20120403212004_final-north-fork-and-lake-vermilion-plan

              Watershed Implementation Plan for
Lake Vermilion and the
North Fork Vermilion River
Vermilion County, Illinois
Prepared by:
Cindy Johnston John Peverly
Resource Conservationist Watershed Coordinator
Vermilion County Soil and Water Conservation District
June 2008
With funding provided by the
Association of Illinois Soil and Water Conservation Districts
with additional assistance provided by the
North Fork Vermilion River Watershed Planning Committee
Funding for this project provided, in part, by the Governor of Illinois and the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency through Section 319 of the Clean Water Act.
&
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………...7
INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................7
PLAN COMPONENTS…..……………………………………………………………………...8
I. Mission Statement...............................................................................................................8
II. Watershed Description.......................................................................................................8
III. Watershed Activities.......................................................................................................13
Drainage………………………………………………………………………………..13
History of Lake Vermilion……………………………………………………….……..13
Keep Vermilion County Beautiful………………………………………………………14
Lake Vermilion Clean Up Day........................................................................................15
Lake Vermilion Water Quality Coalition…....................................................................15
North Fork Special Service Area Committee………………………………………….16
Pheasants Forever………………………………………………………………..…….16
TMDL Development........................................................................................................17
Vermilion County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD)…………………….17
IV. Watershed Resource Inventory....................................................................................17
Brownfields…………………………………………………………………………......17
Channel Obstructions/Flooding………………………………………………………..18
Conservation Easements…………………………………………………………….…19
Conservation Practices...................................................................................................20
Drainage Districts...........................................................................................................23
Flow Data………………………………………………………………………………24
Golf Courses……………………………………………………………………………25
Highly Erodible Land…………………………………………………………………...26
Illinois Integrated Water Quality Report and Section 303d List…...…………………..27
Lake Vermilion Shoreline………………………………………………………………28
Land Development……………………………………………………………………...29
Land Use………………………………………………………………………………..30
Landowner Assistance…………………………………………………..……………...30
Nutrient Management…………………………………………………………………..31
Point Sources………………………………………………………………………..….33
Sediment and Nutrient Reduction Structures………………………………………......33
Septic Systems…………………………………………………………………………..34
Solid Waste Landfill…………………………………………………………………....34
3
Streams………………………………………………………………………................35
Transect Survey………………………………………………………………………...36
Vermilion County Conservation District Foundation (VCCDF)……………………....38
Water Quality Data………………………………………………..…………………...38
V. Problem Statements…………….....................................................................................41
IEPA Identified Water Quality Impairments…………………………………………...41
Septic Systems…………………………………………………………………………..43
Stream Bank Erosion…………………………………………………………………...44
Water Quality Monitoring……………………………………………………………...44
Illegal Dumping………………………………………………..……………………….44
Wildlife………………………………………………………….……………………...45
Channel Obstructions / Flooding……………………………………….……………...45
Other Water Pollutants…………………………………………………………………45
VI. Goals / Objectives…………………...............................................................................46
IEPA Identified Water Quality Impairments…………………………………………...46
Septic Systems…………………………………………………………………………..47
Stream Bank Erosion…………………………………………………………………...48
Water Quality Monitoring……………………………………………………………...49
Illegal Dumping………………………………………………………………………...49
Wildlife………………………………………………………………………………....50
Channel Obstructions / Flooding……………………………………………………....50
Other Water Pollutants………………………………………………………………....50
VII. Implementation Strategies /Alternatives....................................................................51
IEPA Identified Water Quality Impairments…………………………………………...51
Septic Systems…………………………………………………………………………..53
Stream Bank Erosion…………………………………………………………………...54
Water Quality Monitoring……………………………………………………………...54
Illegal Dumping………………………………………………………………………...54
Wildlife………………………………………………………………………………....55
Channel Obstructions / Flooding………………………………………………………55
Other Water Pollutants…………………………………………………………………55
VIII. Cost Summary...……………………..........................................................................56
IEPA Identified Water Quality Impairments…………………………………………...56
Septic Systems…………………………………………………………………………..58
Stream Bank Erosion…………………………………………………………………...58
Water Quality Monitoring………….…………………………………………………..59
Illegal Dumping……………………………………..………………………………….59
Wildlife………………………………………………….……………………………...59
Channel Obstructions / Flooding………………………………………………………60
Other Water Pollutants………………………………………………………………...60
4
IX. Selection of Implementation Strategies/Alternatives..................................................62
IEPA Identified Water Quality Impairments…………………………………………...62
Septic Systems…………………………………………………………………………..63
Stream Bank Erosion…………………………………………………………………...63
Water Quality Monitoring………………………………………………………….…..64
Illegal Dumping………………………………………………………………………...64
Wildlife………………………………………………………………………………....64
Channel Obstructions / Flooding………………………………………………………65
Other Water Pollutants…………………………………………………………………65
X. Measuring Progress / Success………….........................................................................65
IEPA Identified Water Quality Impairments…………………………………………...65
Septic Systems…………………………………………………………………………..67
Stream Bank Erosion…………………………………………………………………...67
Water Quality Monitoring………………………………………………………….…..68
Illegal Dumping………………………………………………………………………...68
Wildlife………………………………………………………………………………....68
Channel Obstructions / Flooding………………………………………………………68
Other Water Pollutants…………………………………………………………………68
THE FUTURE………………………………………………………………………………….69
REFERENCES………................................................................................................................70
5
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 - Distribution of Watershed Area.
Table 2 - Summary of water bodies located in the Vermilion County portion of the NFVR
Watershed.
Table 3 - Summary of Current Conservation Practices and the Watershed Acreages Enrolled
Into the Conservation Reserve Program as of 2007.
Table 4 - Drainage Districts in the North Fork Vermilion River Watershed.
Table 5 - Highly Erodible Soils.
Table 6 - Potential causes and sources of pollutants for water bodies in the NFVR Watershed as
listed in IEPA’s 2006 Integrated Water Quality Report.
Table 7 - Summary of land uses in the NFVR Watershed.
Table 8 - Summary of Agencies and Organizations Providing Conservation Assistance to
Residents of the North Fork Vermilion River Watershed.
Table 9 - Nutrient Management Participation Rates in Project in 2001 & 2002.
Table 10 - Comparison of Nitrogen Normally Applied and Amount Applied in Project.
Table 11 - Number of Septic Systems Permitted Since 1971 in the NFVR Watershed.
Table 12 - Summary of 2006 Streambank Erosion.
Table 13 – Tillage Systems in the NFVR watershed.
Table 14 - Atrazine Concentrations (ppb).
Table 15 - E. Coli Monitoring Data.
Table 16 - Nitrate Concentrations in mg/L in the NFVR watershed collected by the Lake
Vermilion Water Quality Coalition from 2004 – 2006.
Table 17 - Partial Cost Summary List.
6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - The North Fork Vermilion River Watershed.
Figure 2 - Lake Vermilion and location of the dam in relation to the lake.
Figure 3 - The North Fork Vermilion River Watershed with the lake and streams identified as
impaired by the IEPA.
Figure 4 - North Fork Vermilion River Profile.
Figure 5 - Lake Vermilion.
Figure 6 - Tires in the North Fork Vermilion River.
Figure 7 - 1st Lake Vermilion Clean Up Day June taken 2002.
Figure 8 - Some of the debris removed from Lake Vermilion.
Figure 9 - Brownfields in Hoopeston, IL.
Figure 10 - An accumulation of woody debris on Jordan Creek.
Figure 11 - Location of permanent conservation easements purchased through HEP.
Figure 12 - Location of acreage enrolled into the EQIP program.
Figure 13 - Location of Active Drainage Districts within and immediately adjacent to the
Vermilion County portion of the North Fork Vermilion River Watershed.
Figure 14 - Location of the only USGS gauging station on the North Fork Vermilion River.
Figure 15 - Location of Golf Courses.
Figure 16 - Highly Erodible Soils within the North Fork Vermilion River Watershed.
Figure 17 - Lake Vermilion Shoreline Survey
Figure 18 - Location of nutrient management plans that were implemented in 2001 & 2002
through an IEPA 319 Nutrient Management Project - Agreement No. 3190010
Figure 19 - Location of Point Sources.
Figure 20 - Location of installed sediment and nutrient reduction structures funded through an
IEPA Section 319 Grant.
Figure 21 - Location of active Hoopeston Landfill.
Figure 22 - Examples of Stream bank erosion on the North Fork Vermilion River.
Figure 23 - Location of Transect Survey points exceeding the tolerable soil (T).
Figure 25 – Location of Transect Survey points with soil erosion.
Figure 25 - Lake Vermilion Water Quality Sampling Locations.
Figure 26 - Location of Nitrate Sampling done by the Lake Vermilion Water Quality Coalition.
Figure 27 - Location of sub-watershed contributing to BPG-09.
7
Watershed Implementation Plan for Lake Vermilion
and the North Fork Vermilion River
Vermilion County, Illinois
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The North Fork Vermilion River and Lake Vermilion in Vermilion County, Illinois, have
several water quality impairments that take away from the full use of this very important water
resource. To address this and other concerns, the Vermilion County Soil and Water
Conservation District (SWCD) took the lead role in establishing a watershed planning
committee of landowners, city, county, and state officials, agency employees, and private
citizens for the purpose of formulating a watershed based planning document that “will strive to
protect and enhance the water quality in the North Fork Vermilion River Watershed”.
Through a process of public discussions, problem areas were identified and prioritized, goals
and objectives were established, implementation strategies and a cost analysis were put in
place, all to guide future actions taken by this and/or other watershed management groups.
The three problems of highest priority that were identified were: 1.) The water quality
impairments which include excess nitrate and phosphorus concentrations in the river and lake;
2.) Wastewater contamination as indicated by fecal coliform in the river segment between
Bismarck and Lake Vermilion; and 3.) Excess sediment loads in the river and Lake. The
overall goal is to remove or decrease these inputs to achieve full intended use of the water
resources.
The most effective methods identified for achieving the goals listed above were: 1.) To
implement a variety of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address the water quality
impairments; 2.) Construct a waste water (sewage) treatment system for Bismarck, and provide
for a means to conduct on-site septic system inspections, maintenance, and renovation if
necessary; and 3.) Address stream bank erosion on the North Fork Vermilion River and its two
main tributaries, the Middle and East Branch.
INTRODUCTION
In 2007, the Association of Illinois Soil and Water Conservation Districts (AISWCD) awarded
the Vermilion County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) a grant to develop a
watershed implementation plan. This plan was developed primarily for Lake Vermilion (RBD)
and those segments of the River (BPG 05, BPG 09, BPG 10, and BPGD) that flow into the lake
and are currently listed as impaired according to the Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency’s 2006 Integrated Water Quality Report (IR). As such this document has been
prepared based on the guidelines provided to the SWCD by the AISWCD. It is also important
to note that this plan is a working document and the recommendations put forth by the
Watershed Planning Committee are just that, recommendations and are subject to revision.
8
PLAN COMPONENTS
I. Mission Statement
The North Fork Vermilion River Watershed Planning Committee will strive to protect and
enhance the water quality in the North Fork Vermilion River Watershed through the sustainable
use of the natural resources in the watershed while maintaining local control.
II. Watershed Description
The North Fork Vermilion River (NFVR) Watershed is located in east-central Illinois and west-central
Indiana (See Figure 1).
Figure 1. The North Fork Vermilion River Watershed.
The NFVR watershed encompasses approximately 295 square miles (188,950 acres) of nearly
flat to gently rolling (generally < 2% slope) topography that has undergone slight modification
by post-glacial streams. The largest portion of the watershed lies within Vermilion County,
Illinois. One third of the watershed extends east into Warren and Benton Counties in Indiana
and a very small portion extends north into Iroquois County, Illinois. The distribution of
watershed area is shown in Table 1 on page 9.
9
Table 1. Distribution of Watershed Area (taken from Tetra Tech, 2006).
County, State Area of Watershed
in County (Square Miles)
Percent of Watershed
in County (Percent)
Vermilion County, Illinois 190 64
Iroquois County, Illinois 10 3
Warren County, Indiana 66 23
Benton County, Indiana 29 10
The North Fork Vermilion River (NFVR) Watershed is located within hydrologic unit
0512010909 and includes all waters upstream of the dam at the south end of Lake Vermilion
(See Figure 2 below). There are approximately 5.4 miles of river downstream of the dam
before the NFVR converges with the Vermilion River. This segment of the NFVR has not
been included in this document because it does not directly impact flows into or the water
quality of Lake Vermilion.
Figure 2. Lake Vermilion and
location of the dam in
relation to the lake.
10
The primary land use in the NFVR Watershed is agriculture. In fact of the 121,000 acres in
Vermilion County 86% or 104,000 acres are considered to be in row crop production (See Land
Use in the Resource Inventory Section).
It is estimated that the population residing in the North Fork Vermilion River Watershed is
approximately 23,896 individuals with 22,369 of those residing in Vermilion County (Tetra
Tech, 2006). Communities located within the watershed include the town of Ambia (pop.197)
in Indiana and Alvin (pop.316), Bismarck (pop.542), Hoopeston (pop.5,965), Rossville
(pop.1,217), and the northern part of Danville (pop.9,154), all in Illinois (U.S. Census Bureau,
2000).
