what is degrading our urban piedmont streams?
TRANSCRIPT
Nora Deamer DWQ
919-807-6431 [email protected]
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/bpu
What is Degrading our Urban Piedmont Streams?
DWQ Water Quality Assessment Every two years – determine how well our water bodies
supports their designated uses.
Designated uses are bases on stream classifications Class C – Protection and propagation of aquatic life;
Fish consumption; Secondary Recreation Class B – Recreation (Swimming) Class WS – Water Supply Others (Tr, ORW, HQW, SA)
DWQ Water Quality Assessment Use Support Ratings
Supporting – No criteria exceeded Impaired – Criteria exceeded Not Rated – Inconclusive
information/data No Data – No assessment made
Produce an Integrated Report (303(d)/305(b)) (The NC 2012 303(d) impaired waters list is currently out for
public comment. NC is required to submit the 2012 list to the US EPA by April 1st)
Impacts of Urbanization Decreased Vegetative cover Riparian buffer zones Soil infiltration Water Quality Aquatic Habitat Groundwater base flow rates Drought stream flow rates
Increased Impervious surface Runoff volume Runoff velocity Stream bank erosion Stream channelization Soil disturbance Soil compaction
Water Quality Impacts of Urbanization
Increased Stream bank erosion Sedimentation\Turbidity Water temperatures Conductivity Pollutant Concentrations
(nutrients, pesticides, oils, metals) Bacterial loading (animal and
human waste) Algal/Periphytic growth Water supply treatment
cost
Decreased Aquatic habitat Aquatic biodiversity Aquatic health &
reproduction Dissolved Oxygen pH
What Can You Do To Reduce Stormwater Pollution?
Divert roof drains to vegetated areas
Use rain barrels/cisterns Convert lawns to natural
area Vegetate bare areas Use environmentally
friendly lawn care Keep storm drains clean Inspect/maintain septic
systems
Pick-up pet waste Restore stream buffers Support land use &
stormwater planning Minimize paved areas or
use pervious pavement materials
Maintain vehicle Wash vehicle on grassy
areas
Benthic
Macro
invert
Fish C
ommunity
High Wate
r Tem
perature
Low Diss
olved O
xygen
Low pH
Turbidity
Fecal
Coliform
(rec
reatio
n)
Chlorophyll
a
NO2+NO3-N
Ammonia
Water c
olumn Merc
uryZinc
Lead
CopperPCB
Num
ber o
f Im
paire
d As
sess
men
t Uni
ts
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2010 Urban
Piedmont Stream
Impairments
Benthic
Macro
invert
Fish C
ommunity
High Wate
r Tem
perature
Low Diss
olved O
xygen
Low pH
Turbidity
Fecal
Coliform
(rec
reatio
n)
Chlorophyll
a
NO2+NO3-N
Ammonia
Water c
olumn Merc
uryZinc
Lead
CopperPCB
Num
ber o
f Im
paire
d As
sess
men
t Uni
ts
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45100
120
2010 Urban
Piedmont Stream
Impairments
Cape F
ear
Catawba
Neuse
Roanoke
Yadkin
-Pee
Dee
0
20
40
60
80
100
120200400600800
1000
Number of Impaired Assessment UnitsNumber of Impaired Stream Miles
2010 Urban
Piedmont Stream
Impairments ~
By Basin
Standard assessed - 400 CFU/100 mL
2010 Fecal
Coliform Bacterial
Assessment
0303002
0303003
0303007 0303004
0303005
0303006
Little Creek Watershed 2010/2012 Assessment
Booker Creek Upper 3.5 mile segment – Impaired
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Low Dissolved Oxygen (30%)
Lower 2.1 mile segment – Impaired Benthic Macroinvertebrate
Bolin Creek Middle 3.1 mile segment – Impaired
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Little Creek Upper 4.9 mile segment – Impaired
Benthic Macroinvertebrate
Tools & Strategies DWQ Utilizes to Restore Urban Streams
Work with stakeholders/watershed groups to develop watershed restoration plans
Phase I and Phase II Stormwater regulations Development of Total Daily Maximum Loads (TMDL)
for a specific stream reach and pollutant of interest. (A percent load reduction is determined)
Development of specific management strategies and rules (Jordan Lake, Falls Lake, Randleman Lake)
Jordan Lake Nutrient Management Strategy & Rules
Jordan Lake Strategy is divided into three management segment requiring different amount of reductions in order to meet standards.
