^tosrx A 1 NONPOINT SOURCE SUCCESS STURY %P„o^N 1 Partners Collaborate to Improve the Turtle Creek Stream Corridor \A/atprhnrl\/ lmnrn\/prl 'n ^004, excess sediment from eroding streambanks, over-widened channels, livestock access, and lack of tree canopy caused the impairment of Pennsylvania's Turtle Creek. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) added 8.79 miles of stream to the state's 2004 Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d) list of impaired waters. From 2012 through 2020, the Northcentral Stream Restoration Partnership (Partnership) worked with 14 landowners along 5.3 miles of Turtle Creek. Together, they implemented best management practices (BMPs) including streambank fencing, streambank stabilization, and riparian buffers. As a result of the Partnership and landowners' efforts, water quality and aquatic habitat have significantly improved. Problem Turtle Creek is a tributary to the West Branch Susquehanna River in central Pennsylvania's Union County (Figure 1). An 8.79-mile segment of Turtle Creek was listed as impaired for siItation in 2004. The creek flows from forested headwaters into an agricul- tural landscape and a large-lot residential area before its confluence with the West Branch Susquehanna River. The 12.7-square-mile watershed includes the following land uses: forest (47.1%), agriculture (45.6%), and developed land (7.3%). A total maximum daily load (TMDL) developed in 2013 identified excess siltation as the cause of aquatic life impairment in the basin. The largest pollutant load allocations and reductions were identified for cropland, pasture, hay, and streambanks. Project partners conducted ground-truthing and bank pins surveys in 2013 that showed lateral erosion rates of 0.5-1 foot/year, which confirmed that streambank erosion was a significant sediment source. The TMDL developed for Turtle Creek established a 37.2% reduc- tion goal from the 2013 sediment loading. Story Highlights The Partnership was formed In 2007 to help reduce sediment and nutrient inputs by restoring stream corridor stability. Partnership members included Northcentral Pennsylvania Conservancy (NPC), PA DEP's Northcentral Regional Office, Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission's (PFBC's) Stream Habitat Section, and Union County Conservation District, among others. Before 2012, several landowners installed streambank fencing, planted riparian buffers, Figure 1. Map of the Turtle Creek watershed and streambank restoration project locations. excluded livestock from stream corridors, converted cropland to permanent hay, and constructed manure storage areas. However, the stream corridor still had incised, vertical, and eroded streambanks; livestock- trampled streambanks; and limited tree canopy. Landowners in the Turtle Creek watershed quickly saw the results of the first riparian planting (2012) and streambank stabilization (2013) projects, which were led by the Partnership (Figure 2). The partners, focus- ing on restoration outreach, saw an increase in com- munity interest and a waiting list of willing landowners rapidly developed. In 2014, the partners implemented six projects on adjacent farms—the single largest implementation effort to date. The Partnership com- pleted restoration projects on 14 parcels in 2013-2020 and has additional projects scheduled (see Figure 1). TURTLE CREEK WATERSHED: Stream Bank Restoration Projects ------- Figure 2. implementing BMPs improved the creek. Turtle Creek BMP implementation to date includes 5.3 miles of stream restoration with reconnection to channel floodplain (log structures that both stabilize and provide habitat using vanes, cross vanes, and mudsills); 10,900 feet of exclusionary fencing, including 19 livestock and equipment crossings; 1,500 log and rock structures for streambank stabilization; 21.1 acres of riparian area plantings; and 6.5 acres of grassed buffers with incorporated pollinator plantings. Results Water quality has improved. The stream channel stabilization and floodplain reconnection work eliminated vertical, eroded banks while promoting the flushing of fine sediments from the channel substrate. Stream reaches that had been widened over time by cattle access were narrowed using habitat structures, thereby improving sediment transport, lowering thermal gain, raising dissolved oxygen, and eliminating excessive algal mats. Electrofishing survey data from one stream reach site shows the number of lithophilic fish (fish species that need clean gravels to spawn) dra- matically increased after restoration (Figure 3). Index of biological integrity (IBI) scores and habitat scores also increased between 2014 and 2018 at multiple monitoring sites (Figures 4 and 5). By 2018, habitat scores, representing 1.5 miles of stabilization, reached attaining status due to the changes in substrate, bank stability, and increased vegetation. Partners and Funding Several key agencies and regional universities part- nered with local landowners to provide monetary funding and project support and assistance. The Northcentral Pennsylvania Conservancy administered $403,853 of PA DEP's Growing Greener Environmental Stewardship funding through multiple grant awards since 2010. PFBC's Save our Susquehanna program provided $34,297. Landowners provided project support, which included lending and operating equipment; moving and temporarily housing live- stock; providing seed, mulch, and other necessary materials; hosting multiple outreach events; and performing yearly sampling of macroinvertebrates and fish. Susquehanna University's Freshwater Research Institute conducted electrofishing and macroinverte- brate surveys over multiple years to analyze changes in fish populations. Bucknell University conducted detailed cross-sections and longitudinal profile assess- ments at select sites. Lithophilic Fish Response 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 ' 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Stream Reach #1 Figure 3. Fish numbers increased after a 2016 restoration project on a portion of Turtle Creek. Index of Biological Integrity SiteS Site 6 Site 7 2014 0 2018 Figure 4. Turtle Creek IBI scores increased between 2014 and 2018 at multiple sites. 180 160 140 Si o 120 lO 100 ro *¦> 80 In ro 60 X 40 20 0 Habitat Score SiteS Site 6 Site 7 2014 ¦ 2018 Figure 5. Habitat scores increased between 2014 and 2018 at multiple sites along Turtle Creek. * 0 ' I w. \ o U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water Washington, DC EPA 841-F-22-001H April 2022 For additional information contact: Jason Fellon PA DEP, Northcentral Region 570-327-3593 •jfellon@pa.gov Renee Carey Northcentral Pennsylvania Conservancy 570-323-6222 • rcarey@npcweb.org Shanon Stamm Union County Conservation District 570-524-3860 • sbstarnm@unionco.org Cameron Englehart Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission 814-359-5245 • cenglehart@pa.gov ------- |