Section 319
NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM SOCGESS STORY
Improved Stakeholder Awareness Leads to Water Quality Restoration
in Buck Creek
A/ t h H I H High levels of Esc/?er/c/?/a co//bacteria, primarily from wildlife,
VVaterDOay ll nproved |ivestockand humans, in Buck Creek prompted the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to add the creek to the Clean Water Act (CWA) section
303(d) list of impaired waters in 2000 for not supporting the primary contact recreation use. Extensive
public outreach and education efforts increased public awareness of the condition of the creek and
led to voluntary implementation of best management practices (BMPs) by landowners. Watershed
restoration efforts contributed to reductions in bacteria loading. As a result, TCEQ removed Buck
Creek from the state's list of impaired waters in 2010.
Problem
The Buck Creek watershed covers 289 square miles
within the Red River Basin in the Central Great
Plains of Texas. Located in the southeastern corner
of the Texas Panhandle near the Oklahoma state
line, Buck Creek is a small stream surrounded by
rural and agricultural landscapes, with land uses
primarily devoted to row crops and grasslands.
Water quality data collected between 1997
and 2005 showed that the geometric mean for
E. coli bacteria concentrations within Buck Creek
was 262.08 colony-forming units of bacteria per
100 milliliters of water (262.08 CFU/100 ml).
The state's water quality standards require that
E. coli levels not exceed a geometric mean of
126 CFU/100 ml over a seven-year assessment
period. Because data showed elevated bacteria
levels, TCEQ added Buck Creek to the CWA section
303(d) list of impaired waters in 2000 for not sup-
porting its primary contact recreation use.
The monitoring data, combined with bacterial
source tracking and watershed modeling, indicated
that wildlife (including feral hogs) was the largest
contributor of E. coli bacteria in the watershed.
Other sources, including livestock (Figure 1) and
humans, also contributed to pollutant loading.
Project Highlights
Beginning in May 2004, Texas AgriLife Research
personnel conducted water quality monitoring in
Buck Creek to identify potential pollutant sources
contributing to the creek. They collected water
samples once every two weeks from multiple sites
throughout the creek. This monitoring program,
Figure 1. Wildlife and livestock with access to the
creek can deposit fecal material that can contribute
significantly to degraded water quality.
funded by CWA section 319(h) grants from the
Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board
(TSSWCB), significantly augmented the historical
monitoring dataset.
Texas AgriLife Research, the Texas Water Resources
Institute and the TSSWCB jointly held 20 meetings
and educational events to guide local stakeholders
through the watershed planning process for Buck
Creek. Stakeholders reviewed the water quality
monitoring results, bacterial source tracking find-
ings, and watershed modeling scenarios to make
decisions on water quality goals and priority BMPs
needed to restore and protect water quality in Buck
Creek. The project team conducted education and
outreach, including field days for agricultural pro-
ducers to demonstrate BMP implementation and to
encourage the producers to adopt BMPs as a way to
-------
both improve water quality and enhance their opera-
tions. At a January 2008 Texas Watershed Steward
Program workshop held in the Buck Creek water-
shed, nearly 61 percent of the participants indicated
that they planned to adopt BMPs. In a follow-up
survey conducted six months later, 80 percent of
respondents indicated that they had adopted BMPs
on their property.
Local landowners voluntarily implemented a
number of agricultural BMPs to support grazing
management, including:
• Installing off-stream alternative watering sources
for livestock, which can reduce in-stream bacteria
levels by 50-85 percent by making upland areas
more desirable and drawing livestock away from
riparian areas
• Implementing prescribed grazing systems to
adjust stocking rates and grazing intensity
• Installing cross-fencing to manage livestock
distribution and access to riparian areas.
In collaboration with landowners, the TSSWCB certi-
fied nine water quality management plans that imple-
mented prescribed grazing on 29,630 acres. The U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) developed conserva-
tion plans that include prescribed grazing on an
additional 4,520 acres. Landowners also collaborated
with the USDA Wildlife Services to conduct feral
hog (an invasive species) abatement and removal
activities. In total, Wildlife Services performed aerial
control on 45,867 acres, removing 258 hogs.
Results
Water quality monitoring data show that the
long-term E. coli geometric mean in Buck Creek
now complies with the state's water quality
standard. Data show a decrease in the geometric
mean from 262.08 CFU/100 mL (1997-2005) to
31.07 CFU/100 mL (2002-2009) (Figure 2). As a
result, TCEQ removed a 28-mile segment of Buck
Creek from the state's list of impaired waters in
2010 for bacteria.
The success of this effort is attributed to educa-
tion and outreach programming and landowners'
voluntary implementation of BMPs throughout the
watershed. Continued water quality improvements
are likely to be achieved as landowners implement
additional BMPs, as agreed upon by stakeholders
and described in the watershed protection plan.
Water quality monitoring continues to track and
measure interim progress to implement the water-
shed protection plan and ensure this restoration
effort remains a success.
E.coli in Buck Creek
1250-
1000-
•g 750-
=
5 500-
250-
Q
262.08-
O
-,-
^ Geometric mean
^ Water qual ty standard
30 samples
126 CFU/100 ml
31.07-
1997-2005
*
O
§
85 samples
—
-
2002-2009
Assessment Period
Figure 2. Statistical analyses of E. coli in Buck Creek
show that the geometric mean for the 2002-2009
assessment period falls well within the water
quality standard.
Partners and Funding
Over $719,000 in CWA section 319(h) funds from
the TSSWCB, paired with more than $459,000 in
non-federal matching funds from Texas AgriLife
Research, supported the following projects in Buck
Creek—collecting and analyzing water samples,
conducting bacterial source tracking, developing
pollutant loading models, facilitating stakeholder
involvement in the watershed planning process,
and crafting the watershed protection plan.
The Donley, Hall-Childress, and Salt Fork Soil and
Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs) worked
with landowners to voluntarily implement grazing
management systems to reduce the impact of live-
stock on riparian areas. The TSSWCB and the NRCS
worked through the SWCDs to provide approxi-
mately $19,400 in state funding and $97,600 in
federal Farm Bill funding to landowners as financial
incentives to implement management practices in
the Buck Creek watershed.
Over $12,000 in state and federal funds were
used in the feral hog control effort headed by
USDA Wildlife Services. State funds for feral hog
abatement activities were provided through a
grant from the Texas Department of Agriculture.
Other key partners included local landowners, the
Texas AgriLife Extension Service, the Texas Water
Resources Institute, and the Red River Authority of
Texas.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
Washington, DC
EPA841-F-12-001U
August 2012
For additional information contact:
Aaron Wendt
Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board
254-773-2250
awendt@tsswcb.state.tx.us
------- |