It is important to note that this plan will utilize the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s
(IEPA) numerical identification system for the lake, river, and watershed (See Figure 3 on page
11 and Table 2 below). Due to differences in state agencies between Illinois and Indiana, this
implementation plan will focus primarily on that portion of the watershed which lies in Iroquois
and Vermilion Counties in east-central Illinois.
Table 2. Summary of water bodies located in the Vermilion County
portion of the NFVR watershed.
Stream or Lake Name IEPA Waterbody ID Miles / Acres Impairment
Lake Vermilion RBD 880 acres YES
Hoopeston Branch BPGD 4.72 miles YES
Jordan Creek BPGC-01 7.4 miles NO
Middle Branch BPGE-01 15.13 miles NO
North Fork Vermilion River BPG05 9.82 miles YES
North Fork Vermilion River BPG09 5.91 miles YES
North Fork Vermilion River BPG10 24.1 miles YES
North Fork Vermilion River BPG11 4.52 miles NO
Total Miles of River
Monitored by IEPA 71.6 miles
11
Figure 3. The North Fork Vermilion River Watershed with the lake and streams
identified as impaired by the IEPA (taken from Tetra Tech, 2006).
12
The North Fork Vermilion River (NFVR) is classified as a mature river. A mature river is
considered to be low-gradient and have a channel that is stable and not down cutting. The
channel in a mature river erodes wider rather than deeper causing it to become a meandering
stream. A profile of the NFVR is included in Figure 4 below. The profile shows elevations at
key locations and gives the average channel slope. Some of the highest elevations, nearing 855
feet above sea level, are located in the extreme upper end of the watershed approximately two
to three miles northwest of Boswell, Indiana. There are approximately 6.7 miles of the NFVR
that flows in a west-southwest direction across west-central Indiana. The elevation of the
NFVR as it enters Iroquois County, Illinois is approximately 715 feet above sea level. The
river flows in a west-southwest direction for 2.6 miles before turning to flow in a more
southerly direction crossing over into northern Vermilion County. The remaining 37 miles of
river lie in Vermilion County and empties into Lake Vermilion at the south end of the
watershed at an elevation of 582.2 feet above sea level.
There are two notable tributaries that flow into the North Fork Vermilion River. These include
the Middle Branch and the East Branch (also know as Jordan Creek). The two tributaries
merge approximately 1.5 miles northwest of Alvin, IL just east of the CSX Railroad and flow
in a southwesterly direction for approximately 4.5 miles before entering the NFVR. Another
tributary of interest is Painter Creek, rising east of Bismarck and carrying runoff from the
village and surrounding area into the NFVR from the east about 15 river miles above Lake
Vermilion.
Figure 4. North Fork Vermilion River Profile (taken from Kinney, 2005). elevation
miles
Lake Vermilion
13
III. Watershed Activities
Drainage
In 1889, state legislation was passed to provide for the organization of drainage districts (Hay
and Stall, 1974). These drainage districts were given taxing authority to provide for the
construction and maintenance of drainage ditches and subsurface drain tiles. In many areas,
ditches were dug where no channel previously existed to provide tile outlets and connect with
the natural stream.
The NFVR watershed area is characterized by nearly flat to gently rolling (generally < 2%
slope) topography that has undergone slight modification by post-glacial streams. Many of the
soils require artificial drainage (tile, surface, and open ditch) to attain maximum productivity.
In fact, almost all cultivated land in the watershed has been artificially drained by one means or
another. The flatness of the topography in the upstream portion of the watershed is evident by
the fact that the two largest drainage districts, Drainage District No. 1 – Town of Grant (7,354
acres), and the Hoopeston Drainage District (6,863 acres) are located north and southeast of
Hoopeston, respectively. Table 4 on page 23 includes the listing of all the drainage districts in
the watershed and is located in the Watershed Resource Inventory section of the plan. There
are a total of 14 drainage districts in the watershed which encompass approximately 36,653
acres, or nearly 30 percent of the NFVR watershed area in Vermilion County.
History of Lake Vermilion
Lake Vermilion is located at the very southern end of the drainage area and is the receiving
body for surface and subsurface drainage waters of the watershed via the North Fork Vermilion
River (NFVR). It serves as the municipal water supply for nearly 61,500 individuals living in
the City of Danville (pop. 33,904), the Villages of Tilton, Catlin, Westville and Belgium, as
well as the surrounding unincorporated areas (www.aquaillinois.com). The lake, along with the
water supply facility, is privately owned by Aqua Illinois, Inc.
Lake Vermilion was formed by the construction of a concrete dam on the NFVR in 1925. In
1991 the level of the lake was raised by 4.5 feet to its current elevation of 582.2 feet above sea
level in order to create a greater holding capacity. Currently Lake Vermilion holds 3 billion
gallons of water and has a surface area of approximately 880 acres. The lake has historically
been faced with chronic water quality issues including sedimentation and high nitrate levels
which can be associated with lawn fertilization, agricultural activities, faulty septic systems,
and stream bank erosion.
The lake is lined with large mature trees (See Figure 5 on page 14) and there are many lake-shore
residential properties. The lake shoreline itself has been protected from excessive wave
erosion by the application of large stone (rip rap) at the waterline in recent years (See Resource
Inventory).
Lake Vermilion is not only Danville’s source for drinking water, but also a popular spot for
recreation. Activities on the lake include boating, canoeing, and fishing. Lake Vermilion is
14
recognized as one of the state’s best fishing lakes where many fishing tournaments are held
each year. Annual visitors to the lake are estimated at 150,000 individuals.
Figure 5. Lake Vermilion (courtesy of the Vermilion County Conservation District website).
Keep Vermilion County Beautiful
Keep Vermilion County Beautiful (KVCB) is a certified affiliate of the national Keep America
Beautiful program and was organized in 2001. Their mission is to make Vermilion County a
cleaner, healthier, safer and more beautiful place to live and work. By forging partnerships
with the public and private sectors, Keep Vermilion County Beautiful focuses on litter
prevention, education and beautification. Some of their recent events have included river
cleanups, adopt-a-spot (sections of
roads and streets, parks, etc are
'adopted' and cleaned on a regular
basis), educational activities, and
other projects to beautify the
community. Occasionally old tires
are found in the channel (See Figure
6) and along stream banks near
bridges. Free-of-charge community
tire collections are co-sponsored by
Keep Vermilion County Beautiful
(KVBC) with funds from IEPA. This
type of project is typically funded in a
given county only once every 2-3
years. The last tire collection was
held in August of 2006. Figure 6. Tires in the North Fork
Vermilion River.
15
Lake Vermilion CleanUp Day
The first annual Lake Vermilion Clean Up day was held in June 2002 (Figure 7) and has been
going strong ever since. The IEPA’s Streambank Cleanup and Lakeshore Enhancement
(SCALE) grant has been providing funding for this project since 2004. The clean up day is
typically held on the first Friday in June and there are usually anywhere from 20 to 30
volunteers that come out to help and support the event. This program has been very successful
in that the amount of trash and debris pulled out of the lake has continued to decrease since that
first cleanup (Figure 8).
Figure 7. 1st Lake Vermilion Clean Up Day Figure 8. Some of the debris
taken June 2002 removed from Lake Vermilion
(taken from Vermilion County Conservation District website) (courtesy of Vermilion County SWCD)
Lake Vermilion Water Quality Coalition
The Lake Vermilion Water Quality Coalition (LVWQC) was formed in 1992 in response to
nitrate concentrations in Lake Vermilion that exceeded the EPA standard for safe drinking
water. Current membership is at about 38 individuals and organizations and is open to any
concerned citizen with an interest in water quality and nutrient and sediment management in
the watershed. Member volunteers include farmers, homeowners, and several county agency
staff with responsibilities for water quality and erosion management.
Funding for the LVWQC has come from the state and Aqua Illinois Water Company, Inc., in
addition to private contributions. Activities have focused on crop plot demonstrations for
nitrate management, watershed tours for landowners/public/students to show conservation
practices, and sponsoring workshops and seminars on pond construction and biology, stream
bank stabilization, forest land management, and the role of farm tile in drainage and water
quality. Most recently, efforts have been focused on outreach information via local media, and
classroom presentations to 5th and 7th graders with the Enviroscape model (watershed and
erosion) as well as the Rainfall Simulator for tillage and water quality demonstrations. These
activities will continue as requested and as resources become available.
Members of the LVWQC have also undertaken limited water quality sampling of the NFVR as
well as tile outfalls along the NFVR channel to measure nitrate concentrations at five sites
16
between the state line and Lake Vermilion. Intermittent sampling began in 1996 and has
continued through 2005. This data, available through the Lake Vermilion Water Quality
Coalition, has supplemented other official water quality sampling for a variety of pollutants.
The results have shown substantial losses of nitrate from crop fields through agricultural tile
drains during high flow events. These losses could account for up to several pounds of
nitrogen per acre during a one inch rainfall event. This would correspond to 20-30 mg/L of
nitrate nitrogen at tile outfalls which exceeds the IEPA drinking water standard of 10 mg/L.
See Resource Inventory, page 40, Table 16.
Currently, the LVWQC is serving as the technical advisory committee for the NFVR
Watershed Plan. Once this document is complete, the LVWQC will become instrumental in
the implementation of the plan’s goals and objectives. Other planned activities include a
conservation tour in the fall of 2008 as well as a conservation program workshop.
North Fork Special Service Area Committee
In 1987, a “NFVR Watershed Work Plan” was prepared under agreement with the Illinois
Department of Transportation, Division of Water Resources. The purpose of this work plan
was to “identify the problems, recommend solutions, estimate costs, and evaluate impacts of
drainage and channel improvement of the North Fork Vermilion River in Vermilion County”.
This plan addressed the following identified watershed problems: inadequate land and water
management, erosion, and inadequate drainage (i.e. NFVR channel blockages). Recommended
measures included the removal of log jams and trees, silt bars, and stream bank stabilization.
Funding was also requested to provide fencing for livestock exclusion, tile outlet renovation or
replacement, and a 20 foot wide maintained grass strip planted adjacent to the channel where
cropping extends to the channel edge. These practices were completed and paid for by an
Illinois General Assembly appropriation of approximately $2,332,300.
The current North Fork Special Service Area Committee and associated activities grew out of
the above mentioned plan. After the initial construction phase of the North Fork Project in the
early 1990’s, the North Fork Special Service Area Committee was tasked with the ongoing care
and maintenance of the Vermilion County portions of the NFVR, the Middle Branch (Miller
Creek), and the East Branch (Jordan Creek). This committee is governed by a board of nine (9)
commissioners, one of which is appointed by the Board of Directors of the Vermilion County
SWCD, one is appointed by the Vermilion County Board, and seven (7) of which are appointed
from the NFVR watershed.
Pheasants Forever
The Vermilion County Chapter of Pheasants Forever has been active in the NFVR watershed
for over 20 years, assisting landowners in wildlife habitat development. Assistance includes
providing food plot seed as well as native grasses, forbs (herbaceous flowering plants), and
shrubs at no cost to landowners. Technical assistance is also available. The chapter has also
supported seminars, workshops, the development of Heron Park at Lake Vermilion, hunting
opportunities for youth, environmental ethics and technique training for school teachers, and
17
the purchase of no-till drills. The chapter’s goals include increased wildlife habitat, improved
water quality, and decreased soil erosion.
TMDL Development
In 2003, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) contracted with the
environmental management consulting firm, Tetra Tech EM Inc., to begin development of a
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for the North Fork Vermilion River Watershed. The
TMDL establishes the greatest amount of a pollutant that the NFVR and / or Lake Vermilion
can receive, and still meet water quality standards for their intended uses (i.e. drinking,
irrigation, swimming, fishing, etc.). The TMDL process as a whole sets pollution reduction
goals which are a necessary step in improving the quality of an impaired water segment as
identified by IEPA. Although the process attempts to identify the causes and/or sources of
pollutants within the watershed, the recommendations put forth by Tetra Tech will be both
independent of, and more general in nature than this planning document. At the time this
watershed implementation plan was written, the final TMDL report had not yet been released.
The final TMDL report will soon be available online at
http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/tmdl/report-status.html.
Vermilion County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD)
The Vermilion County SWCD, founded in 1942, has worked with a multitude of different
partners over the years to promote a variety of conservation practices and programs. In fact, a
considerable amount of work has been completed in the NFVR watershed over the years
through a series of IEPA Section 319 Grants dating back to 1997. During Phase I of the project
(1997 – 1999), operators in the NFVR watershed were contacted in order to increase their
awareness and to help them adopt conservation measures. Best management practices (BMPs)
were designed and constructed and included 6,150 feet of terraces and 7.5 acres of waterways
to reduce siltation and nutrient/pesticide transport. Phase II (2000 – 2002) of the project
included a cover crop demonstration and the installation of additional BMPs. The BMPs that
were designed and constructed to reduce siltation and nutrient/pesticide transport included 6.07
acres of grassed waterways, 7 grade stabilization structures, 7,515 feet of terraces, and 1.5 acres
of tree plantings. Phase III (2004 – 2007) of the project included two (2) conservation tours as
well as the installation of additional BMPs. More information on the BMPs installed through
Phase III can be found under the Sediment and Nutrient Reduction Structures section of the
Watershed Resource Inventory.
