The Volunteer Monitor
The National Newsletter of Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring
Vol.7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Special Topic: Monitoring Urban Watersheds
Co-Editors: Texas Watch
This issue was co-edited by Texas Watch, the volunteer monitoring program of the Texas Natural
Resource Conservation Commission. Texas Watch presently includes over 200 groups across the state,
representing about 4,000 individuals who monitor everything from bayous and wetlands to creeks, ponds,
and storm drains. This large corps of volunteers is supported by 60 partners from industry, business, and
local and regional authorities.
The following articles appear in this edition of The Volunteer Monitor:
Topic Areas
Editorial Content
General Interest
Information Sources
pH
Stormwater
Test Kits and Test Tips
Urban Waters
Editorial Content
• About The Volunteer Monitor
• Back Issues
• From the Editor: "A Not-So-Prestigious Ecological Address" and "Next Issue: Program
-------
Management"
The Staff at The Volunteer Monitor
General Interest
Secchi Dip-In
Monitoring Stoneflies in January
Monitors Take Action on Phosphate Problem
New Program to Monitor Debris
What's in a Name?
Information Sources
Conferences
National Organizations
Resources
Spanish-Language Publications for Volunteer Monitors
pH
Comments on Calculating pH Statistics
o Table 1. Hypothetical pH and Hydrogen Ion Data Analysis
Stormwater
Derby Creek: Creek Critters Mark Buried Creeks
Million Points of Blight
NPDES Stormwater Permits
Storm Drain Stenciling: The Street-River Connection
o Supplies
Storm Sewers in a Suitcase
Test Kits and Test Tips
Combination Staff Gauge / Crest Gauge
Does Community Education Reduce Water Pollution?
Dissolved Oxygen Test Tip
Low-Cost Biological Monitoring
Test Kits for Organic Contaminants
Storm Drain Monitoring Kits
Urban Waters
Citizens Jump Barriers for Salmon
How Significant is Urban Runoff?
-------
Making Connections Between People and Urban Waters
Urban Watch: A New Approach to Monitoring Urban Nonpoint Source Pollution
Urbanization and Water Quality: A Crash Course
"We're Already Scientists!": Urban Kids Monitor Creek
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
About The Volunteer Monitor
The Volunteer Monitor newsletter facilitates the exchange of ideas, monitoring methods, and practical
advice among volunteer environmental monitoring groups across the nation.
Address all correspondence to: Eleanor Ely, editor, 1318 Masonic Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94117;
telephone 415/255-8049.
Rotating Co-Editors
The Volunteer Monitor has a permanent editor and volunteer editorial board. In addition, a different
monitoring group serves as co-editor for each issue. This unique structure ensures stability while
allowing a variety of viewpoints to be represented.
This issue was co-edited by Texas Watch, the volunteer monitoring program of the Texas Natural
Resource Conservation Commission. Texas Watch presently includes over 200 groups across the state,
representing about 4,000 individuals who monitor everything from bayous and wetlands to creeks, ponds,
and storm drains. This large corps of volunteers is supported by 60 partners from industry, business, and
local and regional authorities.
Subscribing
The Volunteer Monitor is published twice yearly. Subscriptions are free. To be added to the mailing list,
write us. Your subscription will start with the next issue.
Reprinting Articles
Reprinting of material from The Volunteer Monitor is encouraged. Please notify the editor of your
intentions, and send a copy of your final publication to the address above.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Back Issues
The following back issues are available:
Fall 1991 -- Biological Monitoring (photocopy)
Spring 1992 ~ Monitoring for Advocacy
Fall 1992 -- Building Credibility (photocopy)
Spring 1993 ~ School-Based Monitoring
Fall 1993 -- Staying Afloat Financially<
Spring 1994 ~ Volunteer Monitoring: Past, Present, & Future
Fall 1994 -- Monitoring a Watershed
Spring 1995 ~ Managing and Presenting Your Data
To obtain back issues, or additional copies of this issue, send a self-addressed stamped envelope, 9x12
or larger, to The Volunteer Monitor, 1318 Masonic Ave., San Francisco, CA 94117. First-class postage is
780 for one issue, $1.24 for two, and $1.47 for three. For $3.00, you can get up to 15 copies. For larger
orders, please call for shipping charges.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
From the Editor
A Not-So-Prestigious Ecological Address
A few months ago, while looking through the Summer 1994 issue of River Voices (River Network's
newsletter), I came upon some rather poetic thoughts about the importance of knowing your "ecological
address" ~ that is, knowing what watershed you live in. This knowledge, said one writer, gives a person
"an understanding of the interconnectedness of the human and natural environment." Another wrote, "A
watershed is a gatherer ~ a living place that draws the sun and rain together. Watershed consciousness is
a form of home awareness."
Inspired, I opened my map of San Francisco to find my own ecological address. But I hit a snag right
away ~ I couldn't find any streams. So I asked around, and learned that San Francisco's streams are
almost all covered up and have become part of the city's combined sewer system. Rainwater falling on
my street, I was told, runs down the nearest storm drain and ends up at a sewage treatment plant.
Sewage treatment plant, indeed! I'd been looking forward to an ecological address of a bit more
distinction. Where was the poetry? The sun and rain, the interconnectedness with the natural
environment?
Still grasping for some shred of connection to nature, I persisted: "Well, but where does the water
running off my street ultimately end up? It must be either the Bay or the ocean. Since the ocean is all
downhill from my house, wouldn't the water end up there?" But my hopes were crushed by the answer I
received: "Topography has nothing to do with it. You'll have to get a map of the sewers."
Other urbanites have had similarly deflating experiences. At the Watersheds 94 conference, Alan
AtKisson spoke about his efforts to learn what watershed his Seattle home is in. His research led to "a
vast underground network of rectilinear drainage pipes funneling into eight-foot-wide sewage mains:
humanity's rivers." And in those sewers, "springwater from the last tiny section of Ravenna Creek joins
the throng of waters collected from toilets and storm drains and sinks full of dishes."
I did eventually get a map of San Francisco's sewers, and found out that I live in the "sewershed" of San
Francisco Bay. So I am connected to a beautiful body of water that I care about ~ even if the conduits
-------
that link me to the Bay are less romantic than I might have wished.
Because city dwellers tend to feel cut off from natural waters, often the first task for volunteer
monitoring groups working in urban environments is simply to create basic awareness: there is a stream
nearby; this is its name; this is where it goes. The next step is to help people feel personally connected to
that water. Third is to build the understanding that our actions affect the water (as someone once
commented to me, in a city the term "primary stream" essentially means your gutter). The final stage
(which is dependent on getting the first three right) is to start changing behavior. The articles in this issue
offer helpful ideas for successfully carrying out all four of these stages.
Next issue: Program management
What are the ingredients of a well-run volunteer monitoring program? What are the best ways to recruit
and train volunteer monitors, foster volunteer leadership, keep enthusiasm high? How can volunteer
monitors reach out to the wider community? These topics will be covered in the Spring 1996 issue,
which will be co-edited by the City of Bellevue Stream Team Program in Bellevue, Washington.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
The Staff at The Volunteer Monitor
Editor: Eleanor Ely
Editorial Board: Geoff Dates (River Watch Network, Vermont), Linda Green (Rhode Island Watershed
Watch), Mike Herz (San Francisco BayKeeper Emeritus), Meg Kerr (Coastal Resources Center, Rhode
Island), Abby Markowitz (Maryland Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Association), Ken Pritchard
(Adopt-a-Beach, Washington), Jeff Schloss (New Hampshire Lakes Lay Monitoring Program), Jerry
Schoen (Massachusetts Water Watch Partnership), Marcia Wiley (Environmental Education Office,
Superintendent of Public Instruction, Washington)
Co-editing group for each issue changes: Check specific issue for information on the co-editing group.
Graphic Designer: Typesetting, Etc., San Francisco, CA
Printer: Alonzo Printing Co., Inc., Hay ward, CA
This project has been partially funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The contents of this
document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of EPA, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation of use.
Address all correspondence regarding the newsletter to:
Eleanor Ely, Editor
The Volunteer Monitor
1318 Masonic Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94117
telephone (415) 255-8049
Correspondence
Comments regarding the web pages can be sent to:
OW-GENERAL@epamail. epa.gov
-------
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Secchi Dip-In
These students in Kansas City, Kansas, were among the thousands of people across the country who
participated in the All-American Secchi Dip-In last July. Dr. Robert Carlson of Kent State University,
who organized the event, reports that so far he has received data forms from Dip-In volunteers in 37
states and Canada. The volunteers reported Secchi disk readings along with information on water uses
and perceived water quality on the day of the Dip-In.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Monitoring Stoneflies in January
by Joan Martin
In January, dedicated volunteers in the Huron River Watershed Council's Adopt-A-Stream Program take
their nets down to local streams, braving snow, ice, and frozen fingers to do a special kind of
macroinvertebrate monitoring ~ looking for "winter stoneflies." Winter stoneflies have an unusual life
cycle. Soon after hatching in early spring, the larvae bury themselves in the streambed. They spend the
whole summer lying dormant in the mud, thereby avoiding problems like overheated streams, low
oxygen concentrations, fluctuating flows, and heavy predation by fish. In late November they emerge,
grow quickly for a couple of months, then lay their eggs in January.
Why monitor winter stoneflies? Mike Wiley, an aquatic ecologist at University of Michigan and advisor
to the Adopt-A-Stream Program, explains that the January monitoring helps interpret the results of spring
and fall macroinvertebrate surveys. In spring and fall, our volunteers do a thorough benthic survey, based
on Protocol II of the EPA's Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers. Some sites on
urban streams have poor diversity and no sensitive families. The question then becomes: Is the lack of
macroinvertebrate diversity due to specific warm-weather conditions such as high temperatures, low
oxygen, or fluctuating flows, or is there some toxic contamination present? The January screening helps
us answer this question. If winter stoneflies are plentiful, seasonal conditions were probably to blame for
the earlier results; but if winter stoneflies are absent, the site probably suffers from toxic contamination
that is present year-round.
For example, Mallett's is a city creek that lacks macroinvertebrate population diversity in the spring and
fall. When volunteers monitored Mallett's in January, they did not find any winter stoneflies, leading
them to suspect a persistent contamination problem. Further investigation supported this theory:
conductivity testing revealed unusually high levels, above 1,000 asS/cm (microsiemens per centimeter) in
many locations and occasionally above 3,000 asS/cm. The high conductivity indicates the presence of
charged particles that may be contaminants.
The idea of searching for bugs in the middle of winter startles many people. Actually, the bizarre nature
of the event is a great advantage since it captures media attention. Last January, our sampling was
covered by stories and photographs in two local papers.
-------
Recruiting volunteers for winter monitoring has not been not as hard as you might think. After all, during
warmer months people have more alternative outings to choose from! Fortunately, the time spent on the
actual monitoring is mercifully short ~ if winter stoneflies are present they are usually abundant, and will
be found in less than 15 minutes. Usually collection presents no special problems, though if the weather
is very cold the sample may freeze in the net. Furthermore, if volunteers are lucky they sometimes get to
see the bugs "hiking" in the snow along the stream, moving upstream to mate. All in all, our January
monitoring is a lot of fun ~ and nothing makes hot chocolate taste better.
Two genera of winter stoneflies are found in our region (southeastern Michigan), but only one of them ~
Allocapnia — is present in even the smallest streams, so that is the one we look for. Allocapnia occurs in
most Eastern states as far south as Louisiana. In other parts of the country, other winter stoneflies in the
families Capniidae and Taeniopterygidae might be used in a similar fashion. For information and advice,
contact your state Cooperative Extension office or water quality agency. A good general reference book
is Nymphs of North American Stoneflies by K.W. Steward and B.P. Stark (published in 1988 by the
Entomological Society of America).
Joan Martin is Director of the Adopt-A-Stream Program, a joint project of the Huron River Watershed
Council and Washtenaw County Drain Commissioner. She may be reached at HRWC, 1100 N. Main St.,
Suite 210, Ann Arbor, MI 48104; 313/769-5971.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Monitors Take Action on Phosphate Problem
In fall of 1994, volunteer monitors near Camden, New Jersey, measured a 130 percent increase in
phosphate levels on the Cooper River. The following spring, 87,000 local residents received a letter
explaining the problem and giving helpful hints on nontoxic lawn care practices. Now there's an example
of "data to action"!
The volunteers were part of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network (DRN) and had been monitoring the site
since 1991 for a variety of chemicals. "We had seen phosphate spikes each year in spring and fall, when
people treat their lawns with fertilizers," says Fred Stine, DRN's Estuary Coordinator. "But always
before, the spike only lasted for one monitoring cycle (two weeks). Then in fall of 94 it stayed elevated
for six weeks."
Seeking the source of the problem, the volunteers began working their way upriver. They continued to
find high phosphorus levels until they got upstream of the last developed area, at which point the levels
finally dropped.
The volunteers suspected two sources for the phosphorus. One was the stirring up of "old" phosphorus in
river bottom sediments by recent heavy rains. (The sediments are nutrient-rich because prior to 1987,
when a new regional sewage treatment plant was built, 19 municipal sewage treatment plants discharged
18 million gallons per day into the Cooper.) The other source was lawn care fertilizer, washed off in
higher-than-usual concentrations by the same heavy rainstorms. The volunteers consulted a Department
of Environmental Protection field biologist, who agreed with their analysis and confirmed that lawn
fertilizers were a significant source of new phosphate to the river.
