Modeling Pollution Load Reductions

Over the course of the next several weeks, the AKRF team will be developing pollution reduction targets for the watershed, and modeling the reduction capabilities of the projects proposed as part of the watershed-based plan. This process will help to focus management actions based on the cost and efficiency of the proposed projects. In addition to pollution reduction values associated with place-based practices, the final plan will also include general percent removal factors typically associated with non-structural activities (land use change, wildlife management, etc).

To determine load reduction targets, we will use WinSLAMM software to establish baseline conditions for each sub-watershed. Baseline conditions will be defined by pollutant loads associated with a watershed comprised of woods in good condition. Our reduction targets for N, P, TSS, and fecal coliform will be the difference in loading between the existing condition models (Phase I) and the baseline condition models.

Research by Dr. Robert Pitt of the University of Alabama provides the basis for the WinSLAMM modeling approach.

Where sample data is available and bacterial impairments are designated, the statistical roll-back method will be used to establish bacterial reductions for each area upstream of an impairment. This method is commonly used in the development of Total Maximum Daily Loads that use measured in-stream concentrations to assign percent reduction values to total loading.

Christmas Tree Carbon Footprint

In the spirit of the holidays, we're going to break from our usual subject matter and share this interesting item: the first ISO-compliant, third-party peer reviewed Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) comparing artificial Christmas trees to real Christmas trees (in case you ever wondered!).

The LCA-study took into consideration five key indicators to determine which tree type is preferable from an environmental perspective. The results of the LCA found that the choice of either has a negligible impact on the environment compared with the overall individual family´s carbon footprint. However, the study’s findings also show that length of ownership, disposal method and “tree miles” can make a difference as to which tree is environmentally preferable.

Success Story: A Rain Garden for Vernon Park

At Vernon Park in Philadelphia, a group of volunteers has built a functioning rain garden with donated plants and equipment. Lead by the Tookany/Tackony-Frankford Watershed Partnership, the project leveraged support from municipal agencies, community advisers, and a large group of committed volunteers. 


The garden is designed to capture the “first inch” of runoff from the roof of one of the park’s large buildings (seen in the background below). Water from the roof drains is directed into simple swales, which carry water directly into the rain garden. There the water is held back from entering the storm sewer, and can slowly infiltrate into the ground.  

Volunteers graded the rain garden and planted over 400 plugs of fox sedge, bee balm, turtlehead, and ferns, plus small containers of bleeding heart, ironweed, cardinal flower, dogwood, redbud, blueberry, hydrangea, and more. These plants will grow to fill in the rain garden with a lush cluster of flowering native plants that improve habitat and aesthetics in the park. At a fairly low cost to the community, this garden benefits the neighborhood, the city, and the downstream watershed.

Could a project like this happen in the Saugatuck Watershed? What examples can we share of similar local work?





Before planting





Volunteer gardeners at work (Photos ©AKRF, 2011)



  



Impervious Cover in the Saugatuck River Watershed

Many of the implementation projects discussed for the watershed-based plan deal with reducing the negative effects associated with impervious cover. This may mean converting the impervious area to a more porous condition (i.e. gravel to meadow, or a traditional parking lot to porous asphalt), or “managing” the runoff from an impervious area by routing storm flows through a BMP specifically sized to handle that quantity of water.  In less developed parts of the watershed, the strategy is simpler: maintain the low levels of imperviousness through conservation zoning and protection of existing open space.

The watershed-based plan uses The Center for Watershed Protection’s 2003 monograph, Impacts of Impervious Cover on Aquatic Systems, as a basis for its approach. But numerous other sources support the idea of impervious threshholds, including several studies by the CT DEEP summarized in this fact sheet. The Impervious Cover TMDL developed for Eagleville Brook near the University of Connecticut campus offers an excellent case study of the impervious cover approach to managing multiple stressors. Of particular relevance to the Saugatuck River Watershed is the CT DEEP’s Streams of Hope document, which examines conditions in “moderately urbanized” streams where impervious cover is between 6-14% (impervious cover in the Saugatuck River Watershed is approximately 11%).

We are interested in what measures, if any, your town has taken to deal with the impervious cover issue. Conservation zoning, land protection, and LID can be controversial, and there is no single answer that works for every community. If you would like to offer thoughts or feedback on this topic, you may simply leave a message in the “comments” section of this blog post, or write a new post of your own with one of the generic login IDs. For blog support, contact Lia  (lmastropolo “at” akrf.com).

Meeting Recap & Related Resources

On Wednesday November 30th SWRPA, CT DEEP, AKRF, and 18 stakeholder representatives gathered to discuss next steps for implementation of the draft watershed plan. AKRF presented several types of projects that could be implemented to improve water quality and habitat in the watershed. Projects discussed included bioretention cells, retrofits of existing stormwater basins, riparian buffers, and more.

After the presentation, stakeholders offered input on the plan and raised several important questions. Funding was discussed, including regulatory incentives for implementation. Youtube videos, targeted training workshops, and programs for school children were suggested as ways to bring the message of watershed protection to a broader audience. Barriers to implementation were identified, such as limited land use regulation and the difficulty of mobilizing large scale projects.