IV. Watershed Resource Inventory
Brownfields
There are several brownfields that have been identified within the NFVR watershed.
According to the IEPA website, a brownfield is an abandoned, unused, or underused industrial
and/or commercial property, or a portion of a parcel, which has actual or perceived
contamination and an active potential for redevelopment
18
(http://www.epa.state.il.us/lan
d/brownfields/faq.html).
There are two sites in
Hoopeston, IL that are
currently going through the
IEPA’s site remediation
program. One site is located
on the northwest corner of
Routes 1 and 9; the other is
located on the southwest
corner of Routes 1 and 9 in
Hoopeston, IL (See Figure 9).
The Hoopeston Branch passes
immediately adjacent to this
area, so naturally there is a
water quality concern.
Channel Obstructions/Flooding
There are two main types of flooding that may occur within the NFVR watershed. The
planning committee has identified flooding from “urbanized areas” as one type. Urbanized
flooding is normally associated with flash flooding that typically occurs in tributaries
immediately downstream of municipalities that contain a high proportion of impervious areas
such as paved streets and parking areas. In the NFVR watershed, this could affect river
segments below Hoopeston, Rossville, and Bismarck. Water falling on impervious surfaces
can not be absorbed by the ground and as a result it runs off into storm sewers which eventually
overwhelm stream channel capacity.
The second type of flooding is a more “rural” phenomenon associated with heavy rains from
large storm events throughout the watershed. Periodic flooding is a natural occurrence, but
often times there may be factors present that can exacerbate these flooding events. One such
problem - recently cleaned stream channels or channelized drainage ditches--is apparent
upstream in Indiana. The extent of these channelized drainage practices is unknown, but when
surface water is forced into engineered drains without the volume buffering capacity offered by
natural or manmade floodplains, riparian areas, wetlands, or retention areas, the result is
downstream flooding in Vermilion County. Additional problems that compound flooding
issues are beaver dams and woody debris that restrict flow in the main channel of the NFVR as
well as its tributaries. This has a tendency to decrease drainage timeliness and if allowed to
remain may also lead to localized flash flooding.
In addition, accumulation of woody debris at any of the 17 bridges on the main river channel
during high water events can cause structural damage from impact (See Figure 10). The
previously mentioned North Fork Special Service Area Committee considers these problem
situations and remedies flow impedances as needed and as resources arise in cooperation with
Figure 9. Brownfields in Hoopeston, IL.
Hoopeston Branch
Rt.1
Rt.9
19
township and county officials. Of even greater concern, however, is the increase in the rate of
scour erosion around bridge footings and earthen embankments. In one case, the bridge
structure in the channel itself has diverted the river from its “natural” path and led to
undercutting of stream banks, creating loss of land and adding to the sediment load of the
NFVR and the Lake.
Figure 10. An accumulation of woody debris on Jordan Creek.
Conservation Easements
In August 2001, the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) awarded the Vermilion
County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) two grants to acquire permanent
conservation easements. A
conservation easement is a
voluntary, legally binding agreement
that allows the landowner to retain
ownership of the property, but limits
certain types of uses and prevents
development from taking place on
the piece of property. These grants,
also known as the Habitat
Enhancement Project (HEP) allowed
the SWCD to acquire a total of
333.18 acres from nine (9)
landowners. This acreage is located
within the HEP project area
(outlined in red) and located in the
NFVR watershed and the location of
the acreage can be seen in Figure 11.
The principal goals of this project
were to protect existing habitat,
reduce habitat fragmentation,
improve & protect water quality,
maintain/improve the stability of
City of
Alvin, IL
City of
Rossville, IL
Figure 11. Location of permanent conservation
easements purchased through HEP.
20
streams, create core areas for forest & grassland dependent species, create large blocks of
contiguous forest & grasslands, and establish grass or tree cover along both sides of streams.
Conservation Practices
The IEPA considers nutrients and sediment to be the primary nonpoint source pollutants in the
NFVR Watershed. Fortunately, there are conservation practices that when installed and
maintained properly help reduce the amount of those pollutants from entering water bodies.
Some of these practices include filter strips, riparian forest buffers (areas of forested land
adjacent to the river), wetlands, nutrient (fertilizer) management, conservation tillage
techniques, and grassed waterways. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) –
FSA and NRCS as well as the Illinois Department of Agriculture (IDoA) offers programs that
provide cost share to implement such practices. The rules, details, and funding of these
programs change over time, but those that are predominately applied in the North Fork
Vermilion River Watershed are listed below and in Table 3 on page 21. Additional programs
such as IEPA or IDNR funded programs are sometimes available from various sources. The
Vermilion County Soil and Water Conservation District can be contacted for current program
availability.
IDoA Funded Portion of Conservation 2000 (C-2000) Program
The C-2000 program provides cost-share assistance for the construction or adoption of projects
that conserve soil and protect water quality. The program is funded through the IDoA and is
administered by local Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs). The program has 3
principal components; erosion and sediment control practices, the nutrient management plan
practice, and the water well decommissioning practice.
CRP: Conservation Reserve Program
The CRP program is administered by the USDA Farm Service Agency with the Natural
Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) providing the technical assistance for the program.
The goals of the program are to reduce soil erosion and sedimentation in streams and lakes, as
well as improve water quality, establish wildlife habitat, and enhance forest and wetland
resources. It also encourages farmers to convert highly erodible cropland or other
environmentally sensitive acreage to vegetative cover, such as native grasses, wildlife
plantings, trees, filterstrips, or riparian buffers (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/crp/).
21
Table 3. Summary of Current Conservation Practices and the Watershed
Acreages Enrolled Into the Conservation Reserve Program as of 2007.
Program Practice Pollutants addressed
Acres
enrolled in
Iroquois
County, IL
Acres
enrolled in
Vermilion
County, IL
Acres
enrolled in
Benton
County, IN
Total
Acres
Enrolled
CRP
(USDA)
Grass filter strips
along stream
channels
Filters sediment and
pollutants bound to sediment
such as Phosphorus & some
pesticides. Plant roots also
uptake dissolved forms of
Nitrogen & Phosphorus.
50.55 804.17 83.8 854.72
CRP
(USDA)
Riparian Forest
Buffers (trees)
along stream
channels
Filters sediment and
pollutants bound to sediment
such as Phosphorus & some
pesticides. Plant roots also
uptake dissolved forms of
Nitrogen and Phosphorus.
Trees also provide shading
which increases dissolved
oxygen levels in streams.
0 269.81 0 269.81
CRP
(USDA)
Grassed
waterways
Prevents transport of
sediment by healing or
preventing formation of gullies
in cropped fields.
11.23 373.48 29.5 384.71
CRP
(USDA)
Shallow water
areas and
wetland buffers
Traps sediment. Aquatic
plants take up nutrients. 0 34.92 11.4 34.92
CRP
(USDA)
Other grass,
tree, and / or
shrub planting
practices
Such practices include field
borders, windbreaks & wildlife
food plots. While these are
not implemented for the
benefit of water quality, land
used for these practices are
taken out of crop production
thus reducing erosion &
fertilizer losses.
0 0 13.4 13.4
EQIP: Environmental Quality Incentive Program
The EQIP program began in 1997 and is funded by the USDA and administered by the Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). The program is available to farmers and ranchers
who have an interest in protecting the natural resources on their property. The focus of the
EQIP program has been to improve water quality, conserve both ground and surface water,
reduce soil erosion from cropland and forestland, and improve rangeland. The program has
also been used to help improve riparian and aquatic areas, improve air quality, and address
wildlife issues. There are eleven (11) active EQIP contracts within the NFVR watershed
(Figure 12). Some of the practices that are currently being implemented through this program
include grassed waterways, nutrient management planning, and water and sediment control
basins.
22
WHIP: Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program
The WHIP program began in 1998 and is funded by the USDA and administered by the NRCS.
The program is available to all private landowners who have an interest or desire in developing
a plan to improve the wildlife habitat on their property. The NRCS provides technical
assistance to landowners to develop upland, wetland, riparian, and aquatic habitat areas which
are critical to the species that need these areas to thrive. There aren’t any active WHIP
contracts in the NFVR watershed at this time. There hasn’t been as much interest and/or
participation in this program primarily because the incentives are not as good when compared
to other programs such as CRP.
WRP: Wetlands Reserve Program
The WRP program was established in 1990 and is funded by the USDA and administered by
NRCS. The program is available to all private landowners who wish to enhance, protect, or
restore wetlands on their property. Landowners enrolled in this program are able to establish
Figure 12. Location of acreage enrolled
into the EQIP program.
Hoopeston, IL
Rossville, IL
23
long-term conservation and wildlife practices and protection. There aren’t any active WRP
contracts in the NFVR watershed at this time. Similarly to WHIP, there just isn’t the interest
and/or participation in this program primarily because the incentives are not as good when
compared to other programs such as CRP.
Drainage Districts
Most of the cultivated land in the watershed is tile-drained, requiring outlets often maintained
by locally organized and maintained drainage districts. A total of fourteen (14) drainage
districts have been formed over the years to serve the NFVR watershed area. However, it
appears that only half of these are currently listed as active. One of the reasons districts remain
inactive is that the original drainage installations continue to function efficiently, and therefore
no action is required. If drainage fails or additional lines or outlets are needed, districts
previously formed but presently inactive could be reactivated. The active drainage districts are
responsible for maintaining the tile outlets in the open drainage channels that lie within their
boundaries. Table 4 has been included below to show the status and area that is served by these
drainage districts, while Figure 13 on page 24 shows a majority of the active districts in, and
adjacent to, the Vermilion County portion of the watershed.
Table 4. Drainage Districts in the North Fork Vermilion River Watershed
Source: Records of Vermilion County, Illinois and Circuit Clerk of Circuit Court of Vermilion County, IL
District # District Name Status Area (Acres) Date Organized
1 Alvin Active 3,903 1908
2 Antioch (a/k/a Heaton D.D.) Inactive 2,165 1916
4 Beneficial Special Active 2,580 1917
5 Bismarck Inactive 2,040 1959
6 Bridgeman Active 3,577 1916
7 Brougher Active 1,600 1921
13 Drainage District No. 1
Town of Ross Inactive 1,420 N/A
14 Drainage District No. 2
Town of Ross Inactive 2,272 1912
15 Drainage District No. 1
Town of Grant Active 7,354 1924
21 Henning Inactive 894 1912
26 Hoopeston Active 6,863 1910
41 Pleasant Hill Active 1,985 1918
36 Rossville Union Drainage District
No. 1 Towns of Ross & Grant Inactive N/A 1923
52 Union #3 of Grant & Ross Inactive N/A N/A
24
Figure 13. Location of Active Drainage Districts within and immediately adjacent
to the Vermilion County portion of the North Fork Vermilion River Watershed.
Inactive Drainage Districts have not been included on this map.
Source: Vermilion County, Illinois Geographic Information System
Flow Data
There is only one United States Geological Survey (USGS) flow gauging station located in the
NFVR watershed (see Figure 14). USGS station 03338780 is located near Latitude 40°15'55",
Longitude 87°38'34" (NAD of 1927), in the SE ¼ of the NE ¼ in Section 24, T.21 N., R.12 W.,
in Vermilion County, Illinois. It is situated on the left bank on the downstream side of County
Road 2750 N, 1.8 miles west of Bismarck, Illinois. The gage is 594 feet above sea level and
drains 262 square miles at this location.
This station measured flow from June 1970 to September 1974 partially and fully from October
1988 to present. The mean flow is 297.4 cubic feet per second (cfs), and the median flow is 107
cfs. The maximum flow of 14,500 cfs was recorded on April 12, 1994. The minimum flow of
County Boundary
North Fork Vermilion
River Watershed
Alvin Drainage District
Beneficial Special Drainage District
Brougher Drainage District
Drainage District #1 (Grant Twnshp)
Eight Mile Drainage District
Hoopeston Drainage District
Pleasant Hill Drainage District
Ross Township Mutual Drainage
Union Drainage District #1
25
2.5 cfs was recorded in September 1991, which was a very dry month
(http://il.water.usgs.gov/annual_report/data/manuipts/03338780.htm).
Golf Courses
There are two golf courses located within the NFVR watershed close to the river channel or to
the lake itself, both of which could potentially be adding to the nutrient load. The Hubbard
Trail Course (approximately 70 acres) is located just north of Rossville, IL. The Danville
Country Club Course (approximately 175 acres) sits just west of Lake Vermilion (see Figure
15).
Figure 14. Location of the only USGS gauging
station on the North Fork Vermilion River
Route
1
Bismarck,
IL
USGS
Gauging
Station
26
Highly Erodible Land
There are approximately
9,750 acres of highly
erodible land located
within the NFVR
watershed. The vast
majority of these soils are
located adjacent to Lake
Vermilion, the main
channel of the NFVR,
and its two main
tributaries, as well as a
few areas located
throughout the watershed
(see Figure 16 on page
27). Table 5 is included
to identify those soil
types that are considered to be highly erodible.