Stine explains that getting rid of the contaminated sediments would require dredging ~ a procedure that
costs millions and also has serious drawbacks, including the resuspension of metals and other toxics in
the river water, and the problem of finding a disposal site for the dredge spoils. On the other hand, the
influx of "new" phosphorus from lawn and garden runoff was a problem the volunteers could tackle.
The volunteers' results were published in the DRN newsletter, where they caught the eye of the New
Jersey Environmental Federa-tion, a group that was already working to educate people about nontoxic
lawn care alternatives. The Federation teamed up with DRN, and within a short time the two were joined
-------
by a third partner ~ the National Center for Environmental Strategies, a New Jersey-based national
organization concerned with environmentally caused health problems.
Together, the three groups launched an ambitious public education effort aimed at changing residents'
lawn care practices. Stine says, "Our goal was not to assign blame, but to take a positive approach. Our
message was that we can all help fix the problem by changing our habits."
The campaign was kicked off by a press conference, featuring a speech by the mayor of one of the
affected towns. Next, Girl Scouts, Cub Scouts, and adult volunteers distributed 8,000 doorhanger leaflets
in the targeted neighborhoods. Under the headline "Why Does the Cooper River Turn Green?" the
doorhanger explained the relationship between lawn care, nonpoint source pollution, and algal blooms,
and provided helpful tips for nonpolluting lawn care methods.
But the real coup was the mass mailing. Stine called the Camden County Municipal Utilities Authority
(the sewage treatment plant) and asked if they'd be willing to put an insert in their next billing statement.
(As Stine points out, "A bill is something people don't just throw out ~ although they might like to.") The
Authority said that would be fine; just give us the 87,000 copies. "We had no idea where we'd get the
money for printing," says Stine. "We had barely been able to pay for the 8,000 doorhangers." But after
Stine called back and explained the group's financial situation, the Authority agreed to pay all the
printing costs.
And so it was that 87,000 Camden County residents opened their first-quarter billing statement to read
about how volunteer monitors had found high phosphate levels in the Cooper River; how phosphates
contribute to algae blooms; and how they themselves could help solve the problem.
For more information, contact Fred Stine, Delaware Riverkeeper Network, 609/854-5108.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
New Program to Monitor Debris
Many readers of The Volunteer Monitor have probably heard about ~ if not participated in ~ the Annual
International Coastal Cleanup, which the Center for Marine Conservation (CMC) has coordinated for
nearly a decade. Now CMC, with support from EPA, is taking the cleanups one step further with the
National Marine Debris Monitoring Program.
For the program, the U.S. coastline has been divided into nine regions. Within each region, 20 coastal
sites will be sampled monthly, for five years, by trained volunteers following a standardized,
scientifically valid protocol. The data will be used to measure regional trends for 30 specific debris items.
Regional analyses will be combined to get a national picture of marine debris.
For more information on how your organization can become a part of this exciting program, contact Jill
Goodman, Program Manager, CMC Atlantic Regional Office, 306A Buckroe Ave., Hampton, VA 23664;
804/851-6734; e-mail goodmaj@hampton.mhs.compuserve.com
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
What's in a Name?
Here's an idea for giving your outreach program an instant boost, without spending a penny.
Kathleen Edson, Assistant Program Coordinator for the Napa County Resource Conservation District,
reports that the District was having trouble drumming up public interest in its new document, which bore
the working title "Napa River Watershed Integrated Resource Management Plan."
"Whenever we tried to talk about it," she says, "people's eyes glazed over." The acronym, NRWIRMP,
was even worse.
Then Dennis Bowker, the District's Resource Conservationist, had an inspiration: Change the title to
"Napa River Watershed Owner's Manual."
"We saw an immediate improvement," says Edson. "Now, when we put the books out on a display table,
people are interested. They'll pick up a copy and start thumbing through it."
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Conferences
Fifth National Volunteer Monitoring Conference
Third Trashed Rivers Conference
GREEN '96 conference
NALMS Regional Conferences
Fifth National Volunteer Monitoring Conference
From August 3 to 7, 1996, volunteer monitors from around the country will be meeting on the University
of Wisconsin campus in Madison for the Fifth National Volunteer Environmental Monitoring
Conference. This year, the conference will focus on "protecting our watersheds." If you're on the mailing
list for The Volunteer Monitor, you will be receiving an informational flyer on the conference in January.
The conference steering committee is soliciting abstracts from anyone interested in giving a presentation
or leading a hands-on workshop, how-to demonstration, panel discussion, or field trip. If you're
interested, contact conference organizer Celeste Moen (address below) for a conference abstract form.
The form contains additional instructions and guidelines for presenters. All abstracts must be received no
later than March 1, 1996.
For more information, please contact Celeste Moen, Wisconsin Self-Help Lake Monitoring Program,
Wisconsin DNR - WR/2, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707; 608/264-8878.
Third Trashed Rivers Conference
"Friends of Trashed Rivers III," the third conference organized by the Coalition to Restore Urban Waters
(CRUW), will be held May 16 - 18, 1996, in Chicago. The conference is for everyone who has "a
favorite ditch or culverted, riprapped, eroded, flooding, silted, denuded, garbage-filled, or polluted
waterway." According to the organizers, "This is not a conference for the weak-willed or those with
limited vision." For more information, please contact Friends of the Chicago River, 407 S. Dearborn,
-------
Suite 1580, Chicago, IL 60605; 312/939-0490.
GREEN "96 conference
GREEN (Global Rivers Environmental Education Network) will hold its first "Conference of the
Americas" July 10 - 12, 1996, in Ann ALrbor, Michigan. The conference, on the theme of "Educating for
Sustainable Watersheds," will bring together educators and community members to discuss such topics
as school/community interaction, monitoring techniques, interdisciplinary studies, and action taking. To
receive additional conference information and a registration packet, contact GREEN at 721 E. Huron St.,
Ann Arbor MI 48104; 313/761-8142.
NALMS Regional Conferences
NAlLMS (North American Lake Management Society) will hold four regional meetings in Feb-ruary and
March of 1996. These conferences will include many workshops specifically designed for volunteer
monitors of lakes and rivers. The South-eastern regional meeting will be held March 20-23 in Huntsville,
Alabama; for more information, contact Gary Springston at 423/751-7336. The other three conferences
will be held in Massachusetts, Texas, and Washington/Oregon; for exact dates and locations, please
contact NALMS, P.O. Box 5443, Madison, WI 53705; 608/233-2836.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
National Organizations
Some of the organizations listed here focus primarily on environmental monitoring. Others have little or
no direct involvement in monitoring, but offer support with advocacy, environmental protection,
restoration, and other activities of interest to volunteer monitoring groups.
Izaak Walton League's SOS
Save Our Streams (SOS) is the Izaak Walton League of America's 26-year-old national river monitoring
and restoration program. Through workshops, books, curricula, a video, and a technical assistance hotline
(800/BUG-IWLA), SOS provides support in four program areas: (1) Volunteer Water Monitoring, (2)
Stream Restoration, (3) Environmental Education, and (4) Urban Environments. SOS's national technical
assistance database, called "Stream Doctor," helps people locate technical assistance, resources, and
projects. For more information please write to SOS's new address: SOS, IWLA, 707 Conservation Lane,
Gaithers-burg, MD 20878-2983; or call 800/BUG-IWLA.
Coalition to Restore Urban Waters
The Coalition to Restore Urban Waters (CRUW) was founded in 1993 as a network for groups concerned
about urban waters. The network currently includes over 300 groups and is coordinated by a national
steering committee of grassroots organizations. CRUW has just published its five-year plan for meeting
the needs of urban rivers and people, as well as the first issue of its national newsletter, and is organizing
its annual "Friends of Trashed Rivers" conference, to be held in May (see the Conferences article). For
more information, or to obtain a copy of the five-year plan or newsletter, write to CRUW, c/o Izaak
Walton League of America, 707 Conservation Lane, Gaithersburg, MD 20878-2983; 800/BUG-IWLA.
River Network
River Network's mission is to help people organize to protect and restore rivers and watersheds. The
organization supports watershed advocates at the local, state, and national level, and promotes working
together to build a nationwide movement for rivers and watersheds. River Network Partners receive
assistance in the areas of watershed issue research, organization building, fundraising, campaign
-------
strategies, and networking. Partnership dues are on a sliding scale and start at $60. Num-erous
publications are available at a nominal cost, including How to Save a River (book) and River Voices
(quarterly journal). For more information contact River Network, P.O. Box 8787, Portland, OR 97207;
503/241-3506; rivernet@igc.apc.org
River Watch Network
River Watch Network (RWN) works with conservation organizations, high school and college teachers
and students, and citizen volunteers to develop river monitoring and protection programs. By offering
organizational and technical assistance, RWN helps community groups to (1) define the issues they want
to address; (2) design and execute scientifically credible studies; and (3) use the results of their studies to
create strategies for river and watershed conservation.
RWN now has a corps of 10,000 volunteers working on over 150 rivers in 13 states, Canada, Mexico,
and Hungary. For $25/year, members receive RWN's newsletter and 10% discount on publications. To
join, or for a list of services, workshops, and publications, contact RWN, 153 State St., Montpelier, VT
05602; 802/223-3840.
GREEN: An International Network
GREEN, the Global Rivers Environmental Education Network, links students and teachers in 136
countries. Participants use computer networking to share ideas and water quality monitoring data. The
program offers an interdisciplinary experience and involves students in real environmental issues in their
communities. Members receive a quarterly newsletter and a special-rate GREEN EcoNet account.
Student membership is $5 per year; individual memberships range from $25 to $100 per year; and group
membership is $55 per year. For more information, contact GREEN, 721 East Huron St., Ann Arbor, MI
48104; 313/761-8142.
Center for Marine Conservation
For ten years, the Center for Marine Conservation (CMC) has coordinated the International Coastal
Cleanup, which has grown to include 40 U.S. states and 68 countries. Cleanup volunteers record the
amount and type of debris they collect on 81-item data cards and send the cards to CMC for analysis.
Other CMC programs for volunteer monitors are the "Million Points of Blight" storm drain stenciling
project and the new National Marine Debris Monitoring Program. CMC is headquartered in Washington,
DC, and has regional offices in Virginia, California, and Florida. For more information on CMC's
volunteer monitoring projects, contact the CMC Mid-Atlantic Regional Office, 306-A Buckroe Ave.,
Hampton, VA; 804/851-6734.
N. American Lake Management Society
-------
The North American Lake Management Society, better known as NALMS, is a membership organization
of lake property owners, volunteer monitors, scientists, consultants, academicians, and state and federal
agency staff. Members receive the quarterly magazine, LakeLine, and the peer-reviewed journal Lake &
Reservoir Management. Complimentary copies of either publication are available from the address
below. (Volunteer monitors may be particularly interested in the April 1995 LakeLine, which contains a
fascinating article by Bob Carlson on the Secchi disk.)
Members come together annually at the NALMS International Symposium (the next one will be held in
Minneapolis in November 1996). Grants and scholarships for attending the Symposium are available.
NALMS will also present four regional meetings in spring of 1996; please see the announcement for
details. For more information on membership or conferences, please contact NALMS World
Headquarters, P.O. Box 5443, Madison, WI 53705; 608/233-2836; gardner@nalms.org
Trout Unlimited
Trout Unlimited is a conservation group working to restore North America's trout and salmon fisheries
and their watersheds. Founded in 1959, the organization now has over 85,000 members in 450 chapters.
Membership is $30/year ($15 for youth and seniors) and includes the quarterly magazine Trout.
Members are automatically assigned to a local chapter. Chapters hold monthly meetings and organize
local conservation activities, often including stream monitoring and restoration projects. For more
information, contact Trout Unlimited, 1500 Wilson Blvd., Suite 310, Arlington, VA 22209-2310;
703/522-0200.
Native Fish Association
Robert Rice, the membership director of the North American Native Fish Association (NANFA) recently
contacted The Volunteer Monitor to say that NANFA is interested in featuring volunteer monitoring
stories in its quarterly magazine, American Currents. Anyone with a story they would like to publicize is
encouraged to contact NANFA at the address below.
Rice is also inviting volunteer monitors to join NANFA, a 20-year-old hobbyist group dedicated to
studying and collecting native fish and raising them in aquariums. He will send a free sample copy of
American Currents to anyone who is interested. For more information, contact Robert Rice, 2213
Prytania Circle, Navarre, FL 32566; 904/936-9261.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Resources
Urban Watershed Bulletin
An excellent resource for urban watershed management is Watershed Protection Techniques. The
publication's subtitle ~ "A Quarterly Bulletin on Urban Watershed Restoration and Protection Tools" ~
describes it well. Each issue is packed with technical (yet very readable) information. The summer 1995
issue focuses on urban stream restoration and includes seven case studies plus a number of other articles.
To subscribe to Watershed Protection Techniques, contact the Center for Watershed Protection, 8737
Colesville Rd., Suite 300, Silver Spring, MD 20910; 301/589-1890. Subscription (4 issues): $34
individual, $18 student, $54 organization; single issues $14. (If the subscription price is beyond your
budget, check to see if local public or university libraries carry this very useful bulletin.)
Get Organized!
River Watch Network's new 24-page Program Organizing Guide covers 11 basic steps for organizing a
river monitoring program. Drawing on techniques RWN uses to help groups design monitoring projects,
the guide addresses such issues as identifying water quality issues, setting goals, raising money,
recruiting volunteers, etc. To order a copy, send a check for $10, payable to River Watch Network, to
RWN, 153 State St., Montpelier, VT 05602; or call 802/223-3840.
