Looking Glass River Watershed Management Plan - Greater ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Looking Glass River ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Looking Glass River ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Figure 3-8 Phosphorous Pollutant Load Olive Twp £¤ 127 ! ! ! ! Victor Twp CLINTON COUNTY SHIAWASSEE COUNTY Sciota Twp Riley Twp ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Woodhull Twp ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Watertown Twp City of Dewitt Legend Waters of the State Phosphorus State Roads 0.0 - 0.24 lb/ac/yr County Boundary 0.25 - 0.39 lb/ac/yr Municipal Boundaries 0.40 - 0.55 lb/ac/yr Watershed 0.56 - 0.70 lb/ac/yr 0.71 - 0.80 lb/ac/yr CLINTON COUNTY EATON COUNTY INGHAM COUNTY Dewitt Twp Lansing Twp City of Lansing ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! City of East Lansing ! ! ! ! §¨¦ 69 Meridian Twp 4 Bath Twp ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Williamstown Twp 0 1 2 3 Miles Figure 3-9 BOD Pollutant Load Olive Twp £¤ 127 Victor Twp CLINTON COUNTY SHIAWASSEE COUNTY Sciota Twp Riley Twp ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Woodhull Twp ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Watertown Twp City of Dewitt Legend Waters of the State BOD State Roads 4.0 - 4.4 lb/ac/yr County Boundary 4.5 - 5.5 lb/ac/yr Municipal Boundaries 5.6 - 6.6 lb/ac/yr Watershed 6.7 - 7.6 lb/ac/yr 7.7 - 7.9 lb/ac/yr CLINTON COUNTY EATON COUNTY INGHAM COUNTY Dewitt Twp Lansing Twp City of Lansing ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! City of East Lansing ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! §¨¦ 69 Meridian Twp 4 Bath Twp ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Williamstown Twp 0 1 2 3 4 Miles Section 3: Water Quality Conditions 3-23
In Table 3-11 the top five unit area loadings are highlighted in yellow with the number one loadings, Turkey Creek and Lower Vermillion Creek, bolded. Locations and names of subwatersheds can be referenced in Figure 2-1. Table 3-11 Unit Area Storm Water Data Loading Subwatershed Phosphorus BOD Sediment (lbs/ac/yr) (lbs/ac/yr) (lbs /ac/yr) Clise Drain 0.55 6.62 384.47 Faiver Drain 0.65 6.57 500.90 Graneer Drain 0.49 6.11 346.63 Upper Vermillion Creek 0.38 7.05 208.99 Looking Glass A 0.67 6.66 514.47 Looking Glass B 0.40 4.70 283.68 Lower Remey Chandler Drain 0.49 6.92 327.21 Lower Vermillion Creek 0.52 7.98 363.47 Mud Creek 0.30 5.06 173.93 Prairie & Gunderman Drain 0.24 4.28 148.54 Summer Drain 0.63 5.99 479.08 Turkey Creek 0.70 6.61 567.58 Upper Remey Chandler Drain 0.28 4.08 180.66 Middle Vermillion Creek 0.29 6.30 135.84 The model is showing that the highest unit loadings are occurring in the more rural or agricultural zones of the watershed. These results are not due to specific sites within the watershed, but are a result of the higher loadings associated with agricultural land uses. Best management practices existing within the watershed were not considered within this loading model. Pollutant Loading Summary Overall the loadings calculated may provide an accurate representation of the loadings occurring in the watershed. In many instances agricultural landscapes have the highest loads of sediment, phosphorus, and BOD, although urban areas should not be underestimated in their loading contributions. Much of the urban sediments which may not be accounted for through the pollutant load calculations may be originating from construction sites, poor maintenance of roads and catch basins, and altered urban waterways. The MDEQ and MDNR found the greatest impact to macroinvertebrates, fish and habitat in the Looking Glass to be occurring in the downstream areas within the urbanized zone. Sediments may be carried from the upstream reach to the urbanized zone where water velocities are slower and the sediment is able to be deposited. It is a coincidence that the largest loadings of BOD are located in Vermillion Creek, the same area where a TMDL for untreated sewage discharge must be developed. STEPL only calculates pollutant loads based on a specific pollutant concentration for a land use. The pollutant load concentration may be predicting a high load of BOD as a result of the agricultural land use, which may need to be controlled through the TMDL. The published data support the pollutant load calculations produced in the STEPL program for most of the watershed, but suggest that the program is underestimating the urbanized subwatersheds. 3-24 Looking Glass River Watershed April 2007
Page 2 and 3:
GLRC on Phase II Looking Glass Rive
Page 4 and 5:
P:\1666001\09 Looking Glass WMP\WMP
Page 6 and 7:
Table of Contents Organization of t
Page 8 and 9:
SECTION 10 - Plan Sustainability In
Page 10 and 11:
FIGURES Figure 1-1 Watershed Locati
Page 12 and 13:
Organization of the Plan This plan
Page 14 and 15: 9. Evaluation and Revision Section
Page 16 and 17: ! ! ! ! ! ! Forest Hill ! ! ! ! ! !