Table 5. Highly Erodible Soils.
Soil Name Soil Map Symbol Average
Slope
Tolerable
Soil Loss
Blount 23B2 & 2023B 4 % 3
Chatsworth 241C 8% 3
Clarence 147B2 4% 3
Jasper 440C2 8% 5
Martinsville 570C2 & 570F 9% - 26% 5
Morley 194D3, 194F, 194G 14% - 50% 4
Onarga 150C2 7% 4
Ozaukee 194C2 8% 4
Parr 221C3 9% 4
Varna 223C2 7% 5
Figure 15. Location of Golf Courses.
Hubbard
Trail
Danville Country Club
27
Illinois Integrated Water Quality Report and Section 303d List
The current impairments along with their potential causes and sources are summarized in Table
6 on page 28 (IEPA, 2006). It is important to note that the current TMDL Report that is being
developed by Tetra Tech EM Inc. is based on the IEPA 2006 303(d) list. Total Phosphorus for
Lake Vermilion (RBD) was not listed in the 2004 or the 2006 listings. Upon reviewing the
monitoring data it was determined that total phosphorus was mistakenly not listed as a cause of
impairment, therefore a TMDL is still being developed for this important pollutant (not
included in Table 6 below). The current TMDL being developed for Lake Vermilion and the
NFVR should be completed in 2008. The impaired lake and river segments were shown in
Figure 3 on page 11.
Figure 16. Highly Erodible Soils within the
North Fork Vermilion River Watershed
28
Table 6. Potential causes and sources of pollutants for water bodies in the
NFVR Watershed as listed in IEPA’s 2006 Integrated Water Quality
Report. (TMDLs are being developed for pollutants in bold)
Water Body
(IEPA Identifier)
Impaired
Designated Use
Potential
Causes
Potential
Sources
Hoopeston Branch
(BPGD) Aquatic Life Total Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus
Industrial Point Source Discharge
Municipal Point Source Discharges
Lake Vermilion
(RBD)
Aesthetic Quality
Public Water Supplies
Nitrate Nitrogen
Total Suspended
Solids (TSS)
Runoff from Forest/Grassland/Parkland,
Crop Production,
Other Recreational Pollution Sources,
Littoral/shore Area Modifications,
Impacts from Hydro structure Flow
Regulation/modification (the dam)
BPG-05 Public Water Supplies Nitrate Nitrogen Unknown Source
BPG-09 Primary Contact Recreation Fecal Coliform Unknown Source
BPG-10 Aquatic Life Total Nitrogen Crop Production
Municipal Point Source Discharges
Lake Vermilion Shoreline
Lake Vermilion has approximately 14 miles of shoreline, which equates to 73,920 linear feet.
In 2002 a shoreline survey was conducted on Lake Vermilion. The investigation found that
25,429 linear feet of shoreline was considered to have severe erosion (Figure 17 on page 29).
Funding through an IEPA Section 319 Grant as well as an Illinois Clean Lakes Program Grant
was utilized to stabilize all of the severely eroding shoreline. Riprap, geo-textile fabric, and
vegetation were the primary means of stabilizing these banks. There are still areas of shoreline
with slight and moderate erosion that are contributing to the sediment load in Lake Vermilion.
These areas may be targeted for stabilization in the future as they still need to be addressed.
29
Land Development
Residential and commercial development has increased between Danville (pop. 33,904) and
Bismarck (pop. 542) within the last ten years. In particular, the construction and operation of
three “big box” retail outlets, all within one mile of the lake should be noted. The potential
impact on erosion and pollutant inputs to the NFVR has increased from impervious surface
runoff and individual and commercial septic or wastewater treatment system outflows near the
Figure 17.
Lake
Vermilion
Shoreline
Survey
30
lake. In addition, lack of mandated erosion control measures at residential and commercial
construction sites needs to be addressed due to the potential for large amounts of sediment
leaving these sites.
It is unclear as to the amount of development, like that mentioned above, that could take place
in the watershed in the future. This fact could be somewhat linked to the lack of zoning in the
county as a whole. The city of Danville has zoning which extends north from the city 1½ miles
into the NFVR watershed.
Land Use
The principal economic land use activity in the NFVR Watershed is agriculture and the
associated businesses and services. There are approximately 121,000 acres of the NFVR
Watershed that lies in Vermilion County of which 86% are considered to be cropland (Table 7).
In fact, in 2005, Vermilion County ranked ninth in total corn production, and sixth in soybeans
for Illinois (http://www.nass.usda.gov/QuickStats/).
Table 7. Summary of land uses in the NFVR
watershed (taken from Tetra Tech, 2006).
Land Use Area (acres) % of Watershed
Cropland 162,868.9 86.2
Pasture 14,102.5 7.46
Forest 5,981.2 3.17
Urban 2,604.2 1.38
Wetland 1,344.7 0.71
Grass Land 1,307.4 0.69
Water 708.8 0.38
Upland Shrub Land 27.5 0.01
Barren or Mining 3.0 0.002
Transitional 1.6 0.001
TOTAL 188,949.9 100
Landowner Assistance
There are many organizations located in Vermilion County and the surrounding areas that are
available for education as well as financial and technical assistance. Contact information for
these organizations has been included in Table 8 on page 31.
31
Table 8. Summary of Agencies and Organizations Providing Conservation
Assistance to Residents of the North Fork Vermilion River Watershed.
Organization Contact Number Assistance
Illinois Department of Natural Resources (217) 784-4730 A, E, F, T
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (217) 782-3362 E, F, T
Illinois Natural History Survey (217) 333-6880 A, E, T
Illinois State Geological Survey (217) 333-4747 A, E, T
Illinois State Water Survey (217) 333-2210 E, T
Iroquois County SWCD (815) 432-3946 ext. 3 E, F, T
Keep Vermilion County Beautiful (217) 431-2662 E, F, T
Lake Vermilion Water Quality Coalition (217) 442-8511 ext. 3 E
Lincoln Heritage RC&D (217) 253-5466 E, F, T
Pheasants Forever (217) 778-4030 E, F
Prairie Rivers Network (217) 474-9285 E, T
National Wild Turkey Federation (217) 536-6978 E
Vermilion County Conservation District (217) 442-1691 E
Vermilion County Farm Bureau (217) 442-8713 E
Vermilion County Health Department (217) 431-2662 E, T
Vermilion County Recycling (217) 431-2662 E, T
Vermilion County SWCD (217) 442-8511 ext. 3 E, F, T
Vermilion River Ecosystem Partnership (217) 442-8511 ext. 3 F, E
University of Illinois Extension (county offices) (217) 442-8615 E, T
USDA - FSA (Iroquois County Office) (815) 432-3946, ext. 2 F
USDA - FSA (Vermilion County Office) (217) 442-8511, ext. 2 F
USDA - NRCS (Danville Field Office) (217) 442-8511, ext. 3 F, T
USDA - NRCS (Watseka Field Office) (815) 432-3946, ext. 3 F, T
USGS - Illinois Water Science Center (217) 344-0037 E, T
A = Applied Field Assistance E = Educational Opportunities
F = Financial Assistance T = Technical Assistance
Nutrient Management
Nutrient runoff from the approximately 104,000 tilled acres in the watershed has historically
been a problem. In 2001, the IEPA approved a Section 319 Grant (Agreement No. 3190010)
for the AISWCD to help local producers reduce the amount of nitrogen being applied to
cropped fields in the watershed. This grant offered incentive payments to producers to
implement nutrient management plans on their corn acreage in 2001 and 2002. A total of
twelve (12) producers participated in the program. Table 9, on page 32 shows the total acreage
participation rates within the watershed. Table 10, on page 32 shows a comparison of the
32
amount of nitrogen that had
typically been applied prior
to using a nutrient
management plan and the
amount of nitrogen that was
applied by implementing the
nutrient management plan.
Figure 18 shows the location
of where the nutrient
management plans were
implemented over that two
year period. It is also
important to note that this
particular program was only
available to landowners
located in one small sub-watershed
of the NFVR
watershed consisting of
approximately 19,000 acres.
Although this information is
somewhat dated we will
assume that the current rate
of individuals following a
nutrient management plan is
similar to what it was a few
years ago.
Table 9. Nutrient Management Participation Rates in Project in 2001 & 2002
(taken from 319 Nutrient Management Project Agreement No. 3190010 Final Results – Crop Years 2001-2003)
Number of Acres Implementing Nutrient
Management Plans
Percentage of Acres Implementing
Nutrient Management Plans
2001 2002 2001 2002
1,377 2,728 15 % 29.7 %
Table 10. Comparison of Nitrogen Normally Applied and Amount Applied in Project
(taken from 319 Nutrient Management Project Agreement No. 3190010 Final Results – Crop Years 2001-2003)
Nitrogen Normally Applied Nitrogen Applied in Project Load Reduction for Project
2001
lb/acre
2002
lb/acre
Average
for
Project
(lb/acre)
2001
lb/acre
2002
lb/acre
Average
for
Project
(lb/acre)
Average N
Reduction
(lb/acre)
Load
Reduction
for Project
(total lbs)
166.2 146.0 156.1 141.7 134.8 138.3 17.8 64,290
Figure 18. Location of nutrient management plans that
were implemented in 2001 & 2002 through an IEPA 319
Nutrient Management Project - Agreement No. 3190010
Hoopeston, IL
Rossville, IL
Vermilion County, IL
State
Line
33
Point Sources
There are six (6) point sources located within the
NFVR watershed that could potentially be
contributing to the pollutant load (See Figure 19).
They include:
1.) Hoopeston Foods Inc.
2.) Hoopeston Sewage Treatment Plant (STP)
3.) Rossville STP
4.) Alvin Water Treatment Plant (WTP)
5.) Bismarck Community Unit School
6.) Bismarck Community Water District
Wasteload Allocations are the pollutant loads
assigned to point sources; and were given to
relevant point sources for pollutants which had
TMDLs developed (total phosphorus and fecal
coliform).
Sediment and Nutrient Reduction Structures
A total of ten (10) sediment and
nutrient reduction structures were
recently installed throughout the
North Fork Vermilion River
watershed. These structures were
funded through an IEPA Section
319 Grant which began on May
19, 2004 and ended on December
31, 2007. Eight (8) of the
structures were ponds, one (1)
was a water and sediment control
basin (WASCB), and one (1) was
a large terrace system. The
location of the 10 projects can be
seen in Figure 20. Through the
completion of this project the
total sediment load in the North
Fork Vermilion River watershed
was reduced by approximately
1,014 tons per year. In addition
the phosphorus load was reduced
by 451 lbs/year and the nitrogen
load by 900 lbs/year.
Figure 19. Location of Point Sources.
1
2
3
4
5 6
Vermilion
County
Boundary
North Fork
Vermilion
River
Watershed
Project
Locations
Figure 20. Location
of installed sediment
and nutrient
reduction
structures funded
through an IEPA
Section 319 Grant.
34
Septic Systems
Nearly 2,600 individual residential septic system treatment permits have been issued for the
watershed area in Vermilion County since 1971 (See Table 11). Using non-sewered watershed
population numbers and 2.3 people per household, it does appear that a large majority of
present septic systems have been permitted. It is not known how many of these systems are
still operating properly, nor how many additional systems were never permitted and have never
been inspected.
Proper operation and maintenance is necessary for all septic systems to protect water quality.
This applies not only to active systems like aeration and sand filters, but also passive tank
absorption field systems. The closer the home site is to a lake or stream, the more important it
is to be sure the system is operating properly. At this time the number of failing septic systems
in the NFVR watershed is unknown.
Table 11. Number of Septic Systems Permitted Since 1971 in the NFVR Watershed.
Solid Waste Landfill
Illinois Landfill, Inc. operates the Hoopeston Landfill (170 acres) which is currently active and
has been in operation since December of 1991. The landfill is located just southeast of the
town of Hoopeston at 16310 East, County Road 4000 North (see Figure 21 on page 35). It is
the only operational landfill in the watershed and operates under IEPA permit number
98110023. It consists of lined cells and they implement a daily soil cover. All leachate is
collected, contained, and hauled to the Hoopeston Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) for treatment
and release. Life expectancy of this landfill is currently to 2082.
Township Total Number of Permits Discharging Systems (aeration or sand filter)
Blount 735 194
Grant 143 34
Newell 1,439 380
Ross 87 11
South Ross 194 37
TOTAL 2,598 656
35
Streams
There are approximately 71.6 miles of streams in Illinois portion of the NFVR watershed which
includes the NFVR, Middle Branch, Jordan Creek, and the Hoopeston Branch. This total does
not include other notable tributaries such as Painter Creek, other lesser tributaries, drainage
ditches, or intermittent streams. In March of 2004 low level geo-referenced video was taken of
the NFVR. Approximately 30 miles of river were recorded beginning at the upper end of Lake
Vermilion and proceeding upstream to IL Route 9 just east of Hoopeston, Illinois. This video
was then analyzed by Wayne Kinney of Midwest Streams, Inc for the IDoA. Areas with
existing log jams and areas of bank erosion were identified. Figure 22 shows some examples
of bank erosion in the NFVR watershed. A copy of the Aerial Assessment Report for the
NFVR can be accessed online at http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/tmdl/aerial-assessments/
north-fork-vermilion/north-fork-vermilion-aerial.pdf.