Urban Watershed Restoration Directory
The National Directory of Urban Watershed Restoration Efforts, 1994 edition, provides concise
descriptions of 50 urban watershed restoration efforts representing every region of the country. The
directory highlights projects that carry out physical restoration activities to improve water quality,
habitat, or wildlife. Available for $6 from the Center for Watershed Protection, 8737 Colesville Rd.,
Suite 300, Silver Spring, MD 20910; 301/589-1890.
-------
New Stream Restoration Handbook
The Izaak Walton League of America's Save Our Streams Program recently published^ Citizen's
Streambank Restoration Handbook, a 111-page looseleaf manual. The authors write, "Despite a wealth
of knowledge about low-cost, sustainable, and ecologically sound stream restoration techniques, streams
continue to be channelized, diked, and dammed." The guide teaches citizens how to restore streams using
vegetation and natural stream forces to improve habitat and water quality. To order a copy, send a check
for $15, payable to the Izaak Walton League of America, to IWLA, 707 Conservation Lane,
Gaithersburg, MD 20878-2983; or call 800/BUG-IWLA.
Low-Cost Methods Manual
GREEN (Global Rivers Environmental Education Network has just published the Field Manual for
Global Low-Cost Water Quality Monitoring, which is designed to complement Mitchell and Stapp's
Field Guide for Water Quality Monitoring. As its name promises, the new manual provides instructions
on low-cost alternatives such as building your own equipment and making your own reagents. $19.95 +
shipping. To order call GREEN at 313/761-8142.
"Data to Action" Guide
Water Quality Monitoring: Data to Action discusses ways to present volunteer monitoring program
results to different audiences. It focuses particularly on presenting data in a professional, scientifically
credible manner, devoting several chapters to tips on writing a formal scientific paper. This 96-page
manual, written by Lara Laughlin and Helen Rosselli, is available for $10 from Save the Sound, Inc., 185
Magee Avenue, Stamford, CT 06902; 203/327-9786.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Spanish-Language Publications for Volunteer
Monitors
GREEN publications: The following three publications are available from GREEN (Global Rivers
Environmental Education Network), 721 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor, MI 48104; 313/ 761-8142:
Manual de Campo del Proyecto del Rio: Una Guia para Monitor ear la Calidad del Agua. A translation
of GREEN's Field Manual for Water Quality Monitoring, by Mark Mitchell and William Stapp; contains
instructions for nine basic water quality tests and includes chapters on macroinvertebrate surveys, heavy
metals testing, and land use analysis. The Spanish-language version includes an additional chapter with
information and examples pertinent to the Rio Grande / Rio Brava. $12.95 + shipping.
Planes de Lecciones para un Proyecto de Calidad del Agua de 15 Dias. A series of lesson plans used in
Project del Rio, a cross-cultural program between schools on both sides of the Rio Grande/Rio Brava.
$10.95 + shipping.
Video para Monitor ear la Calidad del Agua. A video demonstrating how to perform eight water quality
tests (fecal coliforms, pH, total solids, total phosphates, nitrates, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, and BOD).
$99.95 + shipping.
Manual para Monitoreo Voluntario del Medio Ambiente. A translation of Texas Watch's Manual for
Volunteer Water Quality Monitors. Free to monitoring organizations. To order contact Texas Watch at
512/ 239-4741.
Manual de Campo para el Muestreo de la Calidad del Agua/Field Manual for Water Quality
Sampling. A 60-page bilingual manual, jointly produced by the Arizona Water Resources Research
Center and Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), that contains detailed instructions
for collecting samples from surface water (streams, lakes, ponds) and groundwater. Topics include
selecting containers, calibrating equipment, chain of custody procedures, and field measurements. Free to
public agencies and institutions; $10 to private parties. To order, call Marlene Roden (ADEQ) at 602/
207-2202.
-------
Adopte una Quebrada. An adaptation of the University of Georgia Institute of Ecology's Adopt-A-
Stream manual; specifically designed for use in Costa Rica. The manual covers physical and chemical
parameters and habitat evaluation, and includes a chapter on biological monitoring in tropical systems
and a case study from Costa Rica. Available in December 1995. To order, contact Tina Laidlaw, Institute
of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30605; 706/ 542-1120.
H20 Info: Contamination de Fuentes Difusas. A 1-page bulletin on nonpoint source pollution. Free.
Order from Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) Publications, Mail Code 195,
P.O. Box 13087, Austin, TX 78711-3087; 512/ 239-0028. (Note: Several Spanish-language bulletins on
recycling are also available from the same source.) [Added note: In H20, the 2 should be subscripted
such that H20 is the chemical symbol for water.]
Bilingual software programs. The U.S. EPA and Purdue University have produced a number of software
programs for environmental awareness. Several programs on pollution reduction practices for farms and
homes are available in Spanish as well as English. For a complete list of titles and ordering information,
please contact Glynis Zywicki at 312/ 886-4571.
TEACHER RESOURCES:
listed Puede Ayudar a Detener la Marea de Basura: Guia Didactica Sobre la Basura en el Mar. (A
Spanish translation of EPA's coastal cleanup manual, Turning the Tide on Trash: A Learning Guide on
Marine Debris.) This teacher's guide is designed to increase students' awareness of the impacts of marine
debris and to teach them about pollution prevention techniques. It can also be adapted to teaching about
debris problems in lakes and streams. For a free copy, contact EPA NCEPI, P.O. Box 42419, Cincinnati,
OH 45242-2419. Be sure to include the EPA number in your request. Spanish version: EPA 842-B-93-
003; English version: EPA-842-B-92-003.
Wet and Wild. A series of six bilingual (English and Spanish) units in marine education, for grades K - 6.
Each unit contains approximately 25 multidisciplinary lesson plans. Individual unit prices vary from $8
to $23; the whole set is $85. For more information contact Sea Grant Program, Hancock Institute for
Marine Studies, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0373; 213/740-1963.
Agua en Tus Manos. Uses a comic-book format to teach kids in grades 4 through 6 about water
pollution. Price for 10 - 49 booklets is 390 per booklet + $3.50 shipping & handling (for larger orders,
call for prices). Teacher's guide (also in Spanish) is 500. Order from Soil and Water Conservation
Society, 7515 N.E. Ankeny Rd., Ankeny, IA 50021; 800/ THE-SOIL (800/ 843-7645).
Safe Water: A Bicultural Bilingual Curriculum. A bilingual curriculum about protecting drinking
water; for grades K - 8. Units include water and public health, the hydrologic cycle, and water
conservation. The curriculum is currently being developed and should be available in early 1996. For
more information, contact Michele Kimpel at SEAGO (SouthEastern Arizona Governments
Organization), 118 Arizona St., Bisbee, AZ 85603; 602/ 432-5301.
-------
Posters, fact sheets. The University of Puerto Rico Sea Grant Program has produced a number of posters
and fact sheets ~ some in Spanish, some in English, and some bilingual ~ on marine topics. Of particular
interest are "Edible Fish of the Caribbean," a bilingual poster ($4) and "Fishes of Puerto Rico," a 40-page
booklet ($3). For a complete listing contact UPR Sea Grant Program, UPR-RUM, P.O. Box 5000,
Mayagez, PR 00681-5000; 809/ 834-4726.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Comments on Calculating pH Statistics
by Mark D. Mattson
In the last issue of The Volunteer Monitor, Julie Rector states that pH values should be transformed to
hydrogen ion concentrations (by taking the negative antilog of the pH) prior to calculating the mean. The
mean of the hydrogen ion concentrations is then calculated, and its negative antilog is reported as the
average pH. {EDITOR'SNOTE: See " Va 1'ptive Statistics for Volunteer
Programs," in the Spring 1995 issue of The Volunteer Monitor)
In fact, converting pH to hydrogen ion concentration is not the best approach in every situation. Though
the antilog method is often followed for studies of precipitation chemistry, other reference books on
chemical analyses, such as the APHA's Standard Methods, refer to the precision and accuracy of pH
measurements (not hydrogen ion concentrations) and report results in terms of standard deviations in pH
units. Further-more, when large U.S. EPA surveys of surface water quality data report parametric
statistics, they calculate in pH units, with no conversion to hydrogen ion. The method used to analyze
and report pH data depends on the objective of the study and on the nature of the data.
One reason for the differences in methods is that hydrogen ions have some rather unique properties. Most
water quality constituents are "conservative" ~ in other words, if you pour together equal volumes of a
10 mg/L phosphorus solution and a 30 mg/L phosphorus solution, you will end up with a solution whose
concentration is 20 mg/L phosphorus. However, in natural bodies of water hydrogen ions usually do not
behave conservatively. Instead, their concentration is influenced by the presence of buffers. Obviously
you cannot mix a pH 5 solution with a pH 7 solution and expect the result to be pH 6, because pH is a
logarithm. But using the antilog method to convert pH to hydrogen ion concentration won't give you the
right answer either, because carbonate buffering in the water affects the final pH of the mixture. In order
to accurately predict the final pH you need to know the respective inorganic carbon concentrations of
each solution and perform some rather complicated equilibrium chemical calculations.
Most studies of acid precipitation and acid inputs to watersheds are concerned with loading rates of
hydrogen ions. These studies assume that hydrogen ions behave conservatively, which in this case is a
reasonable assumption because most rain has little or no buffering capacity. So for these studies it is
necessary and appropriate to calculate means based on the hydrogen ion concentrations.
-------
However, studies of surface water quality usually have another purpose. Most such studies are not
concerned with determining mass balances or loading rates of hydrogen ions ~ nor would it make sense
for them to attempt such calculations. Surface waters contain buffers, and thus hydrogen ions do not
behave conservatively and loadings cannot be logically calculated. Instead, the purpose of surface water
studies is usually to summarize the central tendency of a population of lakes, provide descriptive
statistics, and possibly conduct statistical tests to see if one population differs from another. If the
researchers in these studies use parametric statistics such as means, standard deviations, and t-tests, they
should be careful not to violate the assumptions on which such tests are based. Parametric statistics
assume a normal distribution of data. In most cases, surface water acidity data are more nearly normal
when expressed as pH rather than as hydrogen ion.
As an example, suppose a hypothetical sample of pH readings from 11 lakes shows a fairly normal
distribution (see Table 1). The question is, "What is the central tendency in this population of lakes, and
how confident are we in the estimate?" If we use the pH data (without converting to hydrogen ion), we
calculate a mean pH of 7, which appears reasonable and expected. If, however, we use the antilog
method, we calculate a mean pH of 4.99, which does not appear central at all.
A more serious problem arises when we attempt to calculate our confidence in the mean. With the pH
values there is no problem; using the mean pH of 7 and the standard deviation of 1.73 we calculate a
95% confidence interval of 5.84 to 8.16, which is reasonable. However, we run into trouble when we
attempt to calculate the 95% confidence interval about the antilog mean. We calculate a lower confidence
limit of 4.52, which perhaps might not seem too unreasonable ~ but the upper confidence limit is
calculated to be infinitely high, since the hydrogen ion concentration is predicted to be negative at that
confidence limit! Calculating such statistics on the hydrogen ion data drastically violates the assumption
of a normal distribution (compare the hydrogen ion distribution to the pH distribution in Table 1).
Admittedly, most lake surveys won't find such an extreme range of pH values as shown in the
hypothetical example in Table 1. Still, typical lake surveys which use the antilog method to calculate
means and standard deviations may be skewing their estimates of the central tendency and calculating
misleading confidence intervals. A good way to resolve problems associated with non-normally
distributed data is to avoid means and standard deviations altogether and instead use nonparametric
statistics (such as median, range, and interquartiles), which don't assume a normal distribution. In fact,
since many kinds of environmental measurements are not normally distributed, scientists are recognizing
the value of using nonparametric statistics to summarize environmental data.
(EDITOR'S NOTE: A longer version of this article will be appearing in the next issue of NALMS'
quarterly magazine, LakeLine. For more information on NALMS and Lake Line, please see National
Organizations).
Mark Mattson is a Senior Scientist at the Water Resources Research Center, Blaisdell House, University
of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003-0820.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Table 1. Hypothetical pH and Hydrogen Ion Data
Analysis
pH
DATA
[H+] (mole/liter)
4
0.0001
5
0.00001
6
0.000001
6
0.000001
7
0.0000001
7
0.0000001
7
0.0000001
8
0.00000001
8
0.00000001
9
0.000000001
10
0.0000000001
DATA ANALYSIS
Statistic
Mean
Standard Deviation
calculated using pH units calculated using H+ units
0.000010211
(pH = 4.99)
0.0000299251
(pH = 4.52)
7.00
1.73
-------
95% T CT 5 84 0.0000303137
95/oLCL 584 (pH = 4.52)
-0.0000098917
95/o UCL 8.16 / tt • -1 1 \
(pH impossible)
Return to "Comments on Calculating pH Statistics
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Derby Creek: Creek Critters Mark Buried Creeks
In another twist on stenciling, the Berkeley Citizens for Creek Restoration stenciled "creek critters" on
Berkeley, California, sidewalks to mark the locations of culverted streams. Each of Berkeley's 12 creeks
was represented by a different "critter." Richard Register, who designed the stencils, says the project's
goal was to "wake people up" to the creeks buried beneath the city. In 1989 and 1990, the group stenciled
860 locations.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Million Points of Blight
In June 1992, the Center for Marine Conservation (CMC) launched the "Million Points of Blight"
program to serve as a network and clearinghouse for storm drain stenciling projects nationwide. The
name refers to the project's goal: one million storm drains stenciled by the year 2000. To date, 95
organizations from 33 states and Canada are participating in the network.