Page 18 and 19: The goals and objectives were then
Page 20 and 21: Looking Glass Watershed The Looking
Page 22 and 23: • methods for evaluation of progr
Page 24 and 25: References Center for Watershed Pro
Page 26 and 27: ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Page 28 and 29: ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Page 30 and 31: ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Page 32 and 33: The majority of wetlands in the wat
Page 34 and 35: commonly classified as hydrologic s
Page 36 and 37: ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Page 38 and 39: Significant Natural Features to be
Page 40 and 41: References Centers for Disease Cont
Page 42 and 43: 3. Water Quality Conditions People
Page 44 and 45: sanitary sewer treatment system has
Page 46 and 47: Section 3: Water Quality Conditions
Page 48 and 49: Data Analysis Tetra Tech summarized
Page 54 and 55: Table 3-4 explains the problems fou
Page 56 and 57: Vermillion Creek Assessment Vermill
Page 58 and 59: Volunteers identify the species bas
Page 60 and 61: Watershed Fish Consumption The Mich
Page 62 and 63: The coldwater fishery use does not
Page 66 and 67: Interpretation of Watershed Conditi
Page 68 and 69: 4. Community Outreach A watershed p
Page 70 and 71: Public Comment on Draft Plan A draf
Page 72 and 73: Public Education Plan Public educat
Page 74 and 75: determining goals and desires for t
Page 76 and 77: Table 5-1 Status of Designated Uses
Page 78 and 79: Sources The main sources of sedimen
Page 80 and 81: the time for the specified month. (
Page 82 and 83: Altered Hydrology Stream flows vary
Page 84 and 85: day as it is at a USGS gauging stat
Page 86 and 87: Figure 5-2 R-B Index at Eagle (USGS
Page 88 and 89: It should also be noted that the su
Page 90 and 91: Detergents are becoming a serious t
Page 92 and 93: Physical Pollutants Physical pollut
Page 94 and 95: Oil and grease are often referred t
Page 96 and 97: Table 5-14 Pesticide: Sources and C
Page 98 and 99: Introduction 6. Goals and Objective
Page 100 and 101: equirements, some objectives go bey
Page 102 and 103: Goal 3: Encourage Water Quality Fri
Page 104 and 105: general health of wetlands, primary
Page 106 and 107: References DAS Manufacturing. “Cu
Page 108 and 109: Several programs are available loca
Page 110 and 111: Better Site Design Better site desi
Page 112 and 113: Non-Storm Water Discharges Non-stor
Page 114 and 115:
producers to meet personal objectiv
Page 116 and 117:
Michigan Turfgrass Environmental St
Page 118 and 119:
8. Action Plan Source: Basetree, 20
Page 120 and 121:
Table 8-1 Benefits of Goals No Goal
Page 122 and 123:
9. Evaluation Mechanisms “Not eve
Page 124 and 125:
Evaluation Mechanisms Level One - A
Page 126 and 127:
Program Implementation Program impl
Page 128 and 129:
The MDEQ/MDNR have conducted analyt
Page 130 and 131:
Assessing the evaluation mechanisms
Page 132 and 133:
Goal 3: Encourage Water Quality Fri
Page 134 and 135:
Goal 6: Protect and Increase Wetlan
Page 136 and 137:
Evaluation Action Plan At the end o
Page 138 and 139:
Evaluation Mechanisms Municipal Sta
Page 140 and 141:
The committee defined appropriate w
Page 142 and 143:
“It is the purpose of this Memora
Page 144 and 145:
each other about how to protect and
Page 146 and 147:
A-2 Looking Glass River Watershed A
Page 148 and 149:
B-2 Looking Glass River Watershed A
Page 150 and 151:
C-2 Looking Glass River Watershed A
Page 152 and 153:
D-2 Looking Glass River Watershed A
Page 154 and 155:
Appendix E Road Stream Surveys Appe
Page 156 and 157:
Appendix F Vermillion Creek Corresp
show all

Looking Glass River Watershed Management Plan - Greater ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?