,#tDsr%
'&?) N8NP0IHT SOURCE SUCCESS STORY
Local Partnerships and Community Involvement in Growing City Leads
to Improved Water Quality in the Upper Cibolo Creek
\a/atprhndv Imnrnvpd uPPer Cibolo Creek (UCC) was listed for failing to meet water
quality standards for bacteria in the 2006 Texas Water Quality
Inventory and 303(d) List (Integrated Report). The City of Boerne collaborated with the Upper
Cibolo Creek Watershed Partnership and the Cibolo Nature Center to develop a Clean Water Act
(CWA) section 319(h)-funded watershed protection plan (WPP), accepted by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency in 2013. The Cow Creek Groundwater Conservation District, which represents
Boerne and surrounding areas, worked to implement the WPP through education and outreach
efforts. Best management practice (BMP) implementation and stakeholder response to education
events has led to water quality improvements in the UCC. As a result, the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (TCEQ) removed UCC assessment unit (AU) 1908_02 from the impaired
waterbodies list for bacteria in the 2018 Integrated Report.
Problem
UCC is in central Texas and flows through the City of
Boerne in Kendall County (Figure 1). The creek was first
listed on the Texas CWA section 303(d) list of impaired
waters in 2006 with an Escherichia coli (E. coli) geo-
metric mean of 476 colony forming units (cfu)/100
milliliter (mL). These levels are nearly quadruple the
state standard of 126 cfu/100 mL for primary contact
recreation use. UCC is a limestone bottom stream that
runs through the center of the City of Boerne, and it
is a tourist attraction for the area. High concentra-
tions of bacteria, as well as concerns about nutrients,
threatened this sensitive natural resource (Figure 2).
Multiple probable sources of bacteria and nutrients
were identified in the WPP, including wildlife and
agricultural livestock sources (via direct deposit and
stormwater wash off from adjacent land cover) and
urban/residential sources (via stormwater wash off
from urban lands, failing septic tanks, sanitary sewer
overflows and treatment failures).
Story Highlights
In response to high bacteria levels in the creek, the
City of Boerne installed six pet waste stations along
the UCC on public parkland and posted signs to
discourage residents from feeding ducks. The city
also planted multiple bald cypress trees along riparian
Terns
0 Monitoring Station
*~/rl City of Boerne
Figure 1. Upper Cibolo Creek is in central Texas.
zones to improve runoff filtration, create a buffer
and provide bank stabilization. These enhancements
improve water quality while calling attention to activi-
ties that can contribute to water quality problems.
To address rapid growth and significant land use
changes in the surrounding area, the City of Boerne
adapted the San Antonio River Authority's low impact
development (LID) guidance document to meet
these needs. The city's master plan also considers
modifications to development ordinances that include
establishing riparian buffers and LID as part of new

-------
development in sensitive areas. In areas of existing
development, the master plan evaluates opportunities
to improve riparian buffers on city-owned properties
and outlines potential zoning changes to protect ripar-
ian corridors, stream slopes and mature trees.
Whiie physical water quality improvement projects
were successfully implemented, perhaps the greatest
achievements in the UCC watershed were the public
outreach and education events. Watershed partners
reached thousands of community members through
public meetings, technical workshops, newsletters,
creek cleanup events, education programs within
schools, and a water conservation festival. Of note are
two on-site sewage facility (OSSF) workshops held by
the city. Both workshops were well-attended. The first
workshop had a wait iist of 50 people.
Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board
(TSSWCB), Texas Water Resources institute (TWRI),
Texas A&M AgriLife Extension, and Texas A&M
AgriLife Research have hosted education and outreach
programs in the UCC watershed since 2010. These pro-
grams focus on water quality, feral hog management,
livestock management, septic systems management
and water well protection. Field days to demonstrate
these BMPs to landowners were held, with some
events reaching over 850 stakeholders.
Homeowners were also encouraged to harvest
rainwater to conserve water and reduce stormwater
runoff. The Cow Creek Groundwater Conservation
District led education efforts on rainwater harvesting,
offering several well-attended workshops and tours of
existing residential systems.
Results
The TCEQ originally listed AU 1908_02 on the 2006
integrated Report because of high bacteria! levels at
surface water quality monitoring station 12857. During
2012-2016, there were inadequate amounts of data to
analyze for the Integrated Report, so the impairment
was carried forward. Data for 2012-2014 are shown
in Figure 3. An additional monitoring station was
added to the AU in 2015 (station 20821) to increase
the amount of available data. Surface water quality
data taken from the two stations were combined to
assess the AU in the 2018 Integrated Report. In this
report, the E. coli geomean for AU 1908_02 was below
Figure 2. Upper Cibolo Creek flows through the Cibolo
Nature Center, a local recreational resource.
E. coli in Upper Cibolo Creek
¦Criteria (126 cfu/ 100m L)
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Figure 3. Upper Cibolo Creek (AU 1908_02) t. coli
geomeans have fallen over time.
the 126 cfu/100 mL primary contact recreation use
criterion (Figure 3). As a resuit, the AU was removed
from the impaired waters list In 2018.
Partners and Funding
As of 2020, watershed partners have spent approxi-
mately $758,842 on water quality improvements and
education and outreach efforts, combining $455,305
in CWA Section 319(h) funds with $303,537 matched
by local efforts. Locally organized creek cleanups,
interaction with permanent educational displays, and
participation in outreach events are expected to help
sustain improvements to water quality.
&
*L PRO^°
2
o
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
Washington, DC
EPA 841-F-20-001LL
December 2020
For additional information contact:
Samantha Litchke
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
512-239-5644 • samantha.litchke@tceq.texas.gov
Brian Koch
Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board
979-532-9496 • bkoch@tsswcb.texas.gov

-------