The Patuxent Reservoirs Watershed Protection Partnership
Download
Report
Transcript The Patuxent Reservoirs Watershed Protection Partnership
The Patuxent Reservoirs Watershed
Protection Partnership: Successes &
Challenges
2011 EPA Region 3, States
Source Water Protection Meeting
June 9, 2011
Steve Nelson
Environmental Group
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission
Presentation Outline
Brief History of Patuxent Reservoirs Partnership
Watershed Characterization
Successes
Challenges
Brief History of Partnership
1993-1995
MC DEP formed the Patuxent
Reservoirs Protection Group (PRPG)
Multi-jurisdictional working group
Outcome
• Decided to form a partnership for protecting the
reservoirs and their watershed
History
1996 – Agreement Ratified
creating the partnership
• 7 Partner Agencies
• Established a Policy Board & Tech
Advisory Committee
• WSSC filled admin. and coordination
roles
History
1997 - Comprehensive Mgmt Planning Study for
Patuxent Reservoirs Watershed
Defined 6 Priority Resources and 10 Action Items
1998 – Cooperative Agricultural MOU Established
Patuxent Reservoirs Ag Cost-Share Program
New funding source for BMPs targeting small farms
Funded Shared SCD Planner focused on watershed
Priority Resources
Reservoirs & Water
Supply
• Terrestrial
Habitat
• Stream System
• Aquatic Biota
6
Priority Resources
Public Awareness &
Stewardship
Rural Character &
Landscape
7
Watershed Characterization
132 square mile
watershed in MD
Piedmont
99% of watershed w/in
Howard and Montgomery
Counties (split by river)
Triadelphia reservoir (upriver) serves as SWM
facility, sediment trap,
and nutrient sink for
Rocky Gorge reservoir
(down-river)
Successes!
Agricultural Progress
Patuxent Ag Cost-Share Program
• Filling a need with small horse farms
Many education & outreach efforts
• Horse pasture management
• Horse owner survey
Howard and Montgomery SCD
accomplishments since 1999…
Farm Acres with Soil & Water Quality Plans
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
1999
2000
2001
2002
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003 2004 2005 2006
AG BMPs INSTALLED (#)
2007
2008
2009
2010
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
More Successes…
Restoration Projects
WSSC-Owned Land surrounding Reservoirs
Hawlings River Stream Restoration
Cherry Creek Watershed Restoration
Reddy Branch Stream Buffer Plantings
DNR Forest Service developed Concept Forest
Management Plan for Sustainable Forests (2007)
Active deer management program
WSSC-funded an Interim Watershed
Management Report (2009)
and More Successes…
Outreach efforts to citizens in watershed
Septic system care workshops
Earth Month Events
• Watershed Day and H2O Fest (WSSC Sponsored)
• Stream clean-ups (IWLA, other volunteers)
Annual Family Camp Fire at Triadelphia Reservoir
U.S. EPA recognized the Patuxent Partnership
as a Clean Water Partner working cooperatively
to protect their water resources (2003)
Funding Commitment Level
Example (2009)
Annual
Total Funding Estimate = $686,200
Reservoir monitoring (WSSC) = $93K
Trends Analyses (WSSC) = $56K
Outreach (WSSC) = $135K
Admin., Annual Rpt & Coord. (WSSC) = $52K
Watershed restoration planning (PGC) = $50K
Biological Monitoring (HC, MC) = $62K
Ag. Program Oversight (HSCD, MSCD) = $80K
Reddy Branch Stream Buffer Planting = $100K
(M-NCPPC, MC, MSCD, DNR)
Local Challenges
Geography of basin and political boundaries
Howard Co. = large %
of watershed, BUT
very small customer
PG Co. = very small
% of watershed, BUT
the largest customer
(of Patuxent water)
Local Challenges
Limited
shared partner agency funding
(joint contributions)
Difficulty quantifying agriculture load
reductions associated with non-point
source (NPS) BMPs
Equine community plays important role in
NPS load reductions
Regional Challenges
TMDLs
Needed direction from State/Fed agencies to
determine compliance with TMDLs
TMDL Implementation
• Who’s responsible?
Recent emphasis on Chesapeake Bay TMDL
Triadelphia’s TMDL TP Allocation
SCOUR
28%
FOREST
4%
POINT
SOURCES
9%
DEVELOPED
9%
ANIMAL
WASTE
3%
PASTURE
6%
CROP
50%
NON-POINT
SOURCES
91%
Regional Challenges
County
Governments face increasing
competition for fewer “environmental”
dollars with leaner staff
Daunting MS4 NPDES Permit requirements
Many TMDLs per county
“New and improved” SWM regulations
Partnership Challenges
Delegation
of Policy Board participation
from executive level to senior professional
staff who have limited authority to commit
funding and resources
Questions?
Contact Information:
Steve Nelson
Environmental Scientist & Admin. Liaison for
Patuxent Reservoirs Watershed Protection Group
Technical Advisory Committee
Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission,
Environmental Group
14501 Sweitzer Lane
Laurel, MD 20707
[email protected]
301-206-8072