^tDS%
o
ggi NONPOINT SOURCE SUCCESS STURY
%PRo-
'Hvrth Bsfcrvtinix,
Projects Reduce Impacts of Agriculture and Stormwater on Lower
Mud Creek
Waterbody ImprON/gd Agricultural operations arid stormwater runoff degraded fish and
benthic macroinvertebrate communities in a 2.23-mile segment of
Lower Mud Creek, prompting the state to include it on the Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d)
list starting in 1997. Extensive local, state and CWA section 319 grant-funded efforts to restore the
headwaters of Mud Creek and its tributary Clear Creek included streambank stabilization, wetland
restoration, and installation of agricultural BMPs including agrichemical mixing facilities, pasture
watering systems and heavy-use road stabilization. Partners also installed urban stormwater control
measures in the city of Hendersonville, The cumulative effect of section 319 funding and partners'
restoration efforts contributed to the recovery of Lower Mud Creek and its removal from the CWA
section 303(d) list in 2014.
Problem
The Mud Creek watershed is in Henderson County in
western North Carolina (Figure 1). Mud Creek flows
through the city of Hendersonville before empty-
ing into the French Broad River. Mud Creek and its
tributaries have been on the CWA section 303(d)
list of impaired waters since 1997 because of poor
benthic macroinvertebrate diversity and elevated fecal
coliform pollution. Impacts of agriculture, streambank
erosion and stormwater runoff from the Mud Creek
watershed (including Clear Creek, Cox Creek and
other tributaries) have contributed to Mud Creek's
degradation.
French Broad
'd Creek $ \W
Watershed \\/
Clear Creek
Story Highlights
Bat Fork
Lower Mud
Upper Mud
Devils Fork
Legend
/V River or stream
/V Subwatershed
boundary
0 OS 1.6 MiCS
Watershed groups have been actively involved in mon-
itoring and restoring Mud Creek since the late 1990s.
The Volunteer Water Information Network (VWIN)
began monitoring five sites in the watershed in 1992.
In 2000, the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (now Division of Mitigation Services) con-
ducted a 2-year field study. Data from these and other
sources led to the development of the Mud Creek
Watershed Plan in 2003, which laid the groundwork for
two decades of subsequent restoration efforts.
Figure 1. Mud Creek is in western North Carolina.
part of the section 319-funded Ochlawaha Bog (also
known as the King Creek Bog) restoration project
completed in June 2011. The project included restor-
ing approximately 1,045 linear feet of stream,, 16.65
acres of riparian buffers, and approximately 4.95 acres
of wetlands within the Ochlawaha Bog (Figure 2).
Restoring wetland hydrology and vegetation was
Important to protect the headwaters of Mud Creek.
Approximately 6 miies upstream from Mud Creek's
confluence with the French Broad River, 30 acres of
agricultural land were removed from production as
As part of a 319-funded project completed in June
2013, partners installed three agricultural chemical
mixing facilities on farm properties in the Lewis Creek

-------
Figure 2. This restored portion of Ochlawaha Bog had
been a farm field.
subwatershed,, a tributary of Clear Creek. These facili-
ties were installed to prevent potential spills during
mixing and filling of sprayers (a source identified in
the Mud Creek Watershed Plan.) The new facilities
will capture spills and prevent pollutants from flowing
into adjacent surface waters or seeping into ground-
water of Mud Creek's headwaters. Other restoration
efforts Included stabilizing 930 linear feet of eroding
dirt road bed. which prevented an estimated 25 tons
of sediment from entering Cox Creek, another head-
waters tributary. Finally, project partners stabilized
1,275 linear feet of eroding stream bank and planted
native riparian vegetation, preventing 17 tons of
future annual soil loss. Post-implementation monitor-
ing showed that Bank Erosion Hazard Index (BEHi)
scores improved slightly and pebbie counts indicated
improvement in the quality of substrate.
Despite improvements in the Mud Creek water-
shed, three segments of Mud Creek and several of
its headwater tributaries remain listed as impaired
because they received fair scores for benthos or
fish community assessments. Many partners in the
watershed continue to install restoration projects
that will help alleviate the impairment of these seg-
ments. For instance, North Carolina State University
(NCSU) completed a demonstration project in 2017
using section 319 funds to install bioretention basins,
multiple 2,200-gallon cisterns, and a level spreader-
filter strip to reduce stormwater runoff to Lower Mud
Creek in the city of Hendersonville. NCSU will monitor
the project over time. Additional section 319 grant
projects are underway, including a floodplain restora-
tion project on Lower Mud Creek and further urban
stormwater management projects in Hendersonville.
Results
The North Carolina Division of Water Resources
has conducted benthos sampling using the
Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Tricoptera (EPT) index to
measure the presence of pollution-sensitive aquatic
insects. The index assumes that a waterbody show-
ing high EPT richness is less likely to be polluted than
another waterbody with relatively low EPT richness
in the same geographic region. In addition, the state
measured biotic integrity (Bl) in the river segment.
A lower Bl value indicates better water quality.
Monitoring results from both indices showed that the
bioclassification of the segment has varied over time
and has improved incrementally in 2012 (Table 1). As
a result, North Carolina removed a 2.23-mile segment
of Lower Mud Creek from the CWA section 303(d) list
of impaired waters in 2014. Ongoing restoration in the
watershed should contribute to benthos improvement
beyond the good-fair category.
Partners and Funding
Numerous groups have worked together to restore
Lower Mud Creek. The CWA section 319 grant pro-
gram has funded three projects totaling $672,021
in the greater Mud Creek watershed. The Clean
Water Management Trust Fund, Tennessee Valley
Authority, and others have also contributed sub-
stantial grant funds. Other partners contributing
services and funds include VWIN; Henderson County;
North Carolina and Henderson County Cooperative
Extension Service; Henderson County Soil and Water
Conservation District; city of Hendersonville Water
and Sewer; Carolina Mountain Land Conservancy;
Environmental and Conservation Organization; North
Carolina Division of Water Resources, Water Resources
Development Grant; North Carolina Division of
Mitigation Services; Americorps Project Conserve; and
Land of Sky Regional Council of Governments.
Table 1. Bioclassification scores in Lower Mud Creek
1997-2012)
Year
EPT
Bl
Bioclassification
2012
21
5.39
Good-Fair
2007
16
6.21
Fair
2000
10
7.13
Poor
1997
12
6.8
Fair
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
Washington, DC
W .1
^ EPA 841-F-19-001B
pRo*t^° January 2019
For additional information contact:
Maya Cough-Schulze
NC Division of Water Resources
919-707-3679 • maya.cough-schulze@ncdenr.gov

-------