Jordan Lake Nutrient Management Strategy & Rules
15A NCAC 02B .0262-.0273 & .0311 (q) Agricultural Stormwater Management for New Development Stormwater Management for Existing Development Protection of Existing Riparian Buffers Mitigation for Riparian Buffers Riparian Buffer Mitigation Fees for NC EEP Wastewater Discharge Requirements Stormwater Requirements for State and Federal Entities Fertilizer Management Options for Offsetting Nutrient Loads Cape Fear Basin – Jordan Lake Watershed WS-V reclassification
For more information see DWQ website - http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/jordanlake
Questions
Nora Deamer Division of Water Quality 919-807-6431 [email protected]
Basinwide Planning Website http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/bpu
AU# Stream Name Location Classification Miles Impairment Status Use Support Rating/Information
Booker Creek Watershed
16-41-1-15-2-(1) Booker Creek (East-wood
Lake)
From source to dam at Eastwood Lake WS-V,B;NSW 3.5 m Impaired Fair Bug (BB198 - Piney Mtn Rd.);
Low DO @ B3050000 = 30.4%
16-41-1-15-2-(4) Booker Creek From dam at eastwood Lake to US Hwy 15 WS-V;NSW 1.2 m Impaired Fair Bug
16-41-1-15-2-(5) Booker Creek From US Hwy 15 to Little Creek WS-IV;NSW 0.9 m Impaired Fair Bug
Bolin Creek Watershed
16-41-1-15-1-(0.5)a
Bolin Creek (Hogen Lake)
From source to Pathway Drive WS-V;NSW 5.3 m Supporting Good-Fair Bug (BB330 - SR1777)
16-41-1-15-1-(0.5)b
Bolin Creek (Hogen Lake)
From Pathway Drive to US Hwy 501 Business WS-V;NSW 3.1 m Impaired Fair Bug (BB506 - Estes Dr.
Upstream 400M)
16-41-1-15-1-(4) Bolin Creek From US Hwy 501 Business to Little Creek WS-IV;NSW 0.9 m No Data No Data or information to make
assessment
Little Creek Wateshed
16-41-1-15-(0.5) Little Creek From source to a point 0.7 mile downstream of Durham County SR 1110
WS-IV;NSW 4.9 m Impaired Poor Bug (BB197 - Pinehurst Dr.)
16-41-1-15-(3) Little Creek
From a point 0.7 mile downstream of Durham County SR 1110 to New Hope Creek
WS-IV; NSW,CA 0.8 m No Data No Data or information to make
assessment
2010 & Draft NC 2012 Assessment (Integrated Report)
Nonpoint Sources of Pollution Pollution reaching waterways from rainfall runoff, atmospheric
deposition and groundwater flow. Impacts result from cumulative effects of many small activities.
Changing Hydrology Effects
Forces more water (energy) more quickly Physically
damages stream channel
Before Development
After Development
Zone 1: 30’ undisturbed
forest vegetation
Zone 2: 20’ managed vegetation
Stream
Buffer Zones on Streams
Top of bank
Planning Considerations Avoid Areas Near
Sensitive Waters
Maintain Buffer Areas Around Streams
Consider Land Constraints - slope/soil…
Maintain Areas of Open Space
Minimize Impervious Cover
Planning Options Low Impact
Development (LID)
Maintain Stream Buffers Consider Slope & Soil Maintain Open Space Minimize Impervious Cover
What can local governments do to reduce stormwater pollution? Limit impervious surfaces by concentrating development
in high density clusters. Encourage mass transit to reduce need for roads/parking
lots. Set zoning standards for development to reduce runoff
and protect stream corridors. Discourage development in floodplains. Protect farmland and open spaces.
Benefits of Riparian Buffers Trap/Remove sediment
from runoff Protect stream bank
from erosion Trap/Remove
nutrients, metals and other contaminants
Effective flood control Provides food and
habitat for wildlife
How Buffers Work Sediment Nitrogen Phosphorus Other Contaminants Flood Control Channel Stability Wildlife Habitat
Impacts of Increased Turbidity 4-32 NTU
– Reduced food intake – Slight reduction in growth – Reduced survival percentages – Avoidance, escape
≥ 80-90 NTU – Marked reduction in growth & survival
Sensitive Species 10-25 NTU = Mortality
Turbidity High pH Chlorophyll a
Fres
h W
ater
Acr
es
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Lake Impairment Parameters 2010 Impaired Freshwater Acres
Arse
nic
Cop
per
Zinc
Amm
onia
Chl
orid
e
NO
2+N
O3-
N
Turb
idity
Low
Dis
solv
ed O
xyge
n
Low
pH
Chl
orop
hyll
a
Rec
. Fec
al C
olifo
rm B
acte
ria
Bio
logy
-Bug
Bio
logy
-Fis
h
Fres
h W
ater
Mile
s
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90200225250275300
Stream Impairment Parameters
2010 Impaired Freshwater Miles
DO pH Spec. Cond. Turb.
Fecal C. (Geomean) TN NH3
NO2/ NO3-N TP
mg/L μmhos/cm NTU cfu/100 ml mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
CFR Basin Average 7.6 6.9 13.1 75 2.01 0.10 1.24 0.19
Haw – 3030002 8.4 7.3 277 16.7 108 2.90 0.09 2.15 0.24
Deep – 3030003 8.5 7.2 217 15.6 107 2.68 0.07 2.02 0.25
Middle CFR – 3030004 8.5 6.6 119 10.8 91 1.27 0.22 0.49 0.10
Lower CFR – 3030005 7.1 6.9 11.9 28 1.22 0.07 0.51 0.12
Black R – 3030006 6.4 6.1 110 4.5 70 1.07 0.04 0.25 0.11
Northeast CFR - 3030007 6.6 6.6 7.1 98 2.17 0.07 1.23 0.30
Healthy Piedmont Strm* 12-90 0.80 0.05 0.30 0.05 EPA Nutrient Criteria -
Piedmont** 0.70 0.038 EPA Nutrient Criteria -
Coastal** 0.72 0.032
* Information from ESS document. ** USGS Circular 1350 – The Quality of Our Nation’s Water – Nutrients in the Nation’s Streams and Groundwater, 1992-2004 Neil Dubrovskt et al., 2010.