Any group interested in stenciling storm drains is invited to join the "Million Points of Blight" network.
There is no fee for membership, and members receive a free packet containing a storm drain stenciling
fact sheet, a step-by-step brochure, sample flyers, and supply of data cards. CMC also offers stencils on
loan, which may be a good option for smaller groups that don't want to invest in their own stencils. The
data cards are to be used for recording the types of debris found at storm drain sites. This information
will be compiled and analyzed by CMC.
So far, "Million Points of Blight" members have reported painting 229,000 storm drains. Laurie
Halperin, who coordinates the program, says she is sure that this represents only a fraction of the actual
number of storm drains that have been painted nationwide, and she urges everyone who has already done
a stenciling project to "call and be counted."
For more information, or to join the network, contact CMC, 306A Buckroe Ave., Hampton, VA 23664;
804/851-6734.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
NPDES Stormwater Permits
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), mandated by the 1972 Clean Water Act
(CWA), historically focused on point sources such as industrial discharges and sewage treatment plants.
Then, in the 1987 amendments to the CWA, Congress required EPA to extend the NPDES permit
program to stormwater runoff. In 1990, EPA published regulations stipulating that cities with populations
over 100,000 must apply for NPDES permits for their storm drain discharges. In effect, runoff and dry-
weather discharges from urban storm drain systems are now regulated similarly to industrial discharges.
Obtaining the NPDES stormwater permit is a rather involved process. The municipality must inventory
its outfalls and perform both dry- and wet-weather monitoring. Dry-weather monitoring, which is aimed
at detecting illicit connections and discharges to the storm drain system, consists of field screening
outfalls for pH, chlorine, detergents, phenol, and copper, as well as noting color, turbidity, odor, and
visual observations. Wet-weather monitoring is required for three storm events at five to ten major
outfalls; over 140 constituents must be monitored for each sample.
The permit application must also describe the management practices, control systems, and engineering
methods that the city plans to use to reduce pollutant discharges, as well as the long-term monitoring that
will be performed. Most cities will include public education as a significant part of their management
practices.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Storm Drain Stenciling: The Street-River
Connection
by Rhonda Hunter
Yes, Virginia, the pavement in the city is still part of the watershed, and water down a storm drain is not
magically cleansed or sent off the planet.
Most people want to protect their local river, lake, beach, or groundwater aquifer. They value their clean
water for drinking and recreation, and as fish and wildlife habitat. Yet these same people may dump used
oil, antifreeze, and household or garden chemicals down neighborhood storm drains ~ not realizing that
there's a connection between storm drains and local waters.
To raise public awareness, young people and adults have been stenciling storm drains from Hawaii to
New Hampshire with messages like "Dump No Waste ~ Drains to River" (. . . or Bay, Lake, or
Groundwater). Storm drain stenciling is an easy way for people to do something tangible about nonpoint
source pollution in their own watershed.
An effective storm drain stenciling project shouldn't begin and end with simply painting the stencil.
Following are some tips for making the most of the project before, during, and after stenciling day.
GETTING READY
Create a Flyer
Distributing information in the community is one of the most important things you can do, and a good
flyer, brochure, or door-hanger is a vital part of this work. Vol-unteers can distribute flyers either on
stenciling day or a few days before or after. Sometimes they also go door to door and talk to residents.
The following points are useful to include in flyers:
• Enormous amounts of pollution come from the accumulated effects of all our individual actions.
• Contrary to popular belief, most storm drains are not connected to treatment systems. Instead,
whatever enters the drain is discharged directly into local waterways.
-------
• Other activities besides overt dumping also pollute storm drains. Examples include overfertilizing
the lawn, washing the car on pavement, or dumping yard waste into the gutter.
Most important, the flyer needs to give people alternatives so they can avoid polluting. It should list
nearby facilities for recycling automotive oil and household chemicals, describe alternative lawn and
garden care, and so on. (Local governments can often provide brochures with this type of information.)
If stenciling is being done by a school class, the students can create their own flyer from information they
research themselves. Students feel empowered by doing research that has a real-world impact.
Call First for Permission
For public streets, call the city or county Public Works Department (storm water utility or road
maintenance division) for permission. Public Works will probably issue a permit or letter of approval.
They may even help out by providing storm drain maps, traffic safety cones, and vests.
This is also a good time to find out whether your city will allow you to stencil on the sidewalk. (Some
cities restrict paint on the sidewalk, out of a concern that it will be slippery for pedestrians.) If you aren't
allowed to paint on the sidewalk, place the stencil on the street next to the storm drain, where your
message can be easily seen.
For storm drains on private property (i.e., business or apartment parking lots), get the permission of the
property owner.
Consider Safety
Especially when children are stenciling, seriously consider traffic safety issues when you select your site.
Neighborhoods are usually safer than downtown city streets (and much of the nonpoint pollution down
storm drains happens in residential neighborhoods). Place traffic safety cones, and assign at least one
person to watch traffic at all times.
Prepare Materials
Before using stencils for the first time, "weed" remaining letters from the die cuts. This avoids having
small plastic or oil board pieces wash into the drains while you're stenciling. "Stencil weeding" is a good
activity for a short training meeting held before going out to paint.
For painting, an aerosol can of traffic-zone latex paint (without CFCs that harm the ozone) is a good
option. Each can will mark about 20 drains. Some stencilers have also used a small roller with recycled
or leftover latex-based paint. However, this method should be used only with adults or older students,
who can master the technique of striking the extra paint off the roller. If this is not done properly, paint
will run under the stencil, smearing the letters.
Call the Media
Notifying the media of a stenciling event can get your watershed protection message out to the whole
-------
community. Young people in the project enhance media photo opportunities, and the city mayor can be a
powerful draw. Don't forget to take your own pictures, too.
ON STENCILING DAY
Watch the Weather
Dry weather, dry pavement, and air temperature over 50 degrees ensure best results. If the weather is too
wet or cold, reschedule. Stenciling in the rain is counterproductive because the wet paint runs straight
down the drain.
Avoid Mess
Remind stencilers to wear old clothes. Rubber gloves and protective eyewear are helpful, as are plastic
bags worn over shoes. Bring rags to clean up unexpected paint on arms and fingers, and plastic bags to
bring back used gloves and rags (as well as any garbage you pick up, which otherwise could have gone
down the storm drain).
Paint over-spray drifting onto nearby parked cars is guaranteed to result in unhappy neighbors. To avoid
this problem, use a large box (2 to 3 feet tall) opened flat and set up as a shield around the stencil as you
spray.
Work in Teams
Work in teams of 4 to 6. The team should include a traffic look-out. Rotate jobs for maximum
enjoyment.
Tips for Applying the Stencil
1. Scrub the area briskly with a wire brush and dust it off with a whisk broom.
2. Lay the stencil on the sidewalk or street.
3. One or two people can hold the stencil flat. Bricks or rocks work well as weights on the
corners.
4. If using spray paint, shake the can for one full minute. Hold the spray can about 6 to 8 inches
from the stencil and use a series of back and forth sweeping motions to spray one line at a time
until the letters are uniformly covered. If using a roller, strike excess paint from the roller, then
apply evenly across the letters. Whether spraying or rolling, don't use too much paint ~ it will run
underneath and blur the letters.
5. When finished, carefully lift the stencil up off the street. If the stencil is not clearly readable,
don't try to wipe it off and try again! That will only make a big mess. It's okay to go on and learn
from small mistakes. These are not Rembrandts or Picassos, after all. The next one will be better.
6. After stenciling, lay stencils out flat to dry in a warm dry place for a day or so. When the paint
is completely dry, gent-ly roll Mylar stencils to chip off the paint. This works best if paint does
not build up too thick between cleanings.
-------
FOLLOW-UP
A Ripple Effect
Storm drain stenciling does more than just put information on the street. It creates a local ripple effect of
followup pollution prevention activities, especially if stencilers do a good job of leafleting the
neighborhood and if the stenciling project gets some media coverage. Reminded of the street connection
to the river, stencilers can go on to create city "stream teams" that clean up streams and restore stream
banks or wetlands with native vegetation. These activities can kindle support for local government
wastewater management plans.
For teachers, stenciling is an effective community service project that integrates classroom learning with
environmental studies, civics, and language arts, especially if students create their own flyers. Some
cities have also engaged students in youth-at-risk programs in storm drain stenciling. Taking action is
very empowering for kids!
Rhonda Hunter is the founder of Earth-water Stencils. 4425 140th Avenue SW, Dept. V, Rochester, WA
98579-9703; phone 360/956-3774; fax 360/956-7133.
The storm drain stencils pictured in this article (not included in the Internet version),
plus other designs, may be purchased from Earthwater Stencils. Write to the above
address for a brochure.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Supplies
Map of the neighborhood
Stencils
Paint
Whisk broom
Wire brush
Traffic cones, traffic flag
Safety vests
Cardboard box (for overspray shield)
Cleanup rags and bags
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Storm Sewer in a Suitcase
Volunteers and staff with Blue Thumb, Tulsa's Urban Water Quality Improvement Project, are using a
nifty new educational tool called "Storm Sewer in a Suitcase" to demonstrate where storm water runoff
ends up. Storm Sewer in a Suitcase is a miniature (2' x 3') urban watershed model that consists of four
houses located on a cul-de-sac with a stream running along the side. The model is contained in a handy
portable case and is complete with lawns, cars, people, and functional storm drain inlets at the low points
in the street. It was designed by Blue Thumb coordinators Sue Gray, of OSU Extension/Tulsa County,
and Cheryl Cheadle, of Tulsa County Conservation District.
Because Storm Sewer in a Suitcase is interactive, it's a big hit at schools and fairs, and with youth
groups. Participants enjoy applying mock pollutants (food coloring representing motor oil, antifreeze,
fertilizer, or paint) to the road or lawns, then delivering "rain" from a spray bottle. The model's most
distinctive feature is the plexiglass front through which viewers can peep at the inner workings of a
subsurface storm sewer system. (The model is wired so that, when electricity is available, the front can
be lit up for an even better view.) Participants can see for themselves that the polluted water disappearing
down the storm drain receives no treatment; it goes directly to the stream.
"Even adults are often surprised to learn that stormwater does not go to a treatment plant," says Gray.
(The model portrays a separate stormwater system, which is what Tulsa has.)
The "hands on" quality of the model reinforces the lesson that day-to-day activities like car maintenance,
lawn care, or cleaning up after using oil-based paint can be harmful to water. It also helps teach how
even slight behavioral changes can protect water. For example, a demonstration of the effects of over-
fertilizing leads to a discussion of alternatives, such as testing the soil to see if fertilizer is needed, or
using slow-release fertilizers.
The original prototype, built in 1993, was extremely popular, and people who saw it often asked, "Where
can we get one of those?" So Gray and Cheadle decided to gear up for mass production. They had 23
cases and bases manufactured, then invited Blue Thumb volunteers to help finish the models. Though
more accustomed to tasks like environmental education, stream habitat assessments, or chemical water
quality monitoring, the volunteers pitched in enthusiastically ~ putting together model houses, cutting
and gluing felt "lawns," assembling the subsurface plumbing, affixing the lighting system, and painting
-------
the streets and stream bottoms. "We originally had no idea how much work the assembly would be," says
Gray, "but once the volunteers started rolling, there was no stopping until all 23 models were ready for
new homes."
Each model sells for $250, plus $25 shipping and handling, and comes with cars, people, food coloring,
dispensers for "pollutants" and "rain," and a curriculum with ideas for teaching about nonpoint source
pollution. For more information, please call the Tulsa County Conservation District at 918/744-1595.
-- Cheryl Cheadle
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Combination Staff Gauge/ Crest Gauge
Materials needed:
• 6-ft fence post or rebar
• PVC pipe, 1" diam. (or wider), 4 or 5 ft long*
• 2 end caps for the PVC pipe
• 2 or 3 metal clamps or U-bolts
• Section of 2" x 2" wood, (apx. same length as PVC pipe)
• Wooden dowel," to " diam., to fit inside PVC pipe
• Granulated cork
* length depends on anticipated change in stream level
1. Permanently mark 2" x 2" in 1/4 " increments. (Alternative: affix length of measuring tape to 2" x
2. Glue end cap to bottom of PVC pipe. Drill three or four vent holes in section of pipe that will
always be immersed in water, to allow water to flow into pipe. Drill one vent hole near top of
pipe, to allow air to escape.
3. Drive fence post or rebar into streambed in a location where water flows permanently and where
you will be able to reach the gauge without getting wet.
4. Attach 2" x 2" to fence post or rebar using clamps or U-bolts.
5. Attach PVC pipe to 2" x 2", aligning bottom of pipe with zero point marked on 2" x 2".
6. Cut dowel to same length as PVC pipe (dowel should fit snugly so it won't float). Place dowel and
granulated cork inside PVC pipe. Place end cap ((DO NOT GLUE) on top end of pipe.
by Ken Pritchard
Assembly:
2".)
-------
Calibration: Calibrate the gauge by measuring the difference between the lowest point on the stream bed
and the zero point on the scale marked on the 2" x 2". (Note that the lowest point on the stream bed won't
necessarily be the point where the gauge is located, but it must be along the same cross section.) This
"depth-of-stream factor" must always be added to the gauge readings. Recalibrate the gauge yearly, and
also after severe episodes of erosion or deposition.
Reading the crest gauge: To read the crest gauge, remove the top end cap and take out the dowel. Use the
scale on the 2" x 2" to measure the level of the cork powder "ring." Don't forget to add the depth-of-
stream factor (see "Calibration," above). After taking the reading, wipe off the cork powder and replace
the dowel. Occasionally you may need to add more cork powder.