Figure 21. Location of active Hoopeston Landfill.
Hoopeston, IL
North Fork
Vermilion River
4000 N RD
Hoopeston Landfill
36
Figure 22. Examples of Stream bank erosion on the North Fork Vermilion River
(Left, eroded bank 20 - 30 feet high; Right, eroded bank 6 feet high).
In 2006 another Streambank Erosion Study was conducted and confirmed Kinney’s findings.
This project was a Vermilion River Ecosystem Partnership grant which was funded in part by
the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) with in-kind services being provided by
the Geographic Information Sciences Lab at Eastern Illinois University. This survey began by
canoe at the bridge just west of Rossville, IL and proceeded downstream to the bridge on West
Newell Road just north of where the NFVR enters Lake Vermilion. The results of the survey
are summarized below in Table 12.
Table 12. Summary of 2006 Streambank Erosion.
Source: Gutowski et. al, Streambank Erosion Study – North Fork Vermilion River, 2006.
Erosion Index Count Length (ft) Percent (%)
No Erosion 9 4,151.52 1.76
Slight 128 119,083.75 50.40
Moderate 100 84,212.81 35.64
Severe 50 28,841.90 12.21
TOTAL 287 236,289.98 100.00
Transect Survey
The Transect Survey is a biennial survey conducted by Soil and Water Conservation Districts
on behalf of the Illinois Department of Agriculture (IDoA). The surveys are designed to
measure the progress the county has made in reducing soil erosion to tolerable soil loss levels
(T). The results of the survey provide data on the presence of conservation practices in the
county, as well as an estimate of conservation work that still needs to be done. Information is
gathered on tillage systems, crop residue amounts, as well as the presence of sheet and rill
and/or ephemeral soil erosion. The last transect survey was conducted in 2006 with the next
survey scheduled to be completed in the spring of 2009 at the earliest. There are a total of 475
37
Table 13. Tillage Systems in the NFVR Watershed.
Tillage System Number of Points Percent (%)
Conventional 73 54.48
Reduced Till 16 11.94
Mulch Till 7 5.22
No Till 38 28.36
TOTAL 134 100.00
transect survey points which lie in Vermilion County. Of the 475 points, 134 of them lie within
the Vermilion County portion of the NFVR watershed.
Tillage Systems
The tillage systems used
in planting corn and
soybeans in 2006 within
the NFVR watershed can
be seen in Table 13.
Mulch-till and no-till are
considered to be
conservation tillage
systems because they both
leave at least 30% residue
on the soil surface after
planting. Only 1/3 of the points surveyed in the watershed were currently utilizing
some type of conservation tillage. Although reduced tillage systems provide some level
of soil conservation, crop residues are not present in the amounts necessary to be
categorized as conservation tillage (IDoA, 2006).
Soil Loss
Soil losses through sheet and rill erosion are estimated by using the Revised Universal
Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). This formula adopted by NRCS calculates the tolerable
soil loss rates (T). Tolerable soil loss levels were exceeded at 19 of the 134 survey
points (See Figure 23).
Transect
Survey
Points
Transect
Survey
Point
Above T
Figure 23.
Location of
Transect
Survey
points
exceeding the
tolerable soil
loss rate (T).
38
Transect
Survey
Point
Transect
Survey
Point
with
Erosion
Figure 24.
Location of
Transect
Survey
points with
soil erosion.
Soil Erosion
Soil erosion was noted at 38
of the 134 survey points (See
Figure 24) which means that
28% of the fields surveyed
had some degree of erosion.
According to transect survey
guidelines a field with soil
erosion is one “in which
ephemeral erosion has
occurred or is likely to occur
in areas of concentrated
surface water flow. This type
of erosion requires structural
conservation practices, such
as grassed waterways, in
addition to tillage or other
cultural erosion control
practices” (IDoA, 2006).
Vermilion County Conservation District Foundation (VCCDF)
The VCCDF owns the 550 acre Jordan Creek Wildlife Preserve east of Rossville, IL. The
preserve contains a dedicated Illinois Nature Preserve along Jordan Creek which contains
several state endangered mussels. The preserve features several habitat types including streams
and their associated riparian areas, wetlands, mature oak forest, savanna, secondary
successional forest, grasslands, a seep, a small pond, and an old orchard. Wildlife is plentiful
and includes deer, fox, coyote, rabbit, raccoon, opossum, squirrel, pheasant, a variety of
songbirds, neo-tropical birds, and one of the county’s three known great blue heron rookeries.
Water Quality Data
The USGS collected monthly water quality samples in the NFVR at their gauging station near
Bismarck, IL (see Figure 14 on page 25) from 1977 to 1998. Water quality constituents that
have been collected in the past include: total phosphorus (TP), dissolved phosphorus (DP),
ammonia nitrogen, dissolved oxygen (DO), total suspended solids (TSS), nitrite and nitrate
nitrogen, and fecal coliform (Tetra Tech, 2006). Data from these samples can be retrieved from
the NWIS database (USGS 2007) and USEPA STORET (USEPA 2007) database. Jordan
Creek and the Middle Branch were monitored during the 2001 IEPA Intensive Basin Survey
and both tributaries were listed as fully supporting aquatic life (Tetra Tech, 2006).
Five sites in Lake Vermilion have been monitored by the Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency (IEPA) for water quality on a regular basis since 1978 (See Figure 25 on page 36).
Water quality parameters that were being monitored from the five sites include TP, ammonia
39
Figure 25. Lake Vermilion Water
Quality Sampling Locations.
nitrogen, nitrate and nitrites, total
nitrogen, DO, and Chlorophyll-a. This
data can be accessed from the USEPA
STORET database as well as the IEPA
for data after 1998.
Herbicides and pesticides are applied for
weed and pest control in row-crop
production within the NFVR watershed.
The herbicide Atrazine has been the only
chemical that Aqua Illinois frequently
detects through their analysis of water
quality samples taken for their voluntary
monitoring program. Concentrations
exceeding the drinking water standard of
0.003 mg/L (3 μg/L or 3 ppb) at the
water treatment plant intake are observed
primarily during periods of high flow
which are typically in May and June.
Maximum observed concentrations of
Atrazine have been obtained from Aqua
Illinois and are included in Table 14.
The data included in Table 14 is just a
partial listing and only includes the dates
of the maximum concentrations
observed each year. As you can
see there are instances in which
the Atrazine concentration
exceeds the safe drinking water
standard of 0.003 mg/L (3ppb).
Table 14. Atrazine Concentrations (ppb)
Source: Aqua Illinois’s Voluntary Monitoring
Program Data on Atrazine
Date Atrazine Concentration
(ppb) of raw water
5/13/96, 6/3/96, 6/17/96 10.56
5/12/97, 6/16/97 5.30
5/4/98 18.00
6/7/99 9.20
6/12/00 9.50
5/29/01 4.40
5/19/03 12.48
6/8/04 8.38
6/13/05 9.11
4/30/07 5.50
40
Aqua Illinois began monitoring for E. coli in April 2007. Table 15 shows the results of that
monitoring.
Table 15. E. Coli Monitoring Data
Date E. Coli Concentrations
(cfu/100mL) Date E. Coli Concentrations
(cfu/100mL)
4/3/07 34.0 9/18/07 5.2
4/18/07 7.5 10/2/07 44.0
5/1/07, 5/15/07 6.3 10/16/07 38.0
6/12/07 5.2 11/14/07 54.0
6/26/07 4.1 11/28/07 28.0
8/7/07 17.5 12/16/07, 12/26/07 5.2
8/22/07 45.7 1/8/08 16.1
9/4/07 7.5
Table 16 shows partial results of periodic sampling in the NFVR watershed for nitrate N
conducted by the Lake Vermilion Water Quality Coalition (samples analyzed by Aqua Illinois).
The results in the table have been listed from upstream (top of table) to downstream sites.
Figure 26 on page 40, has been provided to show the water quality sampling locations. Any
sample that exceeds the water quality standard of 10 mg/L is of concern.
Table 16. Nitrate Concentrations in mg/L in the NFVR watershed collected by
the Lake Vermilion Water Quality Coalition from 2004 – 2006.
Site 7-8-04 11-30-04 1-5-05 4-28-05 5-15-06
#1 Tile outfall upstream of site #2,
south side of the river 15.6 -- -- 14.5 35.4
#2 County Road 1950 East Road
Bridge just north of Cheneyville, IL 6.8 9.92 12.4 7.9 24.5
#3 Small Tributary at intersection of
County Road 3870 North and Rt. 1 3.8 8.5 10.4 11.7 24.3
#4 Tile outfall on Henning Road
south of 3400 North 4.9 14.8 17.6 19.9 19.8
#5 Tile outfall upstream of site #6
west side of the river -- 13.9 16.3 17.6 25.6
#6 Bridge on County Road 3400 N 3.9 10.2 16.7 8.7 23.5
#7 West Newell Road bridge 3.5 9.5 10.0 10.4 23.9
41
There are three things that
can be inferred by the data
in Table 16. First is that in
general, nitrate
concentration in the main
channel decreases with
distance downstream,
compared to Site #2 near
Cheneyville, IL (upstream).
Second, concentrations in
tile outfalls exceed
concentrations in the
receiving water. And
finally, concentrations in
early summer (before
maximum corn growth) can
be very high, exceeding the
10 mg/L drinking water
standard by two or three
times, triggering additional
water treatment procedures
for water taken from the
lake by Aqua Illinois.
V. Problem Statements
Problems within the watershed were identified by the NFVR Planning Committee, research
reports, and other interested individuals, agencies and volunteer groups. The following
problem statements and descriptions are listed below in descending order of importance. The
priority listing was established by the watershed Planning Committee through discussions
focusing on the overall water quality and sustained natural resource use in the watershed.
IEPA-Identified Water Quality Impairments
Nitrate nitrogen has been identified as a major nutrient pollutant in the NFVR, as well as
phosphorus (P) and sediment. Nitrate inputs come primarily from tile flow, whereas P is
associated more with overland flow such as sheet and rill or gully erosion, and wastewater
inputs. The IEPA has identified Lake Vermilion and four segments of the NFVR as having
nutrient, sediment, and/or pathogen impairments, and as such they are included in this section.
Lake Vermilion (RBD)
Lake Vermilion is impaired for aquatic algae (attributed to total phosphorus), nitrate nitrogen,
and total suspended solids (TSS). There are no current water quality standards for TSS and
therefore a TMDL is not currently being developed for this impairment. However, it is
River
Monitoring
Tile Flow
Monitoring
Figure 26.
Location of
Nitrate
Sampling done
by the
Lake Vermilion
Water Quality
Coalition.
42
important to note that it has been estimated that the lake’s storage capacity decreases by
approximately 1% each year (Bogner and Hessler 1999). Such inputs can be attributed
primarily to TSS from the watershed via sheet and rill erosion, highly erodible soils,
streambank erosion (Table 12, page 36), and shoreline erosion from Lake Vermilion.
.
Nitrate Nitrogen
The Illinois water quality standard for nitrate nitrogen is 10 mg/L for all public and food
processing water supplies, including Lake Vermilion. This standard is regularly
exceeded in the Lake, especially during storm events with high flows. Potential sources
of nutrients may include municipal point sources, residential lawns and septic systems
near the lake, and tile flow supporting row crop production. The Danville Country Club
Golf Course is located just west of Lake Vermilion and may also contribute to the
Lake’s nutrient load.
Phosphorus (P)
Excess algae growth, indicated by secchi disk depths of less than two feet, in Lake
Vermilion is especially common in the summer, interfering with recreational uses and
potentially damaging the fishery. The Illinois water quality standard for total
phosphorus is 0.05 mg/L. This standard applies to any reservoir or lake greater than 20
surface acres in size and in streams at the point of entry into these lakes or reservoirs,
including Lake Vermilion and the NFVR immediately above the Lake where this total P
standard is regularly exceeded. Since algae growth is generally limited by P in Illinois
lakes, excess phosphorus typically associated with sediment from high runoff events,
known point sources such as untreated wastewaters, and failing residential septic
systems can cause algal blooms.
River Segment BPG05 (p.11)
This section of the river is located immediately upstream of Lake Vermilion, and extends 9.82
miles north to about 2550 North Road. This reach of the river is impaired for nitrate nitrogen,
originating in tile drainage water inputs to the segment supporting the intensive corn and no-till
soybean rotation. Practices to reduce inputs/transport anywhere along the nitrate movement
route from applicator/homeowner/farmer to water treatment plant will help this water quality
problem. Applications of chemicals, especially fertilizer, to residential and commercial lawns
are not closely controlled, and runoff from recently treated lawns or adjacent impervious
surfaces contributes to water loading and further degrades water quality. The not-to-exceed
numeric standard for nitrate nitrogen in rivers is 10 mg/L.
