Water and Our Changing Landscape

Perspectives from the Wild and Scenic White Clay Watershed

April 14, 2005

Clayton Hall, University of Delaware

Conference Presentations

National Park Service Perspective

Edward O’Donnell, Watershed Management Committee for Charles Barscz, Manager

National Rivers, National Park Service

Ed O’Donnell read Chuck Barscz’s remarks since Chuck became ill this morning and could not attend. The main theme Chuck conveyed is that the White Clay Watershed possesses “outstandingly remarkable” characteristics that allowed it to be designated as a National Wild and Scenic River in the National Park Service’s system. The reality of these remarkable characteristics came home to him a fresh earlier this spring. He led a group of interpretive and park professionals from across the country on a watershed field trip. Through their eyes he gained a renewed sense of the beauty and natural resource value of the White Clay Creek watershed. Through their comments he also realized the unique combination of local, state, regional, and national entities committing resources to protecting and restoring the watershed. He invited the conference participants to build on the synergy resulting from this National recognition and continue to strive toward the goals of the White Clay Creek and its Tributaries Watershed Management Plan.

Wild and Scenic White Clay Creek Report

Linda Stapleford, River Administrator

White Clay Creek Watershed Management Committee

The Watershed Management Committee is charged with promoting the long-term protection of the White Clay Creek watershed in Pennsylvania and Delaware and supporting, coordinating, and facilitating the implementation of the White Clay Creek Watershed Management Plan. A summary highlighting the Management Committee’s activities from 2002, the first year of program funding, to 2004 follows:

Open Space Preservation

· Developed a series of conservation priority maps for the watershed and identified priority parcels in PA

· Implemented an ongoing landowner outreach program, which includes seeking funds for easements and fee simple acquisitions

· Played a critical role in adding over 90 acres of key land, valued at $1.2 million, to the White Clay Bi-state Preserve

· Conducted an Open Space Municipal Workshop for ten municipalities in Chester County, PA

Outreach

MUNICIPAL

· Developed and conducted presentations to 2 municipalities to promote mutually beneficial projects

· Offered small grants to assist with planning and ordinance development to achieve mutual objectives

CITIZEN

· Provided annual educational exhibits at two key events within the watershed in both PA and DE

· Conducted and assessed a pilot homeowner watershed stewardship project, SMARTYARDS, partially funded by a $4250 grant, for nine residences in London Grove, PA

· Developed text and completed investigative work for the design and production of interpretive signs in the bi-state preserve and signage throughout the watershed

SCHOOLS

· Developed and conducted classroom watershed programs and stream field trips to Stroud Water Research Center for nine 7^th grade classes (approximately 450 students) from middle schools in both PA and DE

· Partnered with Avon Grove Middle school in Pennsylvania and Shue Middle School in Delaware to create public demonstration SMARTYARD sites that complement classroom instruction

· Awarded first of a planned series of $1000 mini-grants to one educator in each state

GENERAL

· Upon request provided forum for discussion of nearly 20 water resource issues in the watershed

· Expanded Management Committee website to inform the community about the watershed

· Planning a spring 2005 White Clay Creek Watershed Conference to increase awareness and support for the watershed’s numerous resources

Trails and Recreation

· Gathered the necessary watershed data in Geographic Information System (GIS) format to create an interpretive brochure and regional trail map; a Request for Proposal for lay-out and design is being issued

Flora and Fauna

· Contributed to funding the Stroud Water Research Center’s 2003-4 summer interns who assisted with watershed macroinvertebrate Stream Watch surveys to assess stream health and track trends

· Contracted for a flora survey of five selected properties to fill in data gaps and provide assistance in obtaining funding for land conservation; fauna surveys are also planned

Historic Resources

· Contracted for the preparation of a National Register Rural Historic District Nomination for the London Tract

Organization

Hired a part-time River Administrator to handle the day-to-day administration of the program, assist the Management Committee in the implementation of the Management Plan, and

For more details of Linda’s remarks please request a copy of the White Clay Creek Management Committee Report 2002-2004 by phone at 302-731-1756 or by email at RiverAdministrator@whiteclay.org.