For more information, contact Ken Pritchard, Special Projects Coordinator, Adopt a Beach, P.O. Box
21486, Seattle, WA 98111; 206/624-6013.
This combination gauge serves as both a staff gauge to measure the water level of a stream at the time of
inspection, and a crest gauge to measure the highest level reached by that stream between the last
inspection and the current inspection. A staff gauge can't tell you the high water level for a rain event
unless you read the gauge at the actual time when the stream crests, whereas a crest gauge preserves a
record of crest height that can be read at a later time.
The crest gauge shown here is based on the "bathtub ring" principle. It consists of a PVC pipe containing
a wooden dowel and a supply of granulated cork. As the water rises, so does the powdered cork. When
the water goes down, the cork granules remain stuck to the wooden dowel at the level of highest water.
By taking successive staff and crest gauge readings and plotting them on a time graph, you can obtain a
general picture of how a stream behaves in response to rain. For instance, a rapid rise and fall in stream
level would be diagnostic of the land's inability to slowly release water. Long-term trends can also show
a correspondence between stream levels and land use changes. For example, the data might show that a
new shopping center has caused the stream to crest several inches higher for the same amount of
precipitation.
If you establish a flow curve that correlates stream height to flow rate for your stream, then in the future
you will be able to estimate stream flow based on readings from the staff or crest gauge alone, without
the need for a flow meter. (Stream flow rate is expressed in cubic feet of water per second, or cfs.) To
establish the flow curve, you will need to use a flow meter. Volunteers who do not wish to invest in a
flow meter (which may cost upward of $1,500) may be able to borrow one from the utility that controls
stormwater. Flow readings at three or four different stream flow stages provide enough data to establish
the curve.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Does Community Education Reduce Water
Pollution?
Volunteers Monitor "Paired Watersheds" to Find Out
by Joan Drinkwin
There's something going on in a small watershed in Austin, Texas, that could answer a big question about
how to combat water pollution in the United States. In the East Bouldin Creek Project, volunteer
monitors are using a sophisticated "paired watershed" monitoring design to find out if the community
outreach and education programs being employed there are actually improving water quality.
What's new about this approach? First let's back up and define the problem. What is: sporadic and
unpredictable, difficult to control, hard to detect using traditional water chemistry monitoring techniques,
devastating to aquatic life? You've got it: nonpoint source pollution. Nonpoint source pollution is
pollution carried into surface and ground waters by runoff from rain, snow, lawn sprinklers, and car
washes. The exact place it comes from can't be pinpointed. Illegal dumping is also considered nonpoint
source pollution because even though it may come from a specific location, or "point," that location is
hard to track down.
Now, let's talk about solutions ~ the techniques, or tools, used to control and prevent nonpoint source
pollution. These tools, which are also called "best management practices" (BMPs), fall into two
categories: structural and nonstructural. Structural BMPs, as the name implies, are physical structures,
such as sediment fences placed around construction sites to capture sediment before it reaches streams
and lakes, or sedimentation and filtration ponds built next to highways to trap oil and grease in road
runoff. Structures like these usually control rather than prevent nonpoint source pollution. By contrast,
nonstructural BMPs, such as land use ordinances and community education programs, are usually
designed to prevent nonpoint source pollution from happening in the first place. Traditionally,
government agencies have preferred structural BMPs, which give them something tangible to point to.
As David Pimentel, former Director of Travis County Environmental Office, puts it, "Agencies have
tended to shy away from nonstructural approaches, like community education, which they view as
squishy.'"
-------
All right, now we can get back to the monitors in the East Bouldin Creek watershed. The big question
they're trying to answer is: Do these nonstructural tools really work? In other words, can you see an
improvement in water quality as a direct result of community outreach and public education?
While a lot is known about the effectiveness of many structural methods used to control nonpoint source
pollution, practically nothing is known about the water quality benefits of most nonstructural techniques.
Before-and-after surveys, in which the same questions are asked before and after a community education
campaign, have traditionally been used to find out whether education efforts increase public awareness.
(For example, such a survey might ask local residents to rate the relative importance of various pollution
sources.) Unfortunately, this kind of survey doesn't tell us whether water quality has improved, or
whether the education campaign has actually succeeded in keeping pollution out of the water.
The goal of the East Bouldin Creek Project is to decrease the amount of nonpoint source pollution
reaching East Bouldin Creek, which the City of Austin's Environmental Conservation Services
Department identified as one of the most polluted creeks in urban Austin. To achieve this goal, an array
of nonstructural prevention activities will be employed throughout the watershed. Local citizens,
students, and businesses will adopt creek sections and carry out such projects as (1) revegetating stream
banks for habitat restoration and erosion control; (2) placing signs to identify the creek and watershed
(e.g., "Welcome to East Bouldin Creek Watershed"); and (3) stenciling storm drains to discourage illegal
dumping of oil and yard waste. In addition, a local elementary school class is developing a watershed
education program which the students will present at other schools throughout the watershed. The
program will include a teacher's handbook and a three-dimensional model of East Bouldin Creek
watershed, complete with local landmarks.
To determine whether all these activities are actually improving the water quality of East Bouldin Creek,
volunteer monitors will use an innovative paired-watershed monitoring design. So what makes this
design innovative?
Traditional monitoring designs fall roughly into three categories: ambient monitoring, upstream-
downstream monitoring, and before-and-after monitoring. Ambient monitoring is generally used to
gather baseline data and determine long-term trends; it is not used to determine whether pollution
prevention or control tools are effective in the short term. In the upstream/downstream design, sites are
chosen to bracket a specific location of interest (such as a structural BMP). This monitoring design
answers the question: Is water quality downstream from the structure better than upstream? One problem
with this design is that with nonstructural methods there is no specific location to bracket. In the before-
and-after design, a site is monitored before and after something is done to control or prevent pollution.
Unfortunately, weather plays such an important role in nonpoint source pollution that often results are
masked by natural variation in rainfall. For example, if you install a structural BMP and then observe an
increase in nitrates, you might conclude that the structure is not working. In reality, though, you might be
seeing the increase because it's been raining more since the structure was built than during your "before"
monitoring.
-------
The paired watershed monitoring design tries to avoid or minimize the above problems by comparing the
study creek with one or more control creeks. The control creek(s) should be similar to the study creek in
size, slope, location, soils, and land cover. During an initial "calibration" phase, which precedes any
pollution prevention activities, the study and control creeks are monitored over a period of time to
determine the relationship between their water quality. Then, during the "treatment" phase, pollution
control and prevention measures are applied only to the study creek; meanwhile, regular monitoring of
both study and control creeks continues. The paired watershed study design does not require that the
watersheds be the same, only that water quality in one creek should predict water quality in the others.
In the East Bouldin Creek Project, volunteers will monitor East Bouldin Creek (the study creek) along
with two control creeks ~ Blunn Creek and Harper's Branch. Since the three creeks are close together,
weather is the same for all of them. The three watersheds are adjacent to each other, are similarly
developed, and are all about the same size, so we expect that water quality in the three creeks will be
related. For example, the level of dissolved oxygen in Blunn Creek may not be the same as that of East
Bouldin Creek, but it should be predictably higher or lower at all times. Or, to take another example, we
may find that conductivity in the creeks changes at the same rate relative to rainfall. Initial analysis of
historical data indicates that the three creeks' water chemistry is related.
The volunteers are now carrying out the calibration phase. They are monitoring the three creeks for
chemical and physical water quality variables on a weekly basis, and for benthic macroinvertebrates on a
quarterly basis.
During the treatment phase, which will last about a year and a half, the nonstructural pollution prevention
activities described above will begin in the East Bouldin Creek watershed. However, no such activities
will be implemented in the control creeks' watersheds. Monitors will continue testing on all three creeks.
After the treatment phase is completed, the water quality of the three creeks will be compared. If the
statistical relationship between the water quality of the study and control creeks changes, this suggests
the pollution prevention activities did affect water quality.
Evaluating the effectiveness of nonpoint source pollution prevention activities like community education
is long overdue. This project will help to determine whether community outreach and public education
really improve water quality. If they do, then more funding for such programs is justified. If they do not,
then other innovative ways to combat nonpoint source pollution still need to be tried. Using volunteers to
collect the water quality data is an important aspect of the project. Since intensive monitoring projects
conducted by professionals can be very expensive, demonstrating that volunteers can conduct such a
study will greatly enhance our ability to monitor what works against urban nonpoint source pollution.
Reference
U.S. EPA. "Paired Watershed Study Design." EPA Office of Water. An 8-page fact sheet. Free; available
from NCEPI, P.O. Box 42414, Cincinnati, OH 45242; fax 513/489-8695. Ask for publication number
841-F-93-009.
-------
The East Bouldin Creek Project is being implemented by Texas Watch, the volunteer environmental
monitoring program of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission. The project is funded in
part by U.S. EPA through Section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act. For more information about Texas
Watch or the project, please call Joan Drinkwin, Texas Watch Nonpoint Source Projects Coordinator,
at 512/239-4742.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Dissolved Oxygen Test Tip
GREEN (Global Rivers Environmental Education Network) has come up with a useful tip for monitors
who use Hach field kits for testing dissolved oxygen. After collecting the water sample and adding the
first two reagents (which fix the oxygen), GREEN volunteers add a small marble or boiling chip to the
bottle before replacing the stopper. This has two benefits: first, "topping off' the level of liquid in the
bottle eliminates the air bubble that sometimes forms between the liquid and the stopper. Second, the
marble or boiling chip helps to mix in the powdered reagents when the bottle is shaken. Note that the
marble or boiling chip should be clean, and should be added gently to prevent the possibility of
introducing air into the bottle.
Here's one more tip: if you find that the stopper sometimes "freezes" in an empty dissolved oxygen
bottle, wrap a piece of paper around the stopper before inserting it into the bottle for storage.
For more information, please call GREEN at 313/ 761-8142.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Low-Cost Biological Monitoring
The device pictured at left costs less than $1 to make and is used by the City of Fort Worth Department
of Environmental Management (DEM) for biological monitoring of storm drainage systems, especially in
outfalls. (Outfalls are pools of water located where a storm drain pipe discharges to surface water.) The
unit was originally designed by former DEM staffer John Falkenbury, and redesigned by staff members
Gene Rattan and Brian Camp, who dubbed it the "stream sentinel." Basically, the sentinel is a 2-liter
plastic soft-drink bottle that is punched with holes, attached to a styrofoam float, and tied to an anchor (a
brick). Camp recalls, "We were drinking a lot of Coke until we found a bottle manufacturer and began
buying directly!"
The stream sentinel is placed in an outfall pool, stocked with 6 fathead minnows, and checked at regular
intervals (Fort Worth DEM usually checks their sentinels once or twice a week). If the fish die, it is
likely that a pollutant was present at some time since the last check. If they don't die, they are released
after two weeks.
The device can be placed in any outfall that has enough water to keep it afloat and can be left in place
indefinitely, as long as it's restocked with fresh minnows every two weeks. Rattan says, "If you don't see
any toxicity after 2 months, you have a very good urban site. If you don't see any toxicity after 6 months,
you've got an excellent urban site."
The big advantage of the stream sentinel is that it permits round-the-clock monitoring. As Camp
explains, "Storm drain pollution is mostly intermittent and transitory, so the odds of identifying toxic
discharges with one-time sampling are low. But the fish stay in the water 24 hours a day."
So far, Fort Worth DEM has monitored about 100 outfalls with the stream sentinel. Because the unit is so
cheap and easy to make and use, Rattan and Camp believe that it has great potential for volunteer
monitoring groups and classroom teachers. It can be used in creeks and ponds as well as storm drain
outfalls. Fort Worth DEM staff raise their own fathead minnows, and they say this is the trickiest part of
the whole procedure. (Rattan points out that a minnow in the Fort Worth program has much better odds
of surviving from egg to adult than a minnow in the natural world: 80-90 percent survival rate for
stream sentinel minnows versus 1-5 percent in the wild.) However, most volunteer groups will probably
opt to obtain their minnows from a bait shop or local university biology department. If fatheads are not
-------
available, Rattan says that other minnows could be substituted, as long as they are not too pollution-
tolerant, and not overly sensitive to natural conditions in your area. A state or federal wildlife agency
should be able to suggest appropriate minnow species.
Fort Worth DEM has produced a video and manual explaining how to construct and use the stream
sentinel. Both are available at no cost from Charlie Howell at EPA Region 6; phone 214/665-8354.
For more information about using the stream sentinel contact Gene Rattan or Brian Camp at Fort
Worth DEM, 5000 Martin Luther King Fwy, Fort Worth, TX76119; 817/871-5450.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Test Kits for Organic Contaminants
by Joe Rathbun
Volunteer monitoring groups rarely test for toxic organic contaminants such as pesticides, herbicides,
and petroleum hydrocarbons. Perhaps this is because the traditional assay methods (e.g., gas
chromatography) are expensive, time-consuming, and difficult. However, many of these compounds are
important pollutants that can cause acute toxicity and chronic health problems in aquatic and terrestrial
creatures, including humans.
There are a number of relatively inexpensive test kits now on the market that could put testing for
organic contaminants within the reach of many volunteer monitoring groups. These kits are all based on
the principles of enzyme immunoassay (EIA), a technique that has been used in medical laboratory
testing for several decades, and has been applied to environmental investigations in the last 10 years.
