Section 319
NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM SOCGESS STORY
Collaborative Watershed Management Improves Dissolved Oxygen Levels
in Eagle Creek
Waterbodv Improved NonP°int source pollution from grazing land and cropland
' ' '' !" • - affected water quality in the Eagle Creek watershed,
prompting the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) to add the stream
to the state's 1998 Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d) list of impaired waters for low
levels of dissolved oxygen (DO). The Coffey County Conservation District developed a
Kansas Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy (WRAPS) for Eagle Creek, which
guided implementation of agricultural best management practices (BMPs) throughout the
watershed. Stream monitoring data collected between 2000 and 2011 show that Eagle
Creek now meets the DO criteria required to protect the aquatic life support designated
use. As a result, KDHE has removed one segment in the Eagle Creek watershed from the
state's 2012 list of impaired waters for the DO impairment.
Problem
Eagle Creek originates in southern Lyon County
and flows into the western portion of Coffey
County, in east-central Kansas. This relatively small
watershed (113.6 square miles) empties into the
Neosho River, which flows into the John Redmond
Reservoir south of the city of Hartford and the Flint
Hills National Wildlife Refuge (Figure 1). Although
grazing land/grassland is the predominant land use
(63 percent of total) in the Eagle Creek watershed,
cropland is commonly situated in bottom areas
close to the stream.
To meet the state's water quality standard for
supporting aquatic life, DO levels in surface waters
must not fall below 5.0 milligrams per liter (mg/L).
Monitoring data collected in the upper reaches
of the watershed before 1998 included one DO
sample that was below 5.0 mg/L. Pursuant to the
state's standard, Eagle Creek was cited as impaired
in 1998 on the Kansas CWA section 303(d) list for
deficient DO levels. Data showed a second low-DO
condition in 2001.
Kansas State University analyzed the Neosho
headwaters and John Redmond Reservoir using a
Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model. The
results indicated that the watershed contributed
excessive nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment to the
A Monitoring Sites
— Delisted Stream Segment (1)
II BMP Target Area 1
II BMP Target Area 2
BMP Target Area 3
Eagle Creek Watershed
Flint Hills N.W.R.
John Redmond Lake
Figure 1. Targeted BMP implementation has restored a 9.4-mile
segment of the main stem of Eagle Creek which led KDHE to
remove the DO impairment.
reservoir, which serves as a regional water supply
for Wolf Creek Nuclear Plant and drinking water sup-
ply for thousands of consumers. The SWAT model
and local knowledge indicated that cropping in bot-
tom lands and unconfined cattle operations were the
primary contributors of nonpoint source pollution.
KDHE developed a total maximum daily load (TMDL)
for Eagle Creek in 2003. The TMDL emphasized buf-
fer establishment and stream restoration practices
to address the DO impairment.
-------
Project Highlights
In January 2004, KDHE used CWA section
319 funds to partner with the Coffey County
Conservation District (CCCD) to develop and
implement a watershed plan. Using the SWAT
model results provided by Kansas State University,
information from TMDLs and evaluation data from
the federal Conservation Reserve Program, the
CCCD identified Eagle Creek as a target watershed.
Through a series of agency and town meetings,
federal, state and local stakeholders formed a team
to lead the watershed plan implementation effort.
A landowner, who later became an Eagle Creek
WRAPS board member, allowed an Emporia State
University team to monitor a segment where he
had implemented a number
of BMPs. He had installed
a piped "filter" diversion,
added critical area planting
after removing a livestock
wintering area adjacent to the
stream, fenced a riparian area,
and rotated crops with the
beginning of no-till farming.
His participation is thought to
have informed other landown-
ers and encouraged them to
install BMPs (Figure 2).
Figure 2. A landowner installed
a fence to prevent cattle from
accessing the stream.
Watershed landowners implemented numer-
ous practices between 2004 and 2011, including
52.5 acres of critical area planting; 62.5 acres of
filter strips; 23.6 acres of grassed waterways;
1874.3 acres of nutrient management planning;
7,045 acres of high-residue management using no-
till, strip-till and/or direct seeding; and 1,018 acres
of prescribed grazing. Other practices included
7,902 feet of diversion; 8,717 feet of fencing;
1,300 feet of pipeline for livestock water distribu-
tion; and 68,818 feet of terraces. Additional prac-
tices include eight ponds for livestock distribution
and alternative water supplies, one underground
outlet (for the diversion filter), two livestock waste
systems and five waste storage facilities.
Results
Eagle Creek Dissolved Oxygen
E 10
k
A
i
i
A
A
A
m
A
•
m
f
.<
\
T
t
0
0
A
I,
J
Date
A Upper • Lower
-WQS
Figure 3. Data show that the lower reach of Eagle Creek meets
the DO water quality standard.
presumed to represent the entire stream segment
of Eagle Creek from the headwaters to the stream's
confluence with the Neosho River (approximately
32 stream miles). In 2002 KDHE moved the moni-
toring station farther downstream. Monitoring
data collected in the lower reach since 2002 have
shown that all DO samples have remained above
the water quality standard of 5.0 mg/L since 2002
(Figure 3). As a result, KDHE removed the lower
segment of Eagle Creek (approximately 9.4 miles)
from the state's 2012 list of impaired waters for the
DO impairment. In 2011 KDHE collected concurrent
samples at the original upstream site that showed
continued occasional low-DO conditions for the
upper reaches. Therefore, Upper Eagle Creek will
remain listed as impaired for low DO.
Partners and Funding
Before 2001 KDHE maintained a monitoring sta-
tion in the upper reaches of Eagle Creek that was
The success of this project can be attributed to a
number of local, state and federal partners, including
Lyon and Coffey County Conservation Districts and
their respective Natural Resources Conservation
Service offices; Kansas Forest Service; Kansas
Department of Agriculture, Division of Conservation;
Kansas State University; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Region 7; Kansas Rural
Center; Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks and
local landowners. Project funding to date has includ-
ed several EPA CWA section 319 grants, including
a $5000 grant to develop the WRAPS plan and two
grants ($40,000 and $74,020) to implement the plan.
The project also received approximately $40,000 in
Kansas State Water Plan Funds for implementation.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
Washington, DC
EPA841-F-12-001KK
September 2012
For additional information contact:
Ann D'Alfonso
Kansas Department of Health and Environment
785-296-3015
AD'Alfonso@kd heks.gov
------- |