In closing, Linda also explained that the Management Committee seeks to facilitate other groups’ efforts to protect of the Watershed’s resources through presentation. In that light she introduced, Cynthia Kranz Greene, a member of Kranz family who had operated farm in the heart of the watershed, just a mile or two up 896 from the Clayton Hall conference center. Cynthia gave the history of the family’s farm preservation and current status. The presenter grew up there and partook in the activities characteristic of the bucolic setting. She spoke of how farming shaped her life and fostered a respect for the land. She is concerned about the encroaching suburbs and the idea that today’s children will not experience a connection to the land that instills values she deems very valuable to society. The farm also contains outstanding native plant species that would benefit from protection. The family, valuing the open land, had placed a conservation easement on the farm; subsequent sale to the state thus resulted in a substantially reduced sale price. In return for their actions, the state of Delaware committed to refurbish the barn so the site could be used for childrens’ farm education programs. Liability concerns are currently inhibiting a planned 4-H program. The family and the state are looking for a viable solution to allow the farm to be used for farm education for children. Those who might provide assistance were asked to contact Cynthia.

Recognition of Delaware and Pennsylvania Officials

Presentation of Robert Cheyne Memorial Plaque

Judy Shuler, Member

White Clay Creek Watershed Management Committee

Judy presented a summary of the early history and recognized supporters who made the designation possible. The list of local and state supporters from Pennsylvania included Arthur Hershey, State Representative, 13^th District; Chris Ross, State Rep. 158^th District; George Fasic, previously head of Chester County Planning; Pownall Jones, previously on County Agricultural Board; Barclay Hoopes, a Dairy Farmer; and Catherine Larmore, a absolutely critical citizen grassroot supporter. The Delaware state and local supporters included Carl Luft, City Manager, Newark, DE; and Charles Salkin, Dir. DE Div. Parks and Recreation.

Judy also recognized the federal congressional delegations of both states: Senator Joseph Biden,

the late Senator William Roth, Representative Michael Castle, and now Senator and then Gov. Gov. Thomas Carper for Delaware; and in Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, Senator Rick Santorum, Representative Joseph Pitt, and Gov. Thomas Ridge.

Judy then presented a plaque to Sally Cheyne in memory of Robert Cheyne, a London Britain Township resident and official, who was key to land preservation in the watershed and was such an eloquent spokesperson for the White Clay Creek’s National Wild and Scenic designation.

White Clay Creek: A Historical and Scientific Perspective

Bernard Sweeney, Executive Director

Stroud Water Research Center

The beginning of the talk discussed the geologic significance of WCC watershed, the

earliest humans, and the dominance of the deciduous forest. About 1,000 years ago the riparian area consisted of oak/chestnut forest with outstanding aquatic species. Freshwater mussels, the longest living animals in the creek, were abundant. Then came development and housing associated with the early colonial history. The greatest impact was the proximity of the White Clay Creek to Philadelphia. Major forest clearing occurred between 1650 and 1780 for agriculture and development. Beginning in 1907 much of the forest in the watershed was cut for lumber and for clearing land for urban buildings. Less than 1% of the forest remained within 50 kilometers of Philadelphia. The result streams received high sediment loads that were eventually deposited on floodplains. In the intervening years, this sediment gets washed back into streams during storm events; it also is a great place for chemicals to be stored and transported.

Dr. Sweeney began to explain the hydrologic significance of a watershed with a high percentage of established forest. In the past, when the forest was more prevalent, the hydrograph was more stable. Base flows were higher and storm flows were lower. By 1881 when there were recorded data, the hydrograph was much more variable. At this time, all people were on a well system, drawing much more water, base flows were lower, and because of increase in paved surfaces and other changes within basin, storm flows were higher. In 2002, the lowest base flow in history was recorded.

We use enormous amounts of water for various purposes. For example 300 million gallons a day are used for daily newspapers. This same trend in low base flows is seen internationally. The Rio Grande River did not make it to the ocean since 2001, the Yellow River since 1972, and the Colorado since 1960! The White Clay Creek itself did not flow to the ocean in 2002.

The solution to water quantity and quality problems starts in everyone’s back yard. Small streams in your backyard affect the quality of the main stem of the White Clay Creek. Dr. Sweeney went on to talk about the quality of water sources at different locations within the basin. The highest quality of water is found in the headwaters, and the water quality declines downstream. None of the waterways within the White Clay Creek basin qualify as very good in terms of stream health. A lot of players in the food web that are found in pristine streams are missing from the White Clay. The Creek supplies 5-10% of residents’ drinking water.