The kits are quite simple to use in either the field or the laboratory. Basically, a small volume of sample
(less than 0.5 ml) is placed in an antibody-coated test tube, then several reagents are added, producing a
colored solution. The intensity of the color is inversely proportional to the concentration of the
compound being tested (i.e., the more pollutant present in the sample, the less color produced). The per-
sample cost is in the neighborhood of $15. Required equipment includes small-volume pipettes (2 to 250
asL), and a spectrophotometer to read the color. Spectrophotometers are expensive, but volunteer groups
that test chemical parameters may already own one, or have access to one. A cheaper alternative is a
colorimeter, which reads only one or a few colors.
Quantitative results can be obtained by running several standard samples of the pollutant of interest to
obtain a standard curve. For semi-quantitative, or threshold, testing, a single standard sample (usually at
a concentration equal to a regulatory criterion) is used. Results are then reported as "greater than" or "less
than" the criterion.
Kit performance can be optimized by steps like measuring the reagent solutions with calibrated pipettes
rather than using the dropper bottles supplied with the kits, and by keeping the timing of each step in the
analysis consistent. Please contact the author (address below) for details.
-------
EIA test kits are available for a variety of toxic organic contaminants. (Note, however, that EIA can't be
used for metals, with the exception of organomercury.) Kits for the following compounds may be of
particular interest to volunteer monitors:
• petroleum hydrocarbons
• PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons)
• "BTEX" solvents (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene)
• various individual herbicides and pesticides
Groups monitoring in urban watersheds may be especially concerned with petroleum hydrocarbons and
PAHs. Petroleum hydrocarbons (petroleum-based oils, gasoline, and diesel fuel) enter rivers from street
runoff, boat traffic and marinas, and discharges from oil refineries. They are toxic to a variety of
organisms. EIA kits for petroleum hydrocarbons usually measure total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH).
PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) are byproducts of incomplete combustion. They enter rivers
from parking lots and streets, oil refineries, and riverside coal piles. Some of the most potent carcinogens
known are PAHs. There are dozens of PAH compounds; all available kits measure "total" PAH (the sum
of the different PAHs in the sample).
The BTEX solvents (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene) are industrial chemicals often used in the
chemical industry, or for cleaning metal products. They are toxic to many organisms, and some are
known carcinogens. The BTEX solvents are a subset of the petroleum hydrocarbons (which means that
TPH kits will detect anything a BTEX kit will detect).
People tend to associate herbicides and pesticides with agriculture, and indeed these compounds are
important pollutants in rural areas. However, some of them also occur in high concentrations in urban
runoff, due to overuse of weed killers and household pesticides (e.g., ant poison). Kits are available for a
large number of herbicides (including atrazine and 2,4-D) and pesticides (including chlorpyrifos and
lindane). Since each kit is specific for one individual compound, it's essential to know which is likely to
be present in the sample. Information on which herbicides and pesticides may have been used in a
particular watershed should be available from state or county natural resource or agricultural agencies.
EIA kits for PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) are also available. They are mainly useful for testing soil
and sediment, since water concentrations of PCBs are generally too low to be detected by the kits.
Although PCBs have been banned since 1976, they still persist in the environment and are important
pollutants because of their toxicity and carcinogenicity.
EIA kits are available from a number of manufacturers, including Millipore (800/ 645-5476), Ohmicron
(800/544-8881), and Ensys (919/941-5509). Kit suppliers are generally quite cooperative about
supplying literature, advice, and even training.
(EDITOR'S NOTE: The Volunteer Monitor is aware of only one volunteer monitoring group that has
-------
used EIA kits. Friends of the North Fork Shenandoah River, in Virginia, used Ohmicron kits to test 24
wells for two herbicides, metolachlor and atrazine. They found that 22 wells had detectable levels of at
least one of the herbicides. Any other groups who have used EIA kits are invited to share their
experience with our readers; please contact the editor.)
Joe Rathbun is an Aquatic Biologist/ Chemist for AScI Corporation, 15300 Rotunda Dr., Suite 307,
Dearborn, MI 48120; 313/336-7200. He is also a technical advisor for GREEN.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
<
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Storm Drain Monitoring Kits
The kit used by Urban Watch volunteers was developed jointly by City of Fort Worth staff and LaMotte
Company. It includes all the parameters required in EPA's NPDES permit regulations for dry-weather
storm drain monitoring (chlorine, copper, detergents, phenols, pH, turbidity, and color), plus a
thermometer and a test for ammonia-nitrogen.
NAPCO Chemical Company sells the Urban Watch kit (code XX00350) for $310 (or $300 apiece for
orders over 10). For further information call Marilyn Grychka at 800/ 929-5976.
LaMotte Company's Storm Drain Pollution Detection Kit (code 7446) is identical to the Urban Watch kit
except that it does not include the ammonia-nitrogen test or a thermometer. It sells for $275. For further
information call 800/ 344-3100.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Citizens Jump Barriers for Salmon
Volunteers working to restore their urban watershed near Tacoma, Washington, are finding that
negotiating the maze of bureaucratic regulations can be just as daunting as repairing the physical damage
to a stream. Under the leadership of A1 Schmauder, citizens in the Clover Creek watershed formed the
Clover Creek Council in 1991 and went to work to bring back a natural run of Coho salmon and "return
the lost quality of life." But while the citizens labored to remove barriers to salmon, they found some
local government barriers also had to be overcome.
Assessing the damage
The group's first step was to conduct a visual survey, which disclosed that about 75 percent of the
stream's 12-mile course had been altered or rerouted in some way in the name of progress. The damaged
stream bed was leaking so much water into the underlying aquifer that during the summer the flow dried
up completely in some places. One two-mile section had been converted by the county into an asphalt-
lined floodway in 1967. Along this floodway, nearly all trees had been removed and the bottom was
periodically scraped clean of any gravel and rocks that accumulated.
These urban "improvements" had raised the water temperature, decreased flow, created barriers to fish
passage, and destroyed spawning beds. As one Clover Creek Council flyer put it, the creek had been
"channelized, denuded, punctured, lined with asphalt, and left to die."
Setting to work
The Clover Creek Council quickly mobilized the community ~ schools, service organizations, and
businesses. As Schmauder points out, "All the ingredients we needed were right here all along ~ we had
the trucks and tractors; we had the stumps, rocks, and gravel; we had the trees; we had the willing
manpower. We just needed a catalyst to focus all the resources on the problem. The Clover Creek Council
provided that critical function." The volunteers organized 100-person tree plantings. They located and
sealed the worst areas of water loss, using student and citizen power to place clay, rocks, and bentonite
along the banks. They built wooden fish ladders.
Then, in the spring of 1993, a major opportunity presented itself. A contractor was replacing a bridge over
the asphalt-lined section of Clover Creek. At the Council's request, he agreed to make a road into the
stream and spread truckloads of excess gravel, sand, and rock over the asphalt. Other volunteers,
including Trout Unlimited members and 45 high school students, helped deliver and place large woody
-------
debris and boulders needed to keep the gravel in place. "In just one day," says Schmauder, "1,500 feet of
the desecrated stream bottom was converted into something closely resembling a natural streambed."
The actions of that day had two kinds of consequences. The stream segment now had a narrower, deeper
channel to keep the water temperature down, and a bottom suitable for macroinvertebrate habitat. And the
Clover Creek Council had a controversy on its hands ~ because, as Schmauder explains, "At that point
we had gotten into things that were illegal." Although the group had obtained a hydraulic permit from the
State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, they had not obtained permits from Pierce County.
The county's requirements were onerous indeed. According to the county rules, the volunteers needed all
the same permits a developer would need: six permits in all, including a conditional use permit, a filling
and grading permit, and a shoreline development permit. The approval process could take up to several
years, and filing costs totaled $2,500.
David and Goliath
The county issued a "stop work" order and threatened to prosecute the volunteer leaders. When the story
hit the local papers, Schmauder recalls, "We looked like David fighting Goliath. This turned out to be
exactly what was needed to get the public aroused and grab the attention of elected officials."
The community rallied behind the volunteers. The local paper ran supportive editorials. The Rotary Club,
the Chamber of Commerce, and the local school district all gave awards to the Council, and Schmauder
was named "Citizen of the Year" by the local Kiwanis.
Schmauder says, "Nearly everyone ~ even some of the county employees who were demanding permits ~
knew that what the volunteers had done was the right thing. But the county rules were made for
development, not restoration. There were no codes on the books for reversing development."
Through a series of public meetings and negotiations the citizens succeeded in getting the county rules
changed to waive permit fees for volunteer restoration projects. Early in 1994, the Council filed the
appropriate paperwork for the six permits ~ but 18 months later the citizens are still waiting for permits to
be granted for the work already completed.
Measures of success
Meanwhile, Clover Creek is returning to health. In 1993, longtime residents saw water in the creek in
August for the first time in 20 years. Monitoring by the U.S. Geologic Survey showed a 1.5 cfs increase
in stream flow between 1991 and 1993. Citizen monitors saw returning Coho salmon successfully pass
through the fish ladder and go up the creek in the fall of 1994. In 1995, summer flow was the highest in
memory, and a high school student monitor reported that the water temperature did not exceed 60°F.
Barriers start to crumble
Recently, the Washington State Legislature removed some bureaucratic barriers by passing a law
requiring local and state agencies to accept a single permit application ~ with no fees ~ for volunteer
-------
watershed projects.
"This legislation should reduce the time for permit approval from twelve months to two," says
Schmauder. "We'll be able to spend less time on bureaucracy and more in the creek. Instead of treading
water we'll be able to swim.
"The county machinery is slowly changing to work with us. We're persistent and have the will of the
people behind us. Our motto is, Don't ever give up!"'
For more information, or to obtain a copy of the new state law, contact the Clover Creek Council at
15206-B Fern St., S.W., Tacoma, WA 98498; 206/596-8222.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
How Significant is Urban Runoff?
Urban storm water pollution makes a large contribution to the overall degradation of our nation's waters.
According to the EPA report Environmental Impacts of Stormwater Discharges (1992), urban runoff
accounts for an estimated 18% of impaired river miles, 34% of impaired lake acres, and 62% of impaired
estuary square miles ~ figures that are very impressive in light of the fact that urban population areas
take up only about 2.5% of the nation's total land surface, while rural activities take up about 53%.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Making Connections Between People and Urban
Waters
by Abby Markowitz
Optimism is the faith that leads to achievement. Nothing can be done without hope and
confidence. — Helen Keller
Monitoring an urban environment can be an act of great optimism. Almost by definition, urban waters
and watersheds are degraded resources, so monitoring them requires the belief that we can learn from our
mistakes by not repeating them and, in some cases, by undoing them. (Note that the term "urban" isn't
restricted to just inner-city areas and the downtowns of major cities. Any watershed where there is a
significant amount of development and impervious surface ~ a town, say, or a densely populated suburb ~
can be classified as urban.)
Changing the lay of the land by increasing impervious surfaces, modifying hydrology, limiting natural
vegetation, and otherwise altering natural habitats has rarely if ever improved water quality. Generally,
we don't assess urban waters to find out if they are polluted or impaired, but to find out how polluted they
are, and with what. We collect information to discern what specific actions are causing problems,
develop strategies for improving the health of the watershed, and monitor the effects of those
management and restoration strategies.
Certainly, then, one of the overriding challenges we face in developing and fostering volunteer
monitoring programs in urban environments is finding ways to ignite, maintain, and spread the beliefs
that (a) healthy ecosystems are important and (b) "urban watershed" and "healthy ecosystem" don't have
to be mutually exclusive concepts. Following are some strategies that have worked in various urban
watersheds around the country.
Create a watershed awareness
In non-urban areas, people tend to use the local water ~ for fishing, boating, swimming, drinking-water
supply -- which makes it easier for them to feel connected to the water and to believe that they have a
community interest in protecting the watershed. However, in urban settings people usually are not as
personally connected to the water. In fact, many urban river systems have been channelized or are
, r 1%. frjf 1 I i
\flR5Esi J
s
-------
underground, basically making them invisible. So a critical first step in monitoring urban watersheds is to
link people to the river and the watershed. Lynn Kramer, president of the Herring Run Watershed
Association (HRWA) in Baltimore, says, "First, you've got to get people to understand that there's a
stream nearby. In the city, many people don't realize that fact ~ or they don't make the connection
between stream' and the water they see running over the channelized section in their neighborhood."
Through activities like watershed field trips, stream surveys, and tree plant-ings, HRWA helps show
residents that "they are part of a nature-based watershed community, even though they are surrounded by
concrete, brick, and steel."
Name that stream
In Maryland, we have a lot of streams that are simply called "unnamed tributary of [insert name of larger
river]" ~ which somehow doesn't evoke a strong sense of affection and stewardship. Try involving
volunteers in a "name that stream" project. Monitors working with Maryland Save Our Streams came up
with names like "Brownie Troop 56 Branch" or "41st Street Run." Even if it's only used in the local
community, the name helps give the stream an identity. If you want to make the name official, contact
the state Geological Survey or Department of Natural Resources to find out the procedure.
Sometimes a stream has a name, but no one knows what it is ~ even people who drive over or under the
stream every day. Signs on bridges, roads, tunnels, or buildings help build name recognition. Your state
Highway Department (for major roads) or local Public Works Department (for local roads) can tell you
the process for getting markers installed.
Celebrate the water
"People care about things they know and love," says Kramer. "For them to take care of the Herring Run,
it must come alive for them ~ its history, geography, and biology. And we must celebrate it now, in its
imperfect condition." Festivals, canoe rides, art contests, and photo displays all make an urban river, and
its potential, come alive.
