharing, to
get the conservation job done.
Hopefully it can still be carried
out  on  this basis. Certainly
districts would seem to be  the
natural source to go to for an  in-
ventory of the problems and
guidance concerning  needed
methods of control."

Determining Best
Management Practices
EPA Administrator Douglas M.
Costle has emphasized the dual
importance of voluntary pro-
grams and "Best Management
Practices" in achieving 208 non-
point source pollution goals.
  In a recent speech Costle said:
"let me emphasize the fact that
nonpoint source problems are
widespread, and we don't expect
all such sources to be cleaned up
quickly or completely. But we in-
tend to move ahead with this
program without delay, employ-
ing whole range of pollution con-
trol  tools,  including education,
regulation, improved  manage-
ment, incentives and voluntary
 .  i'
                                                                The proper treatment of
                                                                pasture/and prolongs the life of
                                                                desirable forage species and
                                                                maintains forage quality, reduc-
                                                                ing erosion from water.
Eroded soil from stormwater
moving across thousands of un-
protected acres is deposited in
rivers and lakes as sediment.

   ? jp>r a^mjsraaj;
                                    |
                               -i ' -.
8

-------
programs. I want to emphasize
the word 'voluntary,' because to
achieve our goals in this area, a
voluntary program is going to be
a key ingredient to success. I
feel confident that enforcement
will be needed and used only in
rare circumstances."
  Joseph  Krivak, Chief of EPA's
Nonpoint Sources Branch,  has
stated: "The  keystone of our
nonpoint source strategy is the
concept of 'Best Management
Practices.' "
  And what are "Best Manage-
ment Practices?" The term has
been so casually used that it
deserves careful explanation.
  Many soil and water conserva-
tion practices, singly or in com-
bination, help keep water where
it falls and soil, plant residues
and animal wastes in place.
When this is  done, sediment,
many nutrients and pesticides
are kept from reaching our sur-
face waters. In its simplest
terms, this is nonpoint source
pollution control.
  Soil and water conservation
practices that keep pollutants out
of surface waters, and livestock
waste management practices
that have a similar effect, are
"Best Management Practices."
Every SCS field office has a
technical guide that explains
specific conservation practices
tailored to local soil, climate, and
land users. These practices can
control pollution caused by ero-
sion and sedimentation.
  However, SCS does not  have
"Best Management Practices"
for controlling all sources of non-
point pollution. For example, in
many urban areas street litter,
oils and heavy metals on roads
and the like are significant non-
point sources of pollution. SCS
does not have practices that
would reduce pollution from
these sources. Nor does SCS
have practices to control pollu-
tion from road salt, acid mine
drainage and  similar nonpoint
sources.

Massive Undertaking
The question  remains: will each
State, as required by Section 208
of PL 92-500, be able to provide
the Environmental Protection
Agency by November 1, 1978,
with an implementable plan for
abating water pollution from all
identifiable sources, including
such nonpoint sources as farm-
land, urbanizing land  and other

Susceptible soils can wash away
in North Dakota fields as well as
along the red clay shores of Lake
Superior. The cost is enormous,
in topsoil lost and in lowered
water quality.
                                                                  Range seeding prevents ex-
                                                                  cessive soil and water loss, pro-
                                                                  duces forage and improves the
                                                                  natural beauty of grazing land.

-------
 Partnership
 Continued from page 9

 disturbed areas? The way is
 clear. The means are at hand.
   We realize, however, that the
 work is and  will continue to be a
 major undertaking. For there is
 no quick cure-all for nonpoint
 source water pollution.
   The scale  of erosion and  sedi-
 mentation is massive.
   Consider this fact: there are
 some 100,000 kinds of soil in the
 United States, each with unique
 characteristics and  potentials and
 a variety of uses. Fifty years ago,
 Hugh Hammond Bennett, the
 father of soil conservation and
 the first administrator  of the Soil
 Conservation Service,  succinctly
 defined the requirements of ef-
 fective soil and water conserva-
 tion.  "Conservation is possible,"
 Bennett stressed, "only if we use
 every acre according to its capa-
 bility, and treat every acre
 according to its need."
   "You can't farm a flat Indiana
 field  like you would a rolling
 Georgia slope," Bennett said,
 "or a Vermont mountainside like
 a  Texas river bottom. It is that
 simple and that complex."
   Fifty years ago, these ideas
 were  revolutionary.  Today, they
 are fundamental to  soil and
 water conservation  and the key
to nonpoint source pollution
control. The Nation's success
with 208 water quality manage-
ment will be no greater than the
people's understanding of these
truths.
There some 100,000 kinds of
soil in the United States, each
with its own uses and /imita-
tions. Vermont's steep hills,  for
instance, are treated differently
from Georgia tobaccoland.
                                                                                                   The authors are employed by the
                                                                                                   Soil Conservation Service, U.S.
                                                                                                   Department of Agriculture, in
                                                                                                   Washington, D.C. Mr. Welsh, of
                                                                                                   the Resource Planning Branch, is
                                                                                                   also chairman of the USDA  Sec-
                                                                                                   tion 208 Work Group. Mr. Lowry
                                                                                                   is acting director of the Environ-
                                                                                                   mental Services  Division.
                                                                                                   Contour stripcropping is one way
                                                                                                   of controlling erosion and the
                                                                                                   resulting non-point pollution.
10

-------
Letter  to

the  Editor



Editor, 208 Bulletin:

I was pleased to see the article
on "Alternatives to Centralized
Sewer Systems" in the Novem-
ber-December issue. However, I
was disappointed that there was
no mention of the Clivus
Multrum or other self com-
posting toilets. Although not yet
widely known, these devices are
being used in some locations
around the country. These toilets
are another valid alternative to
centralized septic systems from
the standpoint of cost and water
savings.