Dr. Sweeney concluded by stating that the source of the water quality issues that we face today is people’s mindset. There must be a shift in mindset from the stream as a dilutor of pollution. Since 1890, the forest has been rebounding and today the White Clay Creek watershed contains about 20% forest cover. Forests enable streams to process 2-10 times more pollutants and there is a decrease in water treatment costs when you increase forest cover within the basin. Best Management practices such as storm water infiltration structures; terraces and land use practices are necessary. It must be stressed that the health of the stream begins in small streams in one’s back yard. Education must aim to teach people that the health of large streams begins with the even ephemeral channels (those that don’t flow year-round) in your backyard. People must become aware of the importance of streams because of the ecosystem resources that they provide.

Keynote: The Livable Landscape

Rick Darke, President

Rick Darke, LLC

The keynote address by Rick Darke was extremely well received. It was a unique combination of an artistic visual and spoken presentation. It is impossible to do justice here in a written format to such a presentation. Those wishing to learn more about Rick’s landscape perspective would do best to view the NPR interview link on the website, (www.rickdarke.com), obtain a copy of his book, The American Woodland Garden, or attend one of his lectures (his schedule is on his website).

Stormwater Management Panel

Moderator: Andrew W. Urquhart, Co-chair

White Clay Creek Watershed Management Committee

Stormwater Utilities

Frank Piorko, Environmental Program Administrator

Drainage Section, Division of Soil and Water Conservation, DNREC

The state of Delaware has assembled a statewide task force to address stormwater drainage and management issues throughout the state. One of the recommendations of this group is to secure funding for stormwater programs. One of the funding mechanisms discussed is this presentation is a stormwater utility.

There are several key elements of Delaware’s sediment and stormwater program that include planning and design, implementation, technical assistance, site inspection, maintenance, and outreach. All of these elements need to be funded and currently there are a variety of funding tools. Current funding mechanisms include the local municipalities’ NPDES MS4 (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems) components, State general funds, SF/NSF, and grants. Although there are a variety of funding tools available, establishing a stormwater utility will provide a funding method which supports the stormwater program concept and provides an organizational entity.

The rational for the stormwater utility is that as land development increases, the percentage of impervious cover increases resulting in increased stormwater costs. The stormwater utility is considered an equitable approach based on the equivalent residential unit (ERU). The more you pave the more you pay. The average stormwater utility rate is $3.80 per month resulting in approximately $100 per acre per year in program revenue. The stormwater utility funds will support a variety of stormwater related activities, including but not limited to: public maintenance, infrastructure improvements, GIS systems, regional planning, flood control, and mitigation.

The stormwater utility is considered to be an equitable, stable, and adequate approach to address the growing stormwater needs throughout the state. Municipalities, counties, and states throughout the nation have implemented successful stormwater utility programs and can provide examples and lessons learned throughout the process. The state of Delaware has not made any final decisions on a stormwater utility in the state, but research and analysis will continue to assess the feasibility of this approach.

Recharge and Facility Design

Jeffrey Bross, President

Duffield Associates

Recharge and facility design was the focus of this discussion. The goals of recharge and facility design include: water table recharge, aquifer recharge, stream baseflow augmentation, stormwater quality improvement, and stormwater quantity management. Bross provided a recharge diagram to demonstrate the importance of infiltration. He suggested that in addition to the importance of infiltration, there are several concerns related to recharge facilities including the resulting water quality, reliability of the system, and maintaining the system.

Chester County, Pennsylvania, and New Castle County, Delaware, have made progress in regulating stormwater and encouraging recharge facilities in order to address stormwater runoff concerns. New Castle County implemented a Water Resource Protection Area (WRPA) Ordinance in 1991, and has since implemented several ordinances and code revisions to encourage stormwater recharge. Chester County, Pennsylvania, has also been progressive in advocating recharge facilities. Both the State of Delaware and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania have made significant efforts to promote recharge facilities.

Bross described several recharge facilities including:

· Recharge basins

· Bio infiltration swales

· Bio infiltration basins

· Subsurface storage and infiltration

· Injection

· Passive management

· Porous pavement

He provided examples of existing recharge facilities throughout Delaware. A recharge facility is located in the Governor’s Square shopping center in Delaware. Wilmington College has a subsurface recharge facility. An example of a passive recharge facility is a grass swale with a check dam, which uses a special soil mix. Permeable paving uses lattice type pavers and are approximately 40% permeable.