HRWA holds an annual "Spring Migration" festival to focus attention on the fact that the Herring Run
waters used to be clean enough for herring to spawn in the spring. One activity is a 5.5-mile streamside
walk, following the route the migrating herring once took.
Address local issues
In addition to connecting people to the river, we need to make connections among populations and issues
within the watershed. Before the first monitor steps into the water, program coordinators should attend
meetings with active local civic groups, businesses, government agencies, PTAs, and church groups.
Attend meetings not only to recruit volunteers but to listen to community concerns and look for ways to
bridge seemingly contradictory interests.
A few years ago, SOS was working with a highly developed suburban neighborhood in eastern Baltimore
County to establish a local adopt-a-stream project. During initial meetings with the county, we learned
that some residents had begun to mow their lawns all the way down to the stream, decimating the riparian
-------
zone and increasing the potential for erosion and flooding. Assuming that the mowing was a way to
beautify the neighborhood, we prepared to give our basic presentation on the importance of natural
buffers at the next community meeting. However, at the meeting, parents talked about a child who had
been murdered while playing down by the stream in the tall grass. Suddenly we realized that a lack of
ecosystem education was not the primary problem here. Rather, what was needed was for SOS to switch
gears and work with the community and the county to develop ways to address the safety issue without
sacrificing stream habitat.
Be creative in deciding what to monitor
Channelized or underground streams may be difficult ~ if not impossible ~ to monitor directly. So you
need to think about the kinds of environmental stressors that can be easily seen, counted, and evaluated
even if volunteers can't get to the water. For example, volunteers could conduct surveys to identify trash
dumping areas, construction sites in violation of sediment control laws, pipe outfalls, sewage overflow
points, oil or other substances being disposed of improperly, or areas that could be planted.
Are there vacant lots in the community? How many? Where? Can any of them be transformed into
community gardens? These were among the questions answered by volunteers conducting a walking
survey of inner-city neighborhoods as part of the Revitalizing Baltimore project. The project does not
focus exclusively on water quality; rather, coordinators and volunteers have the broader goal of
enhancing the quality of community life in the Gwynns Falls watershed. Knowing the locations and
descriptions of vacant areas in the watershed has allowed community residents to create organic gardens,
benefiting all parts of the watershed. Not only do the gardens help manage stormwater runoff, they also
create productive community space, provide learning opportunities for local kids, beautify the
neighborhood, and contribute an additional fresh food supply to local families.
Keep monitors motivated
Monitoring a degraded urbanized stream on a regular basis can be demoralizing ~ and boring ~ for
volunteers. The temperature is always high, there is never much life, a vegetated riparian zone is almost
non-existent. But there may be many reasons why it is important to continue monitoring ~ developing a
baseline for future restoration efforts, tracking the impact of a specific problem or management practice,
evaluating seasonal trends and variation, or looking at upstream and downstream differences.
Communicating these reasons to volunteers can provide motivation to keep at a seemingly hopeless task.
Adapt your training and protocols
Volunteers monitoring urban streams should receive field training on a like stream. Monitoring an urban
stream has its own set of challenges, and volunteers need training that specifically instructs them in
dealing with those challenges. In addition, wherever possible, field training should include a visit to a
similar waterway in a less urban setting, for purposes of comparison. People may not recognize how
severely their stream is impaired until they see one that looks significantly different. Comparing the two
streams will sharpen volunteers' ability to pinpoint problem, such as habitat alterations.
Many monitoring protocols ~ especially those for biological or habitat assessments ~ were originally
developed for rural waters and may need to be adapted for urban settings. For example, in some parts of
-------
the country urban streams tend to have mud and gravel substrates with some areas of big boulders.
Neither of these is prime habitat for aquatic organisms, and any critters that are still there are often small,
making it easier for them to slip through a net. If they do make it onto the net, they're often buried in mud
and sand. Volunteers ~ even with 20/20 vision ~ can be hard-pressed to find much on the net even when
organisms are there.
When SOS and Baltimore County first implemented our biological monitoring program, we found that
monitors in highly degraded areas were having trouble seeing and collecting critters from the net. We
tackled the problem by giving volunteers more hands-on training in sifting through the gunk on the net;
preparing site maps showing the exact location of riffles to be sampled; and giving volunteers better
forceps and magnifying lenses. (For more on how SOS dealt with this problem, see the Proceedings of
the Fourth National Volunteer Monitoring Conference, available from Alice Mayio, U.S. EPA, 4503F,
401 M St., SW, Washington, DC 20460; 202/260-7018.
Think early and often about safety
Safety is an issue for every monitoring program. There are the basics ~ wear appropriate clothing, don't
trespass, don't go into known dangerous areas, etc. However, in city monitoring there are additional
considerations. Monitors are often sampling from road bridges, so there's traffic to watch out for. Sewage
or other instream dumping is a threat; isolated stream areas sometimes become dumping grounds for
broken bottles and used syringes. Crime can be a real concern in some locations. Form larger teams ~
maybe 4 or 5 people ~ to monitor questionable areas.
Feeling unsafe can also be a function of preconceived notions or unfamiliarity. It is not unheard of for
monitors from upstream communities to express concerns about monitoring in certain parts of a city that
they perceive as having a high crime rate. Whether a place is truly dangerous is not the only issue. If a
volunteer feels unsafe about a location, don't try to talk them out of their fears even if you believe the site
is safe. Send that person to a different location, or try teaming them with people more familiar with the
area. In choosing monitoring locations, program managers need to strike a balance ~ they should be
aware of potential safety problems and respect people's concerns without writing off viable monitoring
sites.
Monitoring urban watersheds requires many of the qualities that volunteer monitoring programs already
possess: creativity, innovation, perseverance, and, perhaps most important, the belief that all watersheds
are worthy of protection, and that we can improve even the most degraded watershed.
Abby Markowitz, formerly a Project Director with Maryland Save Our Streams, is an environmental
consultant with TetraTech, Inc., and serves on the Board of Directors for the Maryland Volunteer Water
Quality Monitoring Association.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Urban Watch: A New Approach to Monitoring Urban
Nonpoint Source Pollution
by Joan Drinkwin
Two years ago, when I started working for Texas Watch (the statewide volunteer monitoring program
coordinated by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission), I was assigned the exciting job
of implementing grant projects designed to get volunteers monitoring for nonpoint source pollution. I
thought my job would be easy. After all, I had already been monitoring as a volunteer myself. Each week
-- on the same day and at the same time of day ~ I tested an Austin creek for basic water quality
variables like dissolved oxygen. My monitoring protocol included such infamous nonpoint source
pollutants as nitrate-nitrogen, orthophosphates, and fecal coliform.
I went to the cities where the projects focused and discussed the idea of having volunteers monitor for
nonpoint source pollution within the city limits, using the same monitoring strategy that I had been using.
I suggested to the various directors of public works and managers of environmental departments that the
volunteers could help their staffs locate areas with nonpoint source pollution problems.
Blank stares.
I encouraged them to choose sites where volunteer monitoring would prove most useful to the cities.
Blank stares.
I asked them, "What are your greatest concerns regarding nonpoint source pollution?" Their answer:
"The NPDES permit." They were referring to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
permit that all cities with populations over 100,000 are required to obtain in order to discharge
storm water runoff into the surface waters of the state (see the article titled NPDES storm water permits).
Little else was on their minds.
I was convinced local support from city staff was critical to the success of the project. So I plodded on,
trying valiantly to make my concept of volunteer nonpoint source pollution monitoring fit into the cities'
-------
NPDES mindset.
Eventually I found myself in Fort Worth, facing the Director of the Department of Environmental
Management, the Supervisor of the Storm water Division, and two water quality specialists. I made my
pitch.
Blank stares.
But then, they made a pitch. "Can we get volunteers to monitor for other stuff? We're not interested in
dissolved oxygen or the other variables you're suggesting. What we could use is some help locating illicit
discharges and illegal connections into the storm drain system. Could the volunteers monitor for metals,
chlorine, detergents?"
Could they?
As it happened, the City of Fort Worth already had been working for some time with LaMotte Company
to develop a storm drain monitoring field kit. The City wanted to use the kit for dry-weather screening of
their 600 storm drain outfalls, as part of their NPDES permit requirements. The kit was specifically
geared to detecting illegal or accidental dumping or cross-connections into the stormwater system, and
included all the parameters outlined in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's stormwater
regulations. The City had been using this type of kit for several years and had even trained
nonprofessional paid interns to conduct the monitoring.
Urban Watch is born
The step from using paid interns to volunteers was one small step for the City and one giant leap for
Texas Watch. It ushered in an entirely new direction for volunteer monitoring in Texas: Urban Watch.
This direction is new because it moves away from regular sampling to focus on random pollution events,
and it moves away from traditionally tested water quality variables to focus on parameters mandated by
the NPDES program. Because its monitoring design is specifically tailored to complement NPDES
permit monitoring, Urban Watch creates a strong working relationship between volunteers and local
professional monitors. The program provides cities with data they need while at the same time educating
citizens about nonpoint source pollution and involving them in its management.
Getting up and running
It didn't take long for the Urban Watch concept to become a reality. The City of Fort Worth agreed to
help train and support volunteers. City staff proceeded to prioritize monitoring sites based on information
collected by their paid interns. The Trinity River Authority, another Texas Watch partner in the Fort
Worth area, pitched in with an offer to supply Urban Watch monitoring kits, using funds from the Texas
Clean Rivers Program.
Texas Watch, the Trinity River Authority, and the City of Fort Worth worked together to develop a
training and certification process for volunteers and an overall quality assurance program. Since the grant
-------
project was federally funded under Section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act, a quality assurance project
plan was submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; the plan was approved in the fall of
1994.
What the volunteers do
The Urban Watch monitoring design closely follows the City of Fort Worth's original protocol. The
primary purpose of the monitoring is to detect illicit discharges and illegal connections into the storm
drain system. This means monitors are looking for flow in the storm drain system during dry weather
(when flow should either be absent or consist only of natural base flow). Therefore, monitors never
sample within 48 hours of significant rain.
Unlike most volunteer monitoring designs, which call for monitoring at regular intervals and at the same
time of day, Urban Watch calls for random sampling. Midnight dumping and breaks in sewer lines can
happen at random or they can be regular occurrences. So volunteers are asked to conduct their sampling
at least once per month, but to vary the day and the time they visit their site. Random sampling means
that volunteers are less likely to miss an occurrence just because they monitor on the wrong day, and also
ensures that they see their sites at different times of the day.
Volunteers are asked to monitor their site twice in 24 hours, with at least four hours between samplings,
as mandated in the U.S. EPA regulations. The combination of frequent monitoring and random intervals
increases the likelihood that volunteers will identify isolated incidents of nonpoint source pollutant
discharges.
The Urban Watch kit includes field tests for nine parameters: chlorine, copper, detergents, phenols,
ammonia-nitrogen, pH, temperature, turbidity, and color. Monitors also take note of a variety of physical
characteristics at their site, including the presence or absence of sewage, scum, and trash. It takes about
an hour to perform all the tests.
Each variable in the kit is an indicator of specific pollutants related to illicit discharges and illegal
connections. For example, copper is a heavy metal used in many industrial processes. Its presence is a
problem in itself, and it also indicates the possible presence of other heavy metals and industrial
pollutants. Chlorine is used in treating water for drinking, so its presence can indicate a leak into the
storm drain system from the sanitary sewer system. Chlorine can also indicate problems with car
washing, swimming pool draining, or industrial discharge.
Volunteers go through three phases of training: laboratory training, field training, and a site visit. They
are asked to attend quality control sessions every six months and to commit to two years of sampling at
their site (which is chosen jointly by the volunteer and the City of Fort Worth).
Since the first Urban Watch training in August 1994, 35 volunteers within the Dallas/Fort Worth
metroplex have been trained. Eleven sites are now being monitored regularly, and Texas Watch is
seeking to expand Urban Watch within the metroplex.
-------
Urban Watch volunteers are enthusiastic about the program. They like the flexibility that comes with
random sampling, and they find the data interesting because it tends to be more variable than typical
results for ambient water quality monitoring.
Urban Watch in your city?
Nonpoint source pollution is finally being recognized as a major water quality problem in urban areas.
With growing public awareness comes a groundswell of good intentions aimed at solving the problem.
The Urban Watch program is a new approach that integrates these good intentions with the mandates put
on cities by the federal and state governments.
For larger cities, the requirements of EPA's NPDES storm water permitting program create a need for a
program like Urban Watch. Gene Rattan, of Fort Worth's Department of Environmental Management,
points out, "Whether they know it or not, every city over 100,000 has a vested interest in volunteer
monitoring." But smaller cities can also benefit from the information produced by this type of
monitoring. Anyone interested in starting an urban storm drain monitoring program is invited to contact
Texas Watch at 512/ 239-4742 for ideas on how to do it.
Joan Drinkwin is Nonpoint Source Projects Coordinator for the Texas Watch Program, Texas Natural
Resource Conservation Commission, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, TX 78711; 512/239-4742.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
Urbanization and Water Quality: A Crash Course
by Eleanor Ely
After a good rain, the city sparkles; the air smells fresh. It feels like a new beginning, full of hope and
promise ~ or so it used to seem to me, back in my days of blissful ignorance. Now the effect is somewhat
spoiled, because now I know that however much cleaner the city may look, somewhere nearby a stream
or lake or estuary just got that much dirtier.
Urbanization has a profound impact on water bodies ~ and the pollutants that the rain washes from
smoggy air and dirty streets are just one part of the story. The moment we start covering up the natural
landscape with asphalt and concrete we start to change watershed hydrology.