Common themes that emerged from the meeting were the need for regulatory and financial incentives; funding barriers and the challenges of mobilizing large projects; the importance of innovative outreach and education; and concerns regarding function and aesthetics of structural practices. The following may be useful in continuing this discussion:

• A recent study by American Rivers and the Center for Neighborhood technology begins to quantify the multiple social and economic values associated with low impact development (LID) techniques
• An informative fact sheet on the economic benefits of LID, from the NC Cooperative Extension
• A 2005 study on the economic value of open space in Minnesota
• A detailed discussion of common barriers to implementing green infrastructure, and hidden opportunities
• Project Headwaters, initiated by a Trout Unlimited chapter in southeastern Pennsylvania-- a good example of community-driven implementation of stormwater management projects
• This EPA fact sheet sheds some light on the issue of mosquitoes and stormwater management basins
• A recent zoning debate in Greenwich offers an example of the challenges faced by local land use managers (with commentary from the Mianus Watershed Council’s own jack Stoeker!)
  
  
  
  
  
  

Next Steps for the Watershed-Based Plan

Phase II of the Watershed-Based Planning Process for the Saugatuck, Five Mile, and Mianus Rivers will begin with a stakeholders workshop on November 30, 2011 in the Douglas Room of the Lapham Community Center in New Canaan from 6:30-8:30pm. The Center is located at 663 South Avenue, New Canaan in Waveny Park (the stone house beyond the swimming pool). Directions are available at: http://www.laphamcenter.org/welcome_directions.pdf.

This workshop represents the next step in developing final watershed-based plans for each watershed. The focus of the workshop will be to review and discuss the preliminary recommendations included in the draft plans and to get the community’s feedback on additional project concepts for the final plans. Draft reports are available on the project website http://www.swrpa.org/Default.aspx?Regional=280

During the remainder of the watershed planning process this blog will be updated on a weekly basis. Stakeholders can sign up to receive email notification of new blog posts by emailing Lia (lmastropolo “at” akrf.com) and requesting to be included for their primary river of interest. Stakeholders are also encouraged to post links to their own research and projects within the watershed and to ask general questions of the  group. AKRF staff are available to provide blog support to anyone interested in participating (again, lmastropolo “at” akrf.com).

Draft Watershed Plans Available

The Final Draft of the Watershed Based Plan (WBP) for the Saugatuck River Watershed is posted online: http://www.swrpa.org/Default.aspx?Regional=280.

Thank you to everyone who contributed to the plan!

This marks the successful completion of Phase I. Phase II of the project will build on the Draft WBP to create a final plan for the watershed. Work is expected to begin on Phase II in the fall.

Please note if you are printing the plan, the "Full Document" pdf and the "Figures Only" pdf include both 8.5x11 and 11x 17 pages

Interactive Google Map

Stakeholders in the Saugatuck River Watershed have a new tool for sharing site-specific information: a newly created Google map that can be annotated with text, points, and polygons to indicate existing and proposed project sites as well as known problem areas.




The map currently contains the watershed boundary and the proposed projects included in the most recent draft of the Plan. To annotate these points or to add new features to the map, follow these simple steps:

• Use this link to edit the map
• Sign in at the top right of the page using the generic Gmail address provided by SWRPA (if you are already signed into Google using a personal Gmail account, you will need to log out first)
• The map will reload automatically, this time with an “edit” button on the left near the map title
• Three symbols will appear near the main map navigation: a hand (pan), and point (draw point) and a line (draw polygon)—use these symbols to draw new features and to move features you’ve already drawn
• Click on any feature to add a title to a new feature, or to add comments/description to one of the features proposed in the current draft of the Plan

Welcome!

Welcome to the Saugatuck River Watershed Planning blog, an online forum for community members, stakeholder groups, and watershed professionals to discuss existing conditions and future ideas for the Saugatuck River Watershed. This forum supports efforts of the Southwest Regional Planning Authority (SWRPA) to develop a watershed-based management plan to meet Section 319 funding requirements under the federal Clean Water Act.

To this end, a steering committee including The Nature Conservancy's Saugatuck River Watershed Partnership, local scientists, planners, and community members was convened in July of 2010. Building off the Conservation Action Plan developed in 2006 by The Nature Conservancy's Saugatuck River Watershed Partnership, the committee defined the watershed’s most important uses and values and suggested management strategies to be incorporated into the Plan. As the Plan is developed further, the steering committee will continue to review its content and provide feedback.

This blog offers an easy method of communication among SWRPA, the steering committee, and the consultants developing the plan. You can ask general questions of the group; post links to useful information; suggest projects through the map feature; recommend funding sources; and share your specialized knowledge about this unique watershed. Each member of the group may access the blog and post new content using a generic account that has previously been distributed.

The process for posting content is as follows:

• At the upper right corner of this page, click “sign in” using the generic Gmail address provided to you
• Click “new post” in the upper right corner of the page
• Enter text in the space provided, then click “publish post” to publish your content to the main blog (note: once posted, text cannot be deleted)
• Other members of the blog community can comment on your post via the “post comment” feature displayed below each blog entry.

This project is funded in part through the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through a Clean Water Act Section 604(b) planning grant.