In Delaware, since the New Castle County WRPA ordinance was passed in 1991, considerable progress in stormwater management has been demonstrated in New Castle County and throughout Delaware. New Castle County has processed 25 recharge proposals, developed water management agreements for maintenance of the recharge facilities, developed the Environment First Ordinance, developed the Surface Water Management Task Force which will provide recommendations to the Governor, and in 2007 will implement the Source Water Assessment Program.

Pennsylvania’s Initiative: New Stormwater Manual

Wesley Horner, Principal Planner

Cahill Associates Pennsylvania has developed a new stormwater BMP (Best Management Practice) Manual. This manual is a tool for an integrated approach to stormwater management. The manual contains information on stormwater management and stormwater management BMPs.

There are approximately 2,550 municipalities managing stormwater in Pennsylvania. In 2002 Pennsylvania passed the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Policy. The purpose of this policy, according to the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Policy document, is to ensure effective stormwater management to minimize the adverse impacts of stormwater on ground water and surface water resources to support and sustain the social, economic, and environmental quality of the Commonwealth and to integrate federal Clean Water Act Stormwater Management Requirements. Key components of this policy include Act 167 Model Ordinance, NPDES Phase I and II, MS4 General Permits and the Stormwater Technical BMP Manual.

The Stormwater Technical BMP Manual was the focus of discussion. The Manual consists of ten chapters. The manual includes information on the following areas:

· Comprehensive stormwater management and why it is important

· Addressing stormwater management

· Integrating site design – helping municipalities address stormwater issues

· Nonstructural BMPs

· Structural BMPs

· Stormwater management for highways and roads

· Stormwater calculations and methodology

· Case studies and appendices

This manual is available on the Pennsylvania Department of the Environment’s website at http://www.dep.state.pa.us/.

Chester County Initiatives

Daniel J. Greig, Director

Chester County Conservation District, Chester County, Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania is addressing numerous agricultural issues in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed and the Christina Basin. One of the largest programs is in the Red and White Clay Creek watersheds that are within the Christina Basin. As an aside Dan noted that the P.L. 83-566 Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, which provides funding for flood control and water quality improvement projects throughout the nation, is being threatened to be cut from the federal budget. Dan encouraged participants to write their Congressmen and Senators to encourage support for this bill.

Dan Greig provided an overview of some of CCCD’s programs in the White Clay Watershed.

· In the upcoming year CCCD will focus on implementing nutrient management plans in the equine community. Any farms with over eight horses will need to implement nutrient management plans.

· Erosion and sediment control is another major area that CCCD is focused on, the efforts here consist of reviews, post construction management, and inspection.

· CCCD agriculture team works closely with NRCS to provide funding for BMPs and environmental compliance.

· CCCD is addressing the changing face of agriculture. The agriculture industry has changed significantly over the past 10-15 years. There is a need for education related to how the agriculture community and practices have changed. CCCD is trying to promote harmony among all stakeholders in the watershed.

· CCCD is working on the CCCD Cooperator Handbook. This document discusses what it means to be a cooperator.

· Another major effort is the Ombudsman Program. This program will address agricultural law with municipal officials; CCCD will conduct seminars with the county. The conservation district works as a liaison between the agriculture community and the municipal community.

· Chester County is also one of the pilot counties to organize and promote the Pennsylvania Environmental Agricultural Conservation Certification of Excellence (PEACCE) program. The mission of this program is to promote environmentally safe agricultural practices among livestock and poultry operations; to encourage producers to minimize risks to the environment and, in turn, minimize personal liability; and to recognize those producers who meet or exceed standards as established by the PEACCE program.

· The Mushroom Farm Environmental Program provides assistance to the mushroom farm community to develop management plans and implement BMPs on the mushroom farms throughout Chester County.

Charlotte Sprenkle, from the CCCD, reported on a project in the Trout Run Watershed, a subwatershed of the White Clay Creek Watershed. There are eight mushroom farmers participating in this project. The farmers have implemented several BMPs including riparian forest buffers, filter soxx for inlet protection in order to remove solids, passive treatment wetlands, and grass filters. One of the farmers that is participating in the Trout Run Watershed project has implemented a series of BMPs on his property. The BMPs include the installation of riparian buffers, moving the stream channel and expanding the floodplain, and the most unique component - constructing a wetland in the shape of a mushroom in the City of Avondale. This community has a lot of pride in the mushroom industry and it is a major economic source in the area. CCCD has worked with the farmers in a creative way to interface the character of the community and watershed restoration projects in the agriculture community.

