Section 319
NONPOINT SOORCE PROGRAM SUCCESS STORY
Stream Restoration Efforts Result in Rebound of Brown Trout Population
WatPfbodv ImnrOVPd Livestock 9razin9 along three segments of the West Branch Sugar
^ River resulted in the destruction of in-stream habitat. Therefore,
Wisconsin added these segments to its 1998 303(d) list of impaired waters for not supporting their
designated uses. Dane County began working to restore the fishery in the early 1980s. The restora-
tion efforts reduced nonpoint source pollution from sheet and rill erosion, restricted cattle access to
streams and riparian areas, and improved management of animal waste from barnyards and feedlots.
After nearly 30 years and $1 million in private, local, state and federal watershed restoration activities,
Wisconsin removed all three segments from its 2004 303(d) impaired waters list. These segments
of the West Branch Sugar River are the first to be delisted in Wisconsin as result of environmental
restoration.
Problem
The West Branch Sugar River is in Dane County
in southern Wisconsin. The West Branch runs
southeast from the Village of Mount Horeb for 19
miles into the mainstem Sugar River just upstream
of Lake Belleview. Sediment and habitat alteration
prevented the West Branch from supporting its
beneficial uses of default warm water forage fishery
(WWFF), default warm water sport fishery (WWSF),
and cold water Class II trout fishery (COLD).
Over many years, cropland sediment erosion,
overgrazed pastures, unrestricted cattle access,
barnyard runoff, and streambank and gully erosion
degraded the river and altered the habitat. Dane
County began restoration efforts in the early 1980s
with project funds from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture's (USDA's) Watershed Protection and
Flood Prevention Program—commonly known as
the PL-566 Watershed Program.
In 1997, after completion of the PL-566 project,
the county conducted a watershed assessment
that included both a general habitat survey and
fish surveys at five specific locations on the West
Branch. The fish survey assessment team ana-
lyzed the data using the Coldwater Index of Biotic
Integrity (CW IBI), specifically formulated to evalu-
ate assemblages with two to four species in small,
coldwater streams. The CW IBI ratings were poor
at all the sites. Both the general habitat and fish
surveys showed that the lower reaches of the West
Branch were inhabited by warm-water species such
as carp, black crappie, white sucker and a variety
Figure 1. West Branch Sugar River: Pre-rehabilitation
conditions.
of eurythermal minnows, which are adaptable to a
wide range of temperatures. In addition, the avail-
able habitat was insufficient to sustain a number of
top-level carnivores, such as brown trout, and was
rated poor. In particular, the in-stream surveys indi-
cated that the habitat upstream of State Highway 92
suffered from environmental degradation and had
habitat scores ranging from poor to fair. The main
problems included steep, highly eroded stream-
banks, shallow water depth and heavy silt deposits
in the stream (Figure 1).
Project Highlights
Building on 13 years of local watershed restoration
activities, more work began in 1999 to improve
the riparian corridor and habitat upstream of State
-------
Highway 92. Project participants placed more
than 20,000 feet of riprap to stabilize the toe of
the stream; reshaped 58,000 feet of streambank;
seeded 17 acres; and placed more than 1,000 fish
habitat structures in the stream. Participants placed
riprap on the banks and seeded them, establish-
ing grasses with good root structure to preserve
bank integrity. Reestablishing vegetation along
the streambanks also provided a buffer to mitigate
runoff from the surrounding agricultural fields.
Other project elements included narrowing the
river in appropriate places to increase flow velocity,
flushing the soft sediment out of the channel and
uncovering the gravel bottom, which is essential to
trout reproduction.
Nonprofit organizations will hold 20-year, 66-foot-
wide easements on the project area for public
access. Landowners began practicing whole farm
planning and conservation tillage to reduce erosion
of their farm lands. The willingness of more than a
dozen landowners to participate was instrumental
to the success of this project.
Results
In 2002 habitat evaluations at three sites found that
the habitat had improved, and scores ranged from
good to excellent (Figure 2).
By 2004 Dane County had achieved its goal—the
fishery was restored. Cool and cold-water species
now inhabit the sections of river above the project
area. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resource
(DNR) expects trout populations to continue to
increase with improved water quality and habitat
conditions. Another positive indicator is evidence
of multiple year classes of trout, including 3-4 inch
young-of-the-year (YOY). Surveys conducted in
1997 showed no YOY present at any of the sampling
sites. By 2003 surveys showed the presence of
YOY at 10 of the 13 stations, indicating that natural
reproduction is taking place in the West Branch.
The West Branch responded to the best manage-
ment practices, which helped increase baseflow
and reduce erosion. Repairing the riparian cor-
Figure 2. West Branch Sugar River: Post-rehabilitation
conditions.
ridor and adding stream habitat enabled the river
to meet its potential as cold water Class II trout
water. These changes, including improvements in
habitat, increased numbers of indicator species and
evidence of natural reproduction of trout, resulted in
Wisconsin delisting all three segments in 2004 from
its 303(d) list.
Partners and Funding
Wisconsin DNR, the Dane County Land
Conservation Department (LCD), landowners and
several volunteer organizations worked to improve
the riparian corridor and habitat of the stretch of
the West Branch Sugar River upstream of State
Highway 92. Dane County LCD received four
Targeted Runoff Management grants from DNR,
totaling $520,000 for riprap, fencing, shaping,
seeding and stabilizing the river banks. Support for
fish habitat structures placed at strategic locations
along the river included more than $210,000 in
cost-shared funds from DNR trout stamp funds, the
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, the
Wildlife Habitat Improvement Program, nonprofit
organizations including Trout Unlimited, Deer Creek
Sport and Conservation Club, Madison Fishing
Expo, Badger Fly Fishers, and volunteers. EPA sec-
tion 319 grant funding provided DNR staff support.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
Washington, DC
EPA841-F-08-001D
April 2008
For additional information contact:
Mike Sorge or Jim Amrhein, DNR South Central Region
608-275-3247 / 608-275-3280
michael.sorge@wisconsin.gov/James.a mrhein@wisconsin.gov
Patrick Slitter, Dane County Land Conservation Office
608-224-3730 • lwrd@co.dane.wi.us
------- |