Imperviousness
Almost by definition, development equals impervious surfaces ~ roads, sidewalks, drive-ways, parking
lots, rooftops. Rainfall can't soak into these surfaces, so most of it becomes runoff. In his article "The
Importance of Imperviousness," Thomas Schueler calculates that the runoff from a one-inch rainstorm
falling on a one-acre meadow would fill the average office to a depth of about two feet; but if that
meadow were completely paved, the runoff from the same storm would completely fill the office . . . and
the two offices next to it.
In urban areas, 40 to 80 percent of the land area is covered by paved surfaces and rooftops.
Imperviousness brings a double whammy: not only is a whole lot more stormwater converted to runoff,
but that large volume of water rushes down to streams much faster than it used to. Peak stormwater
discharges can be two to five times higher than pre-development levels, and that water can reach the
stream in half the time it used to take.
Changes in watershed hydrology
In response to this onslaught, stream morphology changes. The channel gets wider and the banks are
undercut. Sediment eroded from the widening streambanks covers the streambed. Instream habitat
structures such as pool and riffle sequences are lost.
Increased runoff volume means floods are higher and more frequent. Meanwhile, because less water
! --
•y
-------
soaks into the ground to replenish groundwater, streamflow is reduced during dry weather periods; the
stream may even run dry.
Another change is that the water warms up. In heavily paved areas, local air and ground temperatures can
be 10 to 12 degrees warmer than if the area were in a natural state. Loss of streamside shade and reduced
summer flows further contribute to stream warming.
Adding insult to injury, humans attempt to cope with the increased runoff and flooding by tampering with
streams directly ~ channelizing, rerouting, culverting, and even burying them.
Pollution
All the effects described so far would happen even if urban runoff were perfectly clean ~ but of course it
is not. Rain (or snow) falling through the air above a city starts picking up pollutants before it even hits
the ground, then collects many more as it flows over rooftops, streets, and parking lots. Some of the most
important urban runoff pollutants, along with major sources, are:
Sediment (construction sites)
Nutrients (fertilizer; phosphorous attached to sediment)
Bacteria (pet wastes; sanitary sewer overflows)
Toxic substances, including
o Herbicides and pesticides (lawn and garden care)
o Metals (vehicle brake pads and tires; building materials)
o Hydrocarbons (vehicles)
o Industrial and household chemicals (paint, cleaning products)
Sediment, nutrients, and bacteria are "conventional" pollutants that often cause problems in rural as well
as urban watersheds. Herbicides and pesticides likewise are important pollutants in both rural and urban
areas. Metals, hydrocarbons, and other toxic chemicals are more specific to urban runoff.
For most people, the words "toxic runoff' conjure up the mental image of some giant factory disgorging
vile corrosive liquids. Actually, the image of a clogged freeway, or of a block of perfect, weed- and bug-
free lawns, would be closer to the mark. Indus-trial discharges have been strictly regulated over the last
20 years, and most of the worst problems have been cleaned up. Now the everyday actions of individuals
contribute a greater share of urban runoff pollution.
Vehicles are probably the single worst offenders. They are a major source of copper, lead, cadmium, and
chromium ~ all of which are toxic to either humans, aquatic life, or both. Because brake pads and tires
wear directly onto roads, the metals and other contaminants that they deposit are transported very
efficiently to the storm water system. Vehicles are also the leading source of hydrocarbons in urban
runoff. Oil and other automotive fluids are constantly leaking onto roads and parking lots. And illegal
dumping and accidental spillage of motor oil from do-it-yourself oil changes annually totals more than 10
times the amount spilled by the Exxon Valdez.
-------
Lush green lawns and pretty gardens may look like a welcome spot of nature, but what you don't see are
the excess nutrients (fertilizer) and toxic chemicals (herbicides, pesticides) that wash off with rain or
when the lawn is watered. In fact, urban gardeners use up to 10 times more toxic chemicals per acre than
farmers.
Harm to aquatic life
Not surprisingly, the cumulative effects of urbanization are devastating to aquatic life. Sedimentation,
pollutants, high storm flows, low summer flows, and high temperatures all take their toll. Numerous
studies have shown that after urban development fish and macroinvertebrate communities alike decrease
in total numbers, become less diverse, and are composed of more pollution-tolerant species.
What can we do?
Although a volunteer monitoring group probably can't do much to reduce imperviousness in their city,
volunteers can at least reverse some of the damage through restoration activities like revegetating stream
banks, restoring stream bottom habitat, and uncovering stream portions that have been paved over.
Volunteer monitoring groups do have a fighting chance at reducing the amount of pollution that reaches
an urban waterway. Volunteers in programs like Maryland Save Our Streams' "Mud-Busters" are
reducing the amount of sediment carried in runoff by monitoring construction sites to see that they
comply with sediment and erosion regulations. (For more on the Mud-Busters, see the Fall 1992 issue of
The Volunteer Monitor. The Fall 1992 issue can be back-ordered, see details at The Volunteer Monitor
Home Page.) And in Texas, volunteer monitors are helping to detect illegal or accidental connections to
storm sewer systems.
Observational monitoring, such as "streamwalking" or "watershed walking," helps in two ways. First is
the educational value of letting people see for themselves the abuses that urban streams are subjected to.
Second, observational monitors can inventory pollution sources like yard wastes dumped into streams,
eroded land or stream bank areas, dumpster spillage, vehicle fueling areas, parking lots, industrial sites
with poor housekeeping practices, and so on.
Changing behavior
Probably the best way to fight urban water pollution is to change people's behavior, and many volunteer
monitoring groups use public education campaigns to try to do just that. The first step in changing
behavior is to help people feel connected to the water, as Abby Markowitz points out (cover story). The
next is to show them how their ordinary, everyday activities can hurt water quality.
Geoff Brosseau, Executive Director of Bay Area Storm water Management Agencies Association, says,
"We've been concentrating on the message that Stormwater runoff isn't treated' ~ that it goes directly to
the stream. And that's an important message ~ but it won't do any good if people aren't even aware of
when they're using the stormwater system. Essentially people are using the system all the time ~ every
time they wash the car, water the lawn, rake leaves into the gutter."
-------
Often monitoring groups build a community education program around storm drain stenciling. This is an
excellent approach ~ but groups should be careful not to make their focus too narrow. At least the person
pouring used motor oil directly into a storm drain probably has some awareness that they're using the
storm drain system, even if they don't understand the harm they're causing. But what about the folks up
the block, over-watering their over-fertilized lawn? Or the neighbor who's hosing cement and paint
wastes into the street? The slogan "Don't Dump" may not reach these people since they probably don't
think of their actions as "dumping." Educational flyers need to clearly explain the less-obvious ways that
people pollute storm drains.
"Cars cause water pollution"
The majority of educational materials aimed at reducing car-related urban runoff limit their advice to the
following three points: (1) maintain your vehicle to prevent leaks; (2) dispose of used motor oil properly;
and (3) don't wash your car in the driveway (wash it on the grass or at a car wash facility instead). Very
few mention that driving itself is a source of water pollution. Kelly Moran, Water Pollution Prevention
Program Manager for the city of Palo Alto, California, says, "We've talked for years about cars and air
emissions. We haven't even started talking about cars and water pollution. We need to start publicizing
the message that Cars cause water pollution.' Whenever you drive, you're leaving tire particles on the
road. Every time you touch your brake pedal, you're depositing brake dust, which often contains copper."
Grounds for optimism
Though changing human behavior is not usually regarded as an easy task, in this case there may be
grounds for optimism. After all, hardly anyone wants or intends to pollute water; people just don't know
that's what they're doing. Once educated, they are often more than willing to change. Brosseau tells about
the time he went over and talked to a neighbor who was emptying his swimming pool into the street. The
man was very surprised to learn that the water was running untreated into the nearby creek ~ and very
eager to learn about alternatives that wouldn't harm the creek.
Of course there is only so much that can be accomplished through appeals to individuals to change their
behavior. The way most American cities and suburbs are laid out, combined with inadequate public
transportation, almost forces people to depend heavily on automobiles. To address this larger problem,
urban volunteer monitors might consider forming alliances with groups advocating for clean air, public
transit, human-friendly urban design, and related issues.
References
American Rivers. 1995. No Fishing, No Swimming, No Drinking: America's Urban River Crisis. 16
pages. Available for $5 from Amer-ican Rivers, 801 Pennsylvania Ave. SE, Suite 400, Washington, DC
20003.
Johnson, Carolyn. 1992. "Urban Runoff: How Polluted Is It?" 6-page flyer; available for free from
Carolyn Johnson, University of Wisconsin-Extension, 1304 S. 70th St., Suite 228, Milwaukee, WI 53214-
3154; 414-475-2881.
-------
Schueler, Thomas R. 1987. Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing
Urban BMPs. Washington Metropolitan Water Resources Planning Board.
Schueler, Thomas R. 1994. "The Importance of Imperviousness" in Watershed Protection Techniques
vol. 1 no. 3 (Fall 1994). Issue available for $14 from Center for Watershed Protection, 8737 Colesville
Rd., Ste. 300, Silver Spring, MD 20910; 301/589-1890.
U.S. EPA Office of Water. 1992. Environmental Impacts of Stormwater Discharges: A National Profile.
EPA 841-R-92-001. Available for $6.50 + $2 shipping from ERIC, 800/276-0462 (ask for pub # W286').
Eleanor Ely is the editor of The Volunteer Monitor.
-------
The Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 7, No. 2, Fall 1995
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only.
Although the information provided here was accurate and current
when first created, it is now outdated.
"We're Already Scientists!"
Urban Kids Monitor Creek
Wildcat Creek begins its 12-mile journey to San Francisco Bay in scenic parklands high in the East Bay
hills. But soon it descends into highly urban communities, flowing for its last seven miles past parking
lots and businesses, under a freeway, alongside roads, and behind modest houses. At virtually every point
where the creekbed is accessible to the public, it is littered with broken glass, garbage, and the inevitable
shopping carts.
Yet, compared to many urban creeks, Wildcat has been fortunate. Only a few short stretches have been
culverted, and in most places the banks are shaded by native trees. Most important, the creek has strong
advocates in the community.
These community activists have more on their minds than pretty scenery. Their first concern is for the
people, especially those in the low-income neighborhoods near the mouth of Wildcat Creek. Lillie Mae
Jones, a longtime local resident and a member of the Wildcat Creek Watershed Council, sums up the key
challenge facing the Council this way: "How can we affect the people who live here for the better, in
terms of health and employment, for both youth and adults?"
Given these community priorities, it is fitting that the newest activity on Wildcat Creek ~ weekly water
quality monitoring by local elementary and high school students ~ doesn't just benefit the creek. It's also
providing some hands-on teaching experience for the high school students, juniors and seniors enrolled
in Richmond High School's innovative "Teacher Cadet" program to encourage minority students to
pursue careers in teaching. And it's giving the elementary students a taste of what it's like to be a
scientist.
The monitoring project was initiated by the Urban Creeks Council (UCC), a local nonprofit organization,
with funding support from an EPA 319 (nonpoint source pollution reduction) grant. Last winter, UCC's
Ellie Insley approached the Teacher Cadets' teacher, Lana Martarella, and asked if she'd like to get her
class involved in the project. Martarella was delighted at the opportunity ~ especially since, as it
happened, her students had already been studying creeks for several months. Explaining why she had
chosen to focus her class on creeks, Martarella says, "My most important job is to give my students self-
confidence. Most of them speak English as a second language, and many will be the first in their family
-------
to graduate from high school. So I wanted them to become experts in something, and I decided on creeks.
Using the creek theme as a basis, the students could create lesson plans for science, math, English, music,
and art."
After Insley showed Martarella's students how to do the monitoring procedures, they began weekly
testing of Wildcat Creek for temperature, turbidity, pH, conductivity, ammonia, and dissolved oxygen.
By spring, the Teacher Cadets had indeed become creek experts. Now they were confident enough to
take their knowledge into Dover Elementary School, where they taught the procedures to 3rd and 4th
graders. With the assistance of the Cadets, the elementary students performed weekly testing at the same
site, on a different day.
"The elementary kids were totally into the monitoring," says Insley. "Their teacher had told them, You
guys are scientists. You were born scientists.' So when I asked them if they thought they might be
scientists when they grew up, they were indignant. They told me, We're already scientists.'"
While the 8- and 9-year-olds were seeing themselves as scientists, the high school students were seeing
themselves not only as teachers, but as citizens with the power to make a difference. "Most of my
students feel powerless," Martarella says. "I'm trying to show them they can take personal responsibility
for their environment, both physical and social. The Wildcat Creek project was career education, it was
community activism ~ the students could see that this was real life."
This year the program is expanding to include five more schools monitoring at different locations along
the creek. The City of San Pablo is lending enthusiastic support. "This project will help us meet the
monitoring requirements for our NPDES stormwater permits, since all our storm drains go to the creek,"
explains Adle Ho, San Pablo's NPDES Coordinator. In fact, Ho specifically requested that the monitors
add ammonia to their battery of tests because high levels of ammonia are a clue that sewage may be
getting into stormwater, perhaps via illegal connections. Ho says the program is also helping San Pablo
fulfill the public education component of its NPDES program. (EDITOR'S NOTE: See the NPDES
Stormwater Permits article for more information.) The City is providing educational materials, helping in
the selection of monitoring sites and testing parameters, and paying for quality control testing. "We're
really excited about getting to the kids," says Ho. "They are the future of the city and the environment."
------- |