Backyard Habitats/SMARTyards: A Municipal Outreach Tool

John Harrod, Backyard Habitat Coordinator

Delaware Nature Society

“Smartyards”, a unique component of the Delaware Nature Society’s (DNS) Backyard Habitat program, is an incentive based effort to encourage homeowners to improve water quality by planting native, water friendly plants and reducing or eliminating the need for chemical fertilizer and pesticide applications. While many efforts, such as the TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) process, are underway at both federal and state levels, public understanding of nonpoint source pollution issues is necessary to cultivate awareness and create solutions. “Smartyards” helps individuals understand their own impact on the health of waterways by making the connection between land use practices and water quality. Participants certify their residences as official Backyard Habitat sites, while learning resource conservation practices and discovering how to provide habitat for a greater diversity of wildlife species; thereby, helping ensure the health of our streams and rivers by reducing the reliance on products that contribute to non-point source pollution.

Through grant funding “Smartyards” participants receive a landscaping package valued at approximately $500 and one-on-one technical assistance from DNS trained Habitat Stewards that help them certify their property. Certification allows the National Wildlife Federation and state affiliates like DNS to map certified habitats and help determine where wildlife corridors have been created and pinpoint specific watersheds that would benefit from the Backyard Wildlife Habitat program. Certification also provides an opportunity for property owners to educate and inspire others in their community. “Smartyards” has produced an enthusiastic response from homeowners, regulatory agencies, and funders. While homeowners are eager to receive the landscaping packages and learn how to make a difference locally, regulatory and funding agencies are encouraged by “Smartyards” ability to address TMDLs, increase citizen education and action, and its ability to be easily duplicated in various watersheds.

Question and Answer Session

It was noted that the New Castle County runoff regulations mandate that stormwater runoff should not exceed preconstruction runoff levels. Are the developers aware of the preconstruction runoff rates?

Jeff Bross answered – as the current law reads, the developers must determine the preconstruction runoff rate. The regulations reads that the post construction runoff rates must equal the preconstruction runoff rates but the issue to look at is that the post construction volume can vary. This is a problem because increased volume causes erosion and sediment problems. Another problem with the regulations is that the combined impact of multiple development projects may be detrimental. One project may not have a negative impact but the culmination of several projects may cause stormwater problems. Bross emphasized that there is a need for watershed studies and modeling to show this combined effect in order for the regulations to consider volume as well as runoff rate in the regulation.

One conference attendee noted that one of the speakers mentioned an infiltration basin that is located at Route 40 and Route 7. The basin has a net gain of 1 million gallons per year. The runoff infiltrates through the sand medium and then into the groundwater. Without any additional treatment, how polluted is this runoff?

Jeff Bross explained that the infiltration basin is only collecting rooftop runoff so the contaminant levels are low, but contamination is still a concern and this is why monitoring is a key component for infiltration basins. The settling process removes the coarser sediment. When using infiltration basins there a lot of variables that must be weighed. Another factor to consider is that the more area available provided for infiltration the better the treatment and the greater the reduction in contaminants.

A conference attendee from Pennsylvania remarked that her basement is constantly flooding during storm events and she asked why there aren’t more stormwater controls placed on developers?

Wesley Horner explained that in Pennsylvania the municipalities/townships are given the authority and power to enact stormwater regulations for the welfare and safety of the community. Peak rates are usually controlled and this may not be enough. Regulations can be more stringent and sophisticated but it is up to the community to lobby the politicians in your area. Horner noted that it is a political problem and that the conference attendee needs to work with her municipality to get better regulations enacted within her municipality.

Closing – Andy Urquhart

The conference attendees were reminded that the White Clay Creek Wild and Scenic Management Committee functions through volunteer participation and if anyone is interested in joining the group please contact any member of the White Clay Watershed Executive Committee members or come to the next meeting on June 7^th at 7:00 p.m. at New Garden Township.

The Executive Committee members thanked Linda Stapleford for her hard work in assembling the conference and noted it was a huge success.