^tosrx

(&}) NONPOINTSOIREESRCEESSSTORY

% *

?k>L PRO^°

VrnOmSfiiS

Restoration Projects Reduce Sediment in the West Fork W hite River

WafprhnHv ImnrnvpH T'ne Ar^ansas Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources

'	Division's (ANRD) Nonpoint Source (NPS) Pollution Program first

identified the West Fork White River (WFWR) watershed as a priority for reducing NPS pollution in
1991, The waterbody was added to the state Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d) list of impaired
waters in 1998 for failing to meet state turbidity standards. Streambank restoration projects have
been completed over the last 20+ years in response to water quality and flooding concerns in the
WFWR watershed. Post-project monitoring shows a reduction in sediment loading to the WFWR,
as well as increased protection from pollutant loading and damage during high-flow events. In the
EPA-approved 2018 Arkansas CWA section 303(d) list, the upper 16.5 miles of the WFWR showed
attainment of the turbidity criterion for the first time since being listed as impaired in 1998.

Problem

West Fork White River
Arkansas

The WFWR originates south of the city of Winslow in
northwest Arkansas (Figure 1). It joins the Middle Fork
of the White River and the White River mainstem just
beiow Lake Sequoyah; together, these waters flow for
about 13 miies to the upper reaches of Beaver Lake.
The upper WFWR is known for its good water quaiity
and its smaiimouth bass and rock bass populations,
but the water quality deteriorates quickly as the
river nears Fayetteville. The Arkansas Department of
Environmental Quality assessed a 33.4-mile section of
the WFWR east of Fayetteville and north to the upper
reaches of Beaver Lake "as not supportive" of aquatic
life. The major cause is high turbidity and excessive silt
loads from three primary sources: (1) agriculture land
clearing; (2) road construction and maintenance; and
(3) gravel removal from streambeds.

Early water quality monitoring efforts indicated that
the entire WFWR (27.2 miles) was exceeding the state's
turbidity criterion and it was subsequently placed
on Arkansas's 1998 CWA section 303(d) list. In 1999,
the Upper White River was designated as the states'
highest-priority watershed in the Unified Watershed
Assessment. In the same year, the ANRD NPS Program
funded the first watershed assessment of sediment
sources, and this has served as a foundational piece
for subsequent restoration projects. The assessment
shows the majority of the sedimentation in the WFWR
is due to streambank erosion (66%). Other key sources
include erosion from roadways and ditches (17.1%) and
urban areas/construction (10.9%).

Figure 1. I he WFWR is in northwest Arkansas.

Story Highlights

Since 1998, ANRD has funded 18 NPS projects address-
ing water quality monitoring and streambank stabili-
zation in the watershed. In 2003, Audubon Arkansas
started an outreach and demonstration project with
ANRD, helping to create the White River Watershed
Group to continue the conservation and demon-
stration work in the watershed. Audubon Arkansas
also posted watershed signs and worked with local
landowners to create conservation easements for a
little over 3 acres. Another monitoring project with
the Ecological Conservation Organization (ECO) was
started in 2006 to establish two water quality moni-
toring stations on the WFWR to provide a continuous
sample collection frequency that emphasized both
base flow and storm flows.


-------
Figure 2. Streambank erosion and conditions on the
WFWR near the Fayetteviile Airport before (top) and
after (bottom) a restoration project was completed.

In 2007, partners conducted a restoration project
with the Watershed Conservation Resource Center
(WCRC) to plan and implement a natural channel
design that would reduce lateral meander formation
and associated erosion of streambanks. Approximately
800 linear feet of new channel and the river plug were
constructed, and a total of six large structures were
built, including one low-water crossing rock structure,
one log/rock combination J-hook vane, and four rock
J--hook vanes. Several small rock vanes and habitat
rock were also installed. A 1-acre wetland area with
four ponds was created where the old channel previ-
ously existed. The WCRC hosted or assisted with a
series of outreach events during the project's construc-
tion phase through its completion in September 2010.

WCRC secured additional funds from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) to restore streambanks
(Figure 2). From 2007 to 2014, the two-phase West
Fork Stream Restoration at Fayetteviile Airport Project
began stabilizing the streambank (adding toe wood,
soil mattresses, and slope fortification), enhancing
native vegetation, and removing invasive species.

The project included installing two boulder cluster
riffles and repairing two grade control structures. The
restoration was completed before a catastrophic flood
event occurred in December 2015 and at least 12.
other events occurred that had peak flows approach-
ing or exceeding bankfull conditions.

Results

The 2006 WFWR total maximum daily load prescribed
a 53% and 58% reduction of base flow and storm flow
turbidity, respectively. Estimated loadings show that
slightly greater amounts of pollutants pass at the West
Fork (WF) downstream station, WF2. Although total
suspended solids (TSS), soluble reactive phosphorus,
and sulphate decreased in loading values from year 1
to year 3, other parameters such as nitrate, ammonia,
and chloride increased. On average, for all parameters
at both sites, storm events contribute approximately
71% of the pollutant loads. For TSS at WF1 and WF2,
storm events contributed 94% and 91% of the cal-
culated loading, respectively. Bank erosion data was
collected at the West Fork Stream Restoration at
Fayetteviile Airport Project site before restoration,
and flow data was collected from the U.S. Geological
Survey WFWR gage station. During an 8-month period,
the project has prevented pollutants from enter-
ing the WFWR system, including: (1) 15,000-20,000
tons of sediment, (2) 5,000-10,000 pounds of total
phosphorus, and (3) 20,000-25,000 pounds of total
nitrogen. The project protected a county road, utility
infrastructure, and landowner properties by prevent-
ing as much as 60 feet of lateral streambank erosion
and subsequent loss of more than 25 mature trees
in an established forested riparian area. Due to the
observed decrease in TSS loading to the waterbody,
the upper 16.5 miles of the WFWR were determined to
be attaining the state standard for turbidity and were
removed from the list of impaired waters in 2018.

Partners and Funding

Collaborative partnership efforts over the last 25 years
Included ANRD, WCRC, Beaver Watershed Alliance, the
City of Fayetteviile, ECO, Audubon Arkansas, Beaver
Watershed District, and the University of Arkansas. In
2016 WCRC was awarded a $4.3 million NRCS Regional
Conservation Partnership Program grant with an addi-
tional $4.4 million of match provided by local partners
to improve conditions in the watershed.

^£D	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

0** Office of Water
\ Washington, DC

I

, - -	EPA 841-F-22-0010

July 2022

For additional information contact:

Savannah Howell

Arkansas Department of Agriculture,

Natural Resources Division

501-682-1611 • Savannah.Howell@agriculture.arkansas.gov


-------