William L. Gardiner
Sante Fe,  New Mexico
Diagram of the Clivus Multrum.
Mr. Gardiner:

Thank you for indicating our
remission; your letter gives us an
opportunity to expound upon
still other alternatives to cen-
tralized sewer systems.
The Clivus Multrum is a self
composting toilet developed by a
Swedish inventor 30 years ago
and used widely in Europe. The
system can treat bathroom and
kitchen wastes in large volumes.
Wastes are deposited in a large
fiberglass tank where they
decompose under aerobic condi-
tions. Liquids in the waste
evaporate through a ventilating
system circulating through the
tank. The system uses no elec-
tricity and no moving parts. The
Clivus acts as a recycling system
in which solids are decomposed
and dried into a rich humus over
a period of two years.

The Clivus costs between $1,500
and $2,000 making it  competitive
with conventional septic tanks.
However, the system does not
dispose of "gray water" (or
household wastewater)  like sep-
tic tanks. Local health regula-
tions may forbid use of the
Clivus since the system is non-
standard equipment. Additional-
ly, the large tank may make it
difficult to install the  Clivus in
existing homes.

206 Bulletin
Modification
Continued from page 1

ment conveyed the Committee's
request that all interested agen-
cies meet to reconsider the road
plan and the need for modifica-
tions.
  At the time, the DER had ap-
proved two permits  for construc-
tion and  a third permit was
pending. The DER agreed to
review all three permits. The
agencies that played a major role
in the reassessment included the
DER and DOT, Southern  Florida
Water Management District,  and
the Dade County Department of
Public Works, as well as the
WQM agency and members of
the Governmental Liaison Com-
mittee and the Areawide  Plan-
ning Advisory Committee.
  The first step in the reassess-
ment was to determine whether
there was a  significant potential
for water quality degradation
from the road. The citizens'
primary concern, beyond  possi-
ble degradation of canal water
quality, was the potential con-
tamination of drinking water sup-
plies with oil and grease and
heavy metals.  The Miami River
Canal which runs along the
highway feeds directly into an
aquifer that supplies the Coun-
ty's largest water purification
facility. Based on estimated
pollutant loadings from the
highway runoff, which were sup
plied by staff in the Department
of Environmental Resources
Management, everyone agreed
that there was significant poten-
tial for contamination.
  A drainage control  plan
developed by the WQM agency
staff was incorporated into road-
way design by the DOT. The
DER accepted the drainage con-
trols as modifications to the ex-
isting permits. The drainage con-
trols include: specifications for
improved French drain systems;
use of boulder riprapping along
the canal bank;  use of a swale
system along the roadside; and
deep catchment basins for set-
tling solids prior to discharging
water into the canals. The con-
trols also include a tree line be-
tween the road and the canal
bank, with trees chosen for their
large water and nutrient uptake.
  Reassessment  and modifica-
tion of the plans for the highway
took about four months. While
this process was under way, the
DOT continued to obtain rights
of way for the road, so that the
overall project was not ap-
preciably delayed. The first seg-
ment of road  is now under con-
struction.

Significance
These accomplishments are sig-
nificant for several  reasons. The
two water quality management
agencies identified  potentially
significant water quality prob-
lems and acted to minimize the
potential for contamination of
surface water and drinking water
supplies. The modifications pro-
posed by the  WQM agencies and
incorporated by the DOT will
provide drainage controls to filter
and diffuse the runoff from the
two highways.
  Citizens played an important
role in  achieving both of these
accomplishments. In Dade Coun-
ty, it was citizen advisory com-
mittee  members who identified
the water quality issues and pro-
vided the impetus for a broad-
based reassessment which in-
cluded a number of State and
local agencies. In Central Florida,
an independent citizens' organi-
 zation gave greater visibility and
 needed political support to the
 WQM agency's efforts to modify
 the road design.
   The water quality management
 staffs in the Central Florida
 Regional Planning Council and
 the Dade County Department of
 Environmental Resources Man-
 agement played an important
 coordinating role  to bring
 together the interested agencies
 and citizens to reassess the road-
 way plans. In addition, the
 WQM staffs provided technical
 assistance to define the problems
 and develop more effective
 drainage controls.
   Citizens and agency personnel
 at the State and local level have
 gained valuable experience in ef-
 fectively using an existing en-
 vironmental review process and
 incorporating water quality con-
 cerns. In addition, these two
 reassessments have resulted  in a
 broader consideration of the
 water quality impacts of a par-
 ticular land use.
                                                                  1J.U.S.  GOVERNMENT PRINTING  OFFICE.  1978-260-880/82
                                                                                                                             11

-------