River Segment BPG09 (p.11)
This segment of the river starts at the confluence with Painter Creek and extends downstream
5.91 miles, directly flowing into BPG05. The impairment in this reach of the river is for
pathogens, more specifically fecal coliform. “The Illinois fecal coliform standards for general
use requires that during the months May through October, based on a minimum of five samples
taken over not more than a 30-day period, fecal coliform shall not exceed a geometric mean of
200 colony forming units (cfu) per 100 mL (cfu/100 mL), nor shall more than 10 percent of the
43
samples during any 30 days period exceed 400 cfu/100 mL in protected waters” (Tetra Tech,
2006). The IEPA does not list any potential sources for this contaminant in their 2006 303(d)
listing. The planning committee’s list of possible sources include sewage treatment plants
(point source), residential septic systems, and other animal waste inputs from farm and
domestic animals, and perhaps certain wildlife. Bismarck (pop. 542) and Alvin (pop. 316)
septic systems and runoff may well contribute to both nitrates and pathogens in this segment of
the NFVR.
River Segment BPG10 (p.11)
This stretch of the river begins at the confluence of the Middle Branch and extends upstream
for 24.1 miles. This reach of the river is impaired for total nitrogen according to the most
recent IEPA 303(d) listing. This listing has been confirmed by the Lake Vermilion Water
Quality Coalition’s analysis of their periodic water quality sampling data (See Resource
Inventory, Table 16, page 40), which in this stretch indicate elevated nitrate concentrations.
Even though no TMDL will be developed for this segment because there are no numeric water
quality standards for total nitrogen in streams, excess nitrate concentrations from agricultural
drainage losses need to be addressed. Additionally Hubbard Trail Golf Course just north of
Rossville, Illinois could potentially be adding to the nutrient load in this segment of the river
through its intensive turf management practices.
Hoopeston Branch BPGD (p.11)
The Hoopeston Branch is impaired for total phosphorus (P) as well as total nitrogen. Neither of
these pollutants currently have water quality standards therefore a total maximum daily load
(TMDL) is not currently being developed on this segment of the river.
The Hoopeston Branch was also originally listed for low Dissolved Oxygen (DO) in the 2006
Illinois Integrated Water Quality Report and Section 303(d) List
(http://www.epa.state.il.us/water/water-quality/report-2006/2006-report.pdf). However, the
TMDL Stage 2 water quality sampling indicated that the DO no longer violated the standard.
As a result of this finding DO was delisted as an impairment and TMDL development on that
particular impairment was halted.
Septic Systems
Untreated wastewater from individual homes, subdivision development, and unsewered
communities may well be causing impairments to water quality and /or hazards to public
health. On-site wastewater treatment permit applications are on the rise, especially in Newell
Township as indicated by the number of septic system permits in Table 11, page 34. Periodic
maintenance and inspections are necessary to ensure that untreated wastewater is not flowing
into the NFVR.
In addition, Hoopeston has a combined storm water / sewage system, risking nutrient and
pathogen contamination during high flows; communities in the watershed such as Bismarck, IL
currently do not have a sewer system and/or sewage treatment plant; and improperly
44
functioning septic systems may be a potential source of nutrients and pathogenic organisms,
especially if a large percentage of the systems in a sub-watershed are malfunctioning.
Another related watershed-wide drainage concern is residential septic treatment drains or
basement drains that outlet directly into the roadway ditches. The physical problems with this
type of discharge are that it is continuous and does not provide time for the ditches to dry. The
continuous wet condition promotes weeds and woody plant growth and is only controlled by
herbicides. The wet ditches also promote insect populations especially mosquitoes that are a
West Nile virus threat. Resident complaints of the odor and insects can be expected.
Stream Bank Erosion
In places along the NFVR channel, stream bank erosion is removing soil and contributing to the
sediment loading in the stream as well as Lake Vermilion. According to the 2006 streambank
survey conducted by Eastern Illinois University (EIU) all but 1.76% of the NFVR’s banks from
Rossville, IL downstream to the river’s inlet into Lake Vermilion have measurable erosion. In
fact, almost 50% (47.85%) of the erosion was considered to be moderate to severe. (See Table
12 on page 36).
In addition, a visual inspection around the Bismarck area has revealed that there are
approximately 100 cattle, 40 horses, and 150 goats. Perhaps half the cattle and smaller
fractions of the horses and goats are still pastured on marginal riparian areas with free access to
the stream channel, subjecting the stream banks to increased erosion and degradation of
riparian vegetation. It is important to note that this visual inventory was completed on a very
small portion of the watershed therefore more information is needed as to the number and
location of these particular sites in the rest of the watershed. Newly channelized or maintained
drainage ditches may also be subject to short term bank erosion and so contribute to
downstream sediment load and/or deposition.
Water Quality Monitoring
Lack of monitoring in the NFVR watershed has often times been identified as a limiting factor
in support of organized efforts to reduce inputs such as nitrates, phosphorus, and sediment.
Besides identifying pollutant amounts and sources, monitoring is helpful in judging the impact
of educational efforts and the implementation of best management practices on changes that
can be seen in water quality data over time.
Illegal Dumping
Trash and garbage dumping occurs throughout the watershed especially along the roadsides and
around bridges. This habitual problem is not only an eye sore, but also adds to right-of-way
cleanup costs and even creates dangerous situations for those handling the cleanup. Certain
types of trash have the potential to leak fluids. Oil and/or organic solutions are especially
detrimental to water quality and aquatic life. County-wide there were about 180 reports of
illegal dumping in 2006. Most of these involved roadside dumping or garbage accumulation
near residences.
45
Wildlife
The land use in the NFVR watershed is predominately row crop production and as a result there
are concerns about the lack of habitat diversity available to wildlife. Periodic total removal of
woody vegetation as a technique for maintaining drainage ways also further reduces wildlife
habitat. Deer populations have increased substantially to nuisance numbers in the last 20 years,
perhaps because of habitat created by conservation easements and other non-farm residences
and developments. More and more private lands are posted, and hunting leases are increasing
in popularity and are used to access land for hunting purposes. This can include land
specifically under contract for conservation practices.
Another concern of the planning committee is exotic and invasive species. Some of the species
identified as potential problems within the NFVR include autumn olive, garlic mustard, multi-flora
rose, purple loosestrife, and zebra mussels. Invasive, non-native plant species in
particular, have a tendency to take over natural areas and kill off existing native vegetation that
normally holds the soil in place. An increase in erosion is ultimately the result.
Channel Obstructions/Flooding
Tributaries immediately downstream of municipalities are particularly prone to flooding due to
the high density of impervious surfaces. In the NFVR watershed, this could affect river
segments below Hoopeston, Rossville, and Bismarck. Water falling on impervious surfaces
can not be absorbed by the ground and as a result it runs off into storm sewers which eventually
overwhelm stream channel capacity.
Channelized drainage practices force water into engineered ditches without the volume
buffering capacity offered by natural or manmade floodplains, riparian wetlands, or retention
areas. Periodic rural flooding and associated bank erosion is the result. The extent of
channelization in the NFVR watershed is unclear; however it is apparent upstream in Indiana as
well as other drainage ditches located within the watershed.
Accumulation of woody debris and scouring at bridge sites during periods of high flow can
cause damage to bridge structures and create excessive bank erosion.
Other Water Pollutants
Concentrations of the herbicide Atrazine in the NFVR just below Lake Vermilion at the water
treatment plant intake for Danville annually exceed the safe drinking water standard of 0.003
mg/L (3ppb). As a result it becomes necessary to add steps in the overall treatment process to
remove the Atrazine and Aqua Illinois’ treatment costs increase accordingly.
Spraying roadside ditches for weed and brush control is a practice that is sometimes utilized in
the NFVR watershed to help maintain drainage. Through careless use of equipment or
inattention, chemicals sprayed directly onto water surfaces along the road and onto streams
crossed by the road (in violation of label restrictions), potentially resulting in damage to
downstream wildlife and farm animals. Lack of training and/or education of the applicators
46
may be a factor in this type of water pollution.
Residential lawns, streets, and driveways close to Lake Vermilion and its sub-watershed,
contribute runoff directly to the lake. Fertilizer and/or pesticides heavily or carelessly applied
to these surfaces have a direct route into the lake’s waters, and therefore a high potential to
contribute to the pollutant load.
Watershed activities may affect shallow groundwater aquifers, and therefore shallow, uncased
wells. Pollutants could include nitrate, pesticides, and organics such as solvents and fuels.
Risks to groundwater from most of these potential pollutants arise from leakage, runoff, or
spillage into unprotected wellheads. Deeper aquifers such as the Mahomet across the northern
part of the watershed should not be affected.
VI. Goals and Objectives
In the previous section, problems were listed and described in order of priority as determined
by the Planning Committee. The following listing for Goals and Objectives follows the same
prioritization. Priorities were established based on the Committee’s sense about a listed
problem’s overall importance to the health and sustained use of the watershed resources, not on
the likelihood of correcting the problem with current resources and knowledge.
IEPA Identified Water Quality Impairments
Lake Vermilion (RBD)
There are three goals that the planning committee has identified for the lake. They are as
follows:
1.) Reduce nitrate levels below the drinking water standard of 10 mg/L.
2.) Decrease algae blooms
3.) Reduce in-lake sedimentation
Reduce nitrate levels below the drinking water standard of 10 mg/L in Lake
Vermilion. The existing TN load is 14,627 lb/day in the lake. The TMDL calls for a
33% reduction in the total annual load to reach 10 mg/L (Tetra Tech 2006). The
planning committee has also set the 33% reduction in total nitrogen as their goal. The
source is tile drainage, which in turn can be attributed to fertilizer N applications to corn
production fields, and lack of cover crops during the winter months to retain unused
nitrate. In addition, runoff from fertilized residential and commercial lawns may carry
away soluble nitrate fertilizer. Practices to reduce inputs/transport anywhere along the
nitrate movement route from applicator/homeowner/farmer to water treatment plant will
help this water quality problem.
Decrease algae blooms in Lake Vermilion by reducing P inputs in both dissolved and
particulate (sediment) form from the watershed, so that in-lake TP concentrations
remain below 0.05 mg/L, and secchi disk depths remain at or greater than two feet
47
(current mean depths at mid-lake at 1.5 to 2 feet). (Existing TP load 582 lb/day, TMDL
calls for 77% reduction (Tetra Tech 2006)). Excess phosphorus typically associated
with sediment from high runoff events, known point sources, and failing residential
septic systems close to the lake can cause algal blooms.
Reduce in-lake sedimentation to 0.5 % lake volume per year. Field and stream bank
erosion in the watershed are likely the major sources for sediment carried into Lake
Vermilion by the NFVR. It has been estimated that a 50% reduction in the sediment
load is equivalent to a 50,000,000 lb. total reduction which is equivalent to about 0.21
tons/ac/yr (based on 121,000 acre total Vermilion County watershed). Shoreline
erosion on Lake Vermilion is another likely source of sediment. Aqua Illinois has
recently addressed the areas with the most severe shoreline erosion (See text on page 28
as well as Figure 17 on page 29). Therefore, although the lake shoreline is still
considered to be a source, it is most likely not the major contributor to the overall
sediment load in the lake.
River Segments BPG05 and BPG10
The goal is to reduce nitrate concentrations below 10 mg/L in these NFVR segments. The
existing total N load is 14,627 lb/day into the lake. The TMDL calls for a 33% reduction in
total annual load to achieve the concentration standard. Again, one source of the nitrogen is tile
drainage, which can be attributed to fertilizer applications to corn fields as well as lack of cover
crops during the winter months to retain unused nitrate. Lawn and turf management practices
may also contribute to the nitrate load in the NFVR. Practices to reduce nitrogen inputs and /or
transportation of them anywhere along the nitrate movement route from field to stream will
help this water quality problem.
River Segment BPG09
The goal is to reduce fecal coliform bacteria counts to levels that are considered acceptable
by the IEPA as well as safe for human contact in NFVR. The goals outlined to reduce fecal
coliform bacteria in River Segment BPG-09 are also the goals listed in the Septic Systems
section (See below). (Existing coliform load ranges widely from 134 to 11,300 E+9 cfu/day
depending on flow, TMDL calls for about 55% reduction at all flows).
Hoopeston Branch (BPGD)
There are several goals that the planning committee has identified for this river segment. They
include the following:
1.) Reduce total phosphorus concentrations by 25% within 5 years.
2.) Reduce total nitrogen concentrations by 25% within 5 years.
3.) Promote best management practices in the sub-watershed area contributing to this
river tributary segment.
Septic Systems
Work with the Vermilion County Health Department and take a more proactive approach to
48
addressing private landowner’s sewage disposal system problems in Vermilion County.
Watershed goals include:
1.) Inform and educate all homeowners in the watershed that use an on-site sewage
disposal system about the value and cost-effectiveness of regular maintenance.
2.) Replace individual on-site septic systems with a community sewage collection and
treatment system for the town of Bismarck, IL (population 542) by 2010.
3.) Maximize the number of properly functioning on–site septic systems, especially in
the sub-watershed contributing to river segment BPG-09 (See Figure 27 below).
This number has been estimated to be approximately 1,175 systems.
4.) Seek funding for a Vermilion County Health Department “septic system inspector”.
Stream Bank Erosion
Sites of stream bank erosion were identified on the NFVR through an aerial assessment
completed by Wayne Kinney of Midwest Streams, Inc. in 2004. A total of 188 sites of stream
bank erosion were identified along the stretch of the NFVR from the upper end of Lake
Vermilion to IL Route 9 just east of Hoopeston, IL. This data has been confirmed by a survey
conducted by Eastern Illinois University in 2006. Goals will be to:
1.) Prioritize stream bank erosion sites on the main stem for immediate remediation.
2.) Conduct an annual survey on the entire NFVR as well as the two main tributaries
(Jordan Creek and Miller Creek) to assess stream bank erosion and channel
obstructions, and success of implemented practices.
3.) Work with the Lake Vermilion Water Quality Coalition and the North Fork Special
Services Area to address stream bank erosion.
4.) Seek grant funding to address prioritized stream bank erosion sites.
5.) Stabilize at least one site per year.
Figure 27. Location of sub-watershed contributing to BPG-09.
Bismarck, IL
49
In addition to the goals listed above, the committee would like to:
1.) Identify stream bank erosion sites on the two main tributaries (Jordan Creek and
Miller Creek) as well as other drainage ditches throughout the watershed.
2.) Conduct aerial surveys of the two main tributaries as well as other drainage
ditches throughout the watershed.
Where stream bank erosion has been confirmed, the committee would like to:
1.) Certify that livestock are fenced out of the stream channel and kept away from areas
with known stream bank erosion.
2.) Increase the number of livestock producers applying for the Environmental Quality
Incentives Program (EQIP) for stream protection and fencing by 1 producer per
year.
Water Quality Monitoring
The NFVR watershed planning committee recommends more water quality monitoring be
conducted throughout the watershed. The planning committee has outlined several goals in
regard to water quality monitoring.
1.) Develop and implement a monitoring strategy to identify exactly how, when, and
where to conduct water quality monitoring.
2.) Conduct water quality monitoring upstream and downstream of suspected pollutant
inputs.
3.) Promote and actively participate in the Illinois Stream Team.
4.) Secure additional funding for a part-time position to monitor the water quality
within the NFVR watershed.
5.) Implement regular monitoring on two stations for fecal coliform on river segment
BPG-09. Ideal locations for monitoring would include one station above Painter
Creek and one station at the Bismarck bridge.
6.) Conduct an annual canoe survey to visually note and identify any obvious pollutant
inputs.
Illegal Dumping
The goals that the planning committee has identified are to:
1.) Increase the number of individuals by two per year that participate in the Lake
Cleanup Day.
2.) Decrease the amount of trash being taken to the landfill on Cleanup Day by
partnering with the Vermilion County Recycling Program to promote recycling as
well as educating the public about illegal dumping to decrease waste quantities
entering the Lake.
3.) Estimate the amount of garbage requiring removal as well as removal costs by site,
within the townships in the NFVR watershed.
4.) Facilitate a NFVR Cleanup (in addition to the Lake Cleanup event).
5.) Identify funding to conduct a mailing in the NFVR watershed to educate
homeowners about the hazards of illegal dumping and to provide local contact
information to report for dumping complaints.
6.) In addition the committee feels it is important to support clean-up efforts of Keep
50
Vermilion County Beautiful (KVCB) by maintaining membership on the KVCB
Board and recruiting volunteers when requested for KVCB cleanup and recycling
projects.
Wildlife
The planning committee has identified the following objectives in regard to wildlife:
1.) Increase native grass and wooded riparian habitat by 10% of current acreage by the
year 2020.
2.) Increase the diversity of habitat available.
3.) Minimize exotic and invasive species such as autumn olive, bush honeysuckle,
garlic mustard, multi-flora rose, purple loosestrife, Asian carp, and zebra mussels.
This should apply especially to public lands, with a focus on local parks and
township rights-of-way.
The wildlife habitat that is provided by woody cover and permanent grassland is limited in
extent. It primarily occurs adjacent to streams, CRP acreages, along railroad rights-of-way, and
a few scattered woodland tracts located in the downstream portion of the watershed.
Channel Obstructions/Flooding
The North Fork Special Services Area (NFSSA) activities have provided key NFVR channel
maintenance on a continuing basis since their inception in 1987. Drainage district
commissioners and members can also play a key role. Goals include:
1.) Continue working with the NFSSA on an annual basis to maintain free flow of the
NFVR as well as its two main tributaries – the East Branch (Jordan Creek) and the
Middle Branch (Miller Creek).
2.) Contact 20% of the drainage district commissioners within the NFVR watershed per
year to provide them information to encourage water-quality related maintenance
and construction practices such as man-made flood plains, wetland buffers, and
retention areas.
3.) Promote 50 % increase in landowner enrollments of flood prone areas into CRP,
especially filter strips, riparian forest buffers, etc. in the next 5 years.
Other Water Pollutants
Excessive herbicide and pesticide use are of concern in the watershed. The data from Aqua
Illinois shows that Atrazine in particular continues to be a problem in the NFVR Watershed. In
addition, there are concerns that herbicides, pesticides, fertilizer, and other contaminants may
end up in groundwater supplies. The goal in regard to these other water pollutants will be to:
1.) Reduce the number of days the Water Treatment Plant needs to utilize activated
charcoal in order to treat and remove Atrazine from the community drinking water
supply.
2.) Reduce the number of incidents of off-target applications of herbicides and
pesticides particularly when spraying ditches and around bridgeheads.
3.) Hold two educational and/or implementation events for all watershed landowners
for reducing groundwater contamination through leaky wellheads or casings, via
51
abandoned well filling and sealing, and wellhead protection.
VII. Implementation Strategies/Alternatives
IEPA Identified Water Quality Impairments
Lake Vermilion (RBD)
Reduce nitrates - According to the TMDL Report, Tetra Tech’s estimate indicates a
33% reduction in nitrates is needed in order to meet water quality standards in the Lake.
Based on Tetra Tech’s loading information a 33% reduction equates to the removal of
approximately 1,445,400 lbs. of nitrogen per year. This reduction amount would equate
to a 10 lb. per acre reduction on the cropland acreage and is based on the entire NFVR
watershed which would include Indiana and Iroquois County. If the 33% reduction is
only made on the 104,000 cropland acres of Vermilion County, the reduction amount
would be equivalent to approximately a 14 pound reduction in nitrate nitrogen per acre
per year. Nitrate reductions will be accomplished on a watershed basis through
education, technical assistance, and incentives for homeowners and producers not only
in the Lake sub-watershed, but also in the river segments identified below that have
elevated nitrate concentrations (See River Segments BPG05 and BPG10 for more
details).
Reduce algae blooms - Algae blooms can be attributed to excess phosphorus. Tetra
Tech’s TMDL Report calls for a 77% reduction of phosphorus in the lake. Steps can be
taken to help reduce the amount of phosphorus entering the lake and would include:
1.) Promoting reduced tillage on a total of 20,000 acres by 2015.
2.) Educate, inspect, and correct faulty and/or failing residential septic systems
(See Septic Systems below).
3.) Address streambank erosion (See Streambank Erosion below).
4.) Promoting and using best management practices such as filter strips and
riparian buffers which are proven to reduce phosphorus loads. Establish 300
new acres by 2015.
5.) Investigate the use of algaecides such as copper sulfate to treat the symptoms
of excess phosphorus. Although this is not treating the source, or the root of
the problem it may be a practical alternative at times.
6.) Investigate the use of barley straw. Barley straw floated in small bodies of
water at a rate of 80 lbs/acre has proven to act as a long term algistat, if
specific guidelines for application are followed. Effectiveness in a lake as
large as Lake Vermilion is not known. Again, this methodology is not
treating the source of the problem, but could be an alternative method to
improve the aesthetic quality of the lake.
Reduce sedimentation to 0.5 % lake volume per year (a 50% sediment load
reduction).
Reduce tillage on 20,000 acres by the year 2015 throughout the NRVR watershed, and
52
reduce streambank erosion at prioritized sites on the NFVR and its main tributaries
selected for remedial action. Reduce sediment mobilizing bank failures that result from
destabilizing maintenance practices on upland streams and ditches in the watershed by
promoting bank stabilizing maintenance strategies, including the restriction of livestock
access to streams. It has been estimated that a 50% reduction in the sediment load is
equivalent to a 50,000,000 lbs. total reduction, or approximately 0.21 tons/ac/yr (based
on 121,000 acres total Vermilion County watershed).
Increase water retention areas at and around Heron Park on West Newel Road, to allow
more nutrient and sediment removal by “natural” means upstream of the Lake. Survey
this and other potential retention sites in the watershed for feasibility, cost, etc.
River Segments BPG05 and BPG10
Reduce Nitrate concentrations
According to the TMDL Report, Tetra Tech’s estimate indicates a 33% reduction (1,445,400
lbs. reduction per year) in nitrates is needed in order to meet water quality standards in the Lake
and BPG-05. This reduction amount would equate to a 10 lb. per acre reduction on the
cropland acreage and is based on the entire NFVR watershed which would include Indiana and
Iroquois County. If the 33% reduction is only made on the 104,000 cropland acres of
Vermilion County, the reduction amount would be equivalent to approximately a 14 pound
reduction in nitrate nitrogen per acre per year. This reduction can be met by implementing best
management practices which could include the following for the entire VC watershed:
1.) The implementation of nutrient management plans on 50,000 acres by 2015 which
would include reducing the amount of N applied as well as the timing of
applications so that they are closer to the primary corn uptake period.
2.) Identify and secure funding over the next 5 years to provide a cost share program to
implement 2 water control structures and 5 Bio-reactors which are edge-of-field tile
water treatments that utilize wood chips to sequester nitrogen.
3.) The promotion of best management practices that help to keep N from moving off
site including but not limited to filter strips and wetlands.
4.) The promotion of winter cover crops on 100 acres by 2010 which would include
annual field days that would highlight their effectiveness in capturing unused end-of-
season nitrate in the soil profile.
River Segment BPG09
Reduce fecal coliform counts to acceptable levels.
According to the TMDL Report, pathogen contamination occurs almost entirely during the
summer months of May through October, so corrective practices should be in place during this
time. The planning committee’s list of possible sources include sewage treatment plants (IEPA
permitted point sources), residential septic systems, animal waste inputs from farm and
domestic animals, and perhaps certain wildlife. Fecal coliform counts can be reduced by
implementing best management practices which could include the following:
1.) Limiting the amount of time farm animals have free access to rivers, ditches, and
other surface waters (see Stream Bank Erosion below).
53
The Bismarck Community Water District as well as the Bismarck Community Unit School are
both permitted water releases and would not be expected to be a pathogen source. However,
septic systems and runoff in and around the Bismarck area may be contributing nitrates and
pathogens to this segment of the NFVR. These impacts can be minimized by:
1.) Implementing practices that retain polluted runoff such as water and sediment
control basins or the creation of wetlands near the Bismarck/Painter Creek sub-watershed
that remove sediment and chemicals from storm water runoff.
2.) Upgrading wastewater treatment in or around Bismarck (pop. 542) via a residential
sewage collection and treatment system has been highly recommended (see Septic
Systems below).
Hoopeston Branch (BPGD)
The goals will be met by
1.) Working with the City of Hoopeston (pop. 5,965) to manage urban runoff amounts
and quality.
2.) Implement one practice per year such as a water and sediment control basin which
will not only retain runoff from the impervious surfaces within the city of
Hoopeston, but it should also improve the water quality before it enters the
Hoopeston Branch.
3.) Implement one best management practice per year along the Hoopeston Branch.
This may consist of 300 feet of filter strips and/or one-half acres of riparian forest
buffers installed per year.
Septic Systems
Work with the Vermilion County Health Department (VCHD) and take a more proactive
approach to address private landowner’s sewage disposal systems in Vermilion County. This
would include
1.) Put together a mailing list for the approximately 1,175 homeowners within the sub-watershed
contributing to river segment BPG-09. The mailing list will be used for
future mailings.
2.) Utilize a brochure to do a mailing to homeowners regarding the importance of on-site
septic system maintenance. This would include either the purchase of ready
made brochures or the creation of one which pertains to Vermilion County.
3.) Work with the VCHD to create a county wide septic maintenance and/or inspection
program. A separate committee will need to be formed to investigate the concepts
and costs of such a position.
4.) Work with the Vermilion County Health Department to identify and secure funding
for a “septic system inspector” position. A committee may need to be formed to
investigate potential sources of funding.
5.) Work with and provide assistance to the village of Bismarck (pop. 542) to facilitate
the process of replacing approximately 200 individual on-site septic systems with a
community sewage collection and treatment system serving the Bismarck
population. Ideally nearby rural residents could also hook into the proposed system.
54
Stream Bank Erosion
Stream bank stabilization is site specific and will be dependent on the width to depth ratio at
each location. The recommendations put forth by Wayne Kinney (2005) only address lateral
bank migration to protect eroding banks and include the following:
1.) Use Stone Toe Protection at sites with narrow width to depth ratios.
2.) Use Stream Barbs and/or Bendway Weirs in areas with larger width to depth ratios.
A more comprehensive study and/or survey will need to be conducted in order to ascertain the
number of livestock that are in the watershed and whether or not these animals currently have
access to surface waters. This can be accomplished by:
1.) Recruiting a volunteer or intern to complete a livestock survey OR,
2.) Hire a part-time employee or consultant to conduct the livestock survey.
3.) Seek funding to assist with associated costs of the survey.
4.) Once livestock numbers are established, work to encourage producers to implement
best management practices that separate livestock from streams, ditches, and other
surface waters.
Water Quality Monitoring
The NFVR watershed planning committee would like to see more water quality monitoring
throughout the watershed. This can be achieved by:
1.) Identifying actual sampling locations for water quality monitoring and obtain
permission from landowners. This would also include identifying locations on
river segment BPG-09, which is impaired for fecal coliform.
2.) Contacting Prairie Rivers Network in order to obtain information on the Illinois
Stream Team and receive proper training to do some simple water quality
monitoring via trained volunteers.
3.) Identify and secure additional funding for a part-time position to monitor
surface water quality within the NFVR watershed. A potential source would be
through an IEPA Section 319 Grant. The application for funding would need to
include a Quality Assurance Program Plan.
Illegal Dumping
The Vermilion County SWCD will continue to apply for the IEPA’s Streambank Cleanup and
Lakeshore Enhancement (SCALE) grant which provides funding for items such as cleanup
supplies, disposal fees, etc. for clean ups conducted on streams or lakes. The planning
committee also recommends:
1.) Continued and increased promotion of the Lake Vermilion Cleanup Day.
2.) Identify potential partners as well as funding to conduct a NFVR Cleanup
3.) Create a committee to research the concept of an Environmental Court as well as
the feasibility of implementing it in Vermilion County. This process includes
working closely with appropriate county deputies and VCHD regulators, and a
county court judge dedicated to specifically issuing environmental judgments.
4.) Promote the development of township budgets for site specific cleanup dates at
bridgeheads and other known dumping areas.
55
Wildlife
The goal is to increase bird and aquatic habitat, increase plant diversity and minimize exotic
and invasive species. This will be done by:
1.) Promoting landowner incentive programs that are currently available to assist in the
establishment of wildlife habitat. These programs would provide cost share to
landowners to implement practices such as riparian forest buffers and filter strips.
2.) Identify and secure funding to provide for an individual to conduct one-on-one
contacts and provide landowners with much needed information on wildlife friendly
practices, programs, funding, and technical assistance.
3.) Study the feasibility of installing in-stream practices such as pool and riffles and
rock riffles to provide much needed habitat for aquatic species.
4.) Working with agencies such as the Illinois Department of Natural Resources
(IDNR) and Pheasants Forever that have similar wildlife goals and objectives.
5.) Contact drainage district commissioners within the NFVR watershed and provide
them information to encourage maintenance and construction practices (man-made
flood plains, wetland buffers, retention areas) that establish and expand wildlife
habitat.
6.) Continue to work with Pheasants Forever to provide free food plot seed. Seed
varieties currently consist of corn, sunflower, and sorghum.
7.) Promote the NRCS Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program (WHIP). It is important to
note that at the time this document was written this program was not currently being
funded.
Channel Obstructions/Flooding
The Vermilion County SWCD will work with the NFSSA to achieve the goals as listed earlier.
These goals can be achieved by
1.) Creating an educational and/or informational brochure outlining best management
practices with regard to drainage (man-made flood plains, wetland buffers, and
retention areas), OR holding a workshop highlighting the same types of
information.
2.) Identifying and securing funding to provide for an individual to conduct one-on-one
riparian landowner contacts. This person would provide landowners with much
needed technical assistance as well as encourage landowners to enroll flood prone
areas into CRP. CRP practices could include wetland restoration, filter strips, and
riparian forest buffers.
Other Water Pollutants
Atrazine was among the other water pollutants identified as a problem within the NFVR
watershed. The following items can be implemented in order to reduce the need of treatment
and/or removal of Atrazine at the Water Treatment Plant.
1.) Identify and secure funding to implement an in-stream and tile water monitoring
program for Atrazine to establish general watershed areas contributing to Atrazine
concentration spikes in the lake.
56
2.) Utilize a brochure to remind agricultural producers about Atrazine application set
back zones. This would include either the purchase of ready made brochures or the
creation of one which pertains to Vermilion County. The brochure would include
the IDoA’s information for reporting pesticide use complaints.
3.) Work with the three watershed fertilizer/chemical dealers to distribute the brochures
mentioned above.
4.) Hold informational workshops regarding pesticide and herbicide use.
5.) Conduct a survey of producers within the watershed to ascertain what the actual use
of Atrazine is.
VIII. Cost Summary
It is important to note that figures appearing in this section are for planning purposes only, are
subject to revision, and are representative of costs available at the time the document was
written. A partial cost summary has been included in Table 17 at the end of this section.
IEPA Identified Water Quality Impairments
Lake Vermilion (RBD)
Nitrate Nitrogen
The reduction of nitrates in Lake Vermilion will be a direct result of reducing nitrate
fertilizer applications and reducing nitrate losses for the entire NFVR watershed (see
River Segments BPG05 and BPG10 below).
Phosphorus (P)
Costs to reduce phosphorus in the lake include the following:
1.) Conservation tillage programs – see #1 in Total Suspended Solids below.
2.) A residential septic system education program would have minimal costs.
The costs of workshops and/or mailings would be estimated to be $5,000 for
approximately 2,500 households @ $2 per household per year. The
LVWQC would most likely take the lead in providing educational
workshops and mailings with assistance from the Vermilion County
Department of Health.
3.) Residential septic maintenance and inspection program is covered in #3 of
Septic Systems below. Average cost to owner is estimated to be about
$2,000 per renovation.
4.) Stream bank stabilization – see #2 in Total Suspended Solids below.
5.) Algae treatment with an algaecide like copper sulfate would be
approximately $44,000 - $52,800. This figure is based on an 880 acre lake
with treatment costs of $50 - $60 per acre. It is assumed that the cost of
treatment would be provided by Aqua Illinois.
6.) The cost of using barley straw in Lake Vermilion to combat algae problems
is estimated to be about $20 per acre (880 acres) per year or approximately
$17,600 per year.
57
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Costs to reduce in-lake sedimentation to 0.5 % lake volume per year would include:
1.) Reduced tillage cost share programs available through the SWCD and
NRCS. Costs of promotion and participation in these programs would be
about $500,000 for 20,000 acres by 2015 @ $20 - $25 per acre (assuming no
limit on acreage enrolled). The LVWQC would also actively participate.
2.) Stream bank stabilization costs are estimated to be about $43,000 per year.
This would cover the costs of two sites, each approximately 400 feet long @
$53.86 per linear foot on average. This practice would continue indefinitely
until all stream bank erosion has been addressed and would be completed by
the Vermilion County SWCD, the NFSSA, and others.
3.) The cost of installing a retention area at Heron Park (a wetland area
immediately upstream of Lake Vermilion) is currently unknown. A
feasibility study would need to be completed, with initial estimates upward
of $25,000
River Segments BPG05 and BPG10
Costs to reduce nitrate nitrogen in these two segments of the river would include:
1.) Nutrient Management Planning is typically done under cost share programs through
the Vermilion County SWCD or the NRCS. These costs would include $10/acre for
plan implementation and $3/acre for plan preparation. The costs of enrolling 50,000
acres into a nutrient management program by the year 2015 would be approximately
$650,000.
2.) The installation of 5 edge-of-field tile water treatment wood chip bio-reactors over a
5 year period would cost approximately $1,000 each for a project total of $5,000.
The Lake Vermilion Water Quality Coalition would promote this program.
3.) The installation of water control structures is estimated to cost around $1,500 each.
There is a potential for drainage districts to have a technical and financial role in the
installation of 2 structures in the next five years, for a total of $3,000.
4.) The installation of BMPs for surface water like filter-strips, wetlands, retention
areas, etc. are usually installed through cost-share programs through the NRCS and
SWCD. Costs are dependant upon the practice that is installed but could be
estimated at $9,000 per year for 300 acres @ $30 per acre per year.
5.) The utilization of 100 acres of cover crops after corn is estimated to be $2,000 per
year @ $20 per acre per year.
River Segment BPG09
Costs to reduce fecal coliform in this segment of river would include:
1.) Correct malfunctioning septic systems – see #2 and #3 above in the Phosphorus (P)
section of Lake Vermilion (RBD).
2.) Establishing the number of livestock having direct access to the channel or tributary
channels (see #1 and #2 in Stream Bank Erosion section below for costs) and
conduct a directed information session or mailing @ $50 each. Partners to complete
this task would include the LVWQC and SWCD.
58
3.) The installation of a wastewater collection and treatment system at Bismarck, IL is
estimated to be upwards of $3 million.
Hoopeston Branch (BPGD)
The costs of removing total N and total P impairments in the Hoopeston Branch (BPGD) would
include the following:
1.) The installation of at least one small retention basin, 1 acre in size, to improve water
quality from impervious surfaces that drain into the Hoopeston Branch is estimated
to be approximately $10,000.
2.) Stream-side plantings such as filter strips or riparian areas to filter direct runoff, 5
acres @ $200 - $1,000.
Septic Systems
The associated costs would include:
1.) Staff time to complete a mailing list of 2500 addresses. The costs of developing a
mailing list of this size would be approximately $2,000 (100 hours @ $20 per hour).
2.) The costs associated with the brochure are highly dependant on whether it is
purchased or created as well as the quantity of brochures that will be used for the
mailing. Costs could range from $200 to $2,000.
3.) A sub-committee made up of volunteers, agency staff and landowners is required to
develop criteria and costs to develop a “county wide septic inspector” position in
cooperation with the Vermilion County Health Department (VCHD). Costs would
be minimal, identified as in-kind services and meeting costs.
4.) The costs associated with a county wide septic maintenance and/or inspection
program are unknown at this time, but would require additional staff to oversee the
program. Salary and benefits for this additional staff person could be upwards of
$75,000. Outside funding would be sought by this sub-committee working with the
VCHD, the administrative unit for such a position.
5.) Only staff time would be required to provide assistance to the village of Bismarck to
facilitate the process of replacing individual on-site septic systems with a
community sewage treatment plant. Again this cost would be $20 per hour and
would most likely be considered in-kind service. Estimated at 40 hours over a two
year time period for a total of $800.
Stream Bank Erosion
As estimated from Wayne Kinney’s 2004 aerial assessment (Kinney, 2005), the cost to treat
76,500 feet of stream bank at 188 sites at an average cost of $25.00 per foot of bank treated
would be $1,912,500.00. It is important to note that at the time of Kinney’s assessment the cost
per foot of bank treated listed above was program dependant. For this area a more realistic cost
is $53.86 per foot of bank treated. Therefore the cost to treat 76,500 feet of stream would
probably be closer to $4,120,290.00.
The costs to acquire an individual or company to conduct a comprehensive study and/or survey
59
on livestock numbers within the NFVR watershed are difficult to estimate. Costs would be
highly dependant on:
1.) If a quality volunteer or intern could be found that was willing to complete the
project for little to no cost…..estimated costs could be between $0 and $5,000
2.) If a part-time employee or an environmental consulting company were hired to
complete the project…..estimated costs could be between $10,000 and $50,000
Water Quality Monitoring
The costs associated with additional water quality monitoring throughout the NFVR watershed
will be highly dependant on who is doing the sampling and/or monitoring. Our best estimates
of costs are:
1.) Minimal for the identification of sampling locations for water quality monitoring as
well as the acquisition of permission from landowners to access their property.
Costs for completing this task would include hourly rates of employees estimated to
be between $15 - $25 per hour and would be considered in-kind
2.) Also minimal to obtain information and training to be a part of the Illinois Stream
Team to conduct simple water quality monitoring. Costs would include the cost of
the kit which is $150. Funding for this item could be provided by the Lake
Vermilion Water Quality Coalition.
3.) Highly dependant on who will be doing the sampling and/or monitoring. Ideally an
additional part-time staff position could be funded. A salary for a part-time
individual without benefits would be around $20,000 per year. There will also be
costs associated with the analysis of the samples which could be upwards of
$50,000 per year (approx. 10 samples per week, @ $100 per sample). Funding for
this would most likely come from an IEPA Section 319 Grant and would require
development of a Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP). Funds may also be
available from Aqua Illinois to do some of the analysis.
Illegal Dumping
Current costs associated with the Lake Vermilion Clean Up Day range from $500 to $1,000 and
are highly dependant upon the amount of debris that is taken to the local landfill. Similar costs
could be expected upon implementation of a cleanup on the NFVR.
The costs associated with implementing a county wide Environmental Court are unknown at
this time. More information will be needed before an accurate estimate of cost can be made.
At the very least a staff person in the States Attorney’s office would need to be in place to
manage the program. Salary for this position could range from $50,000 to $75,000. Additional
staff may be necessary.
Wildlife
The costs associated with increasing wildlife habitat are highly variable and are increasingly
dependant on cost-share programs administered by state and/or federal agencies. Estimated
implementation costs include:
60
1.) Approximately $500 per year on the promotion of various landowner incentive
programs through mailings and workshops. This cost would also include
partnering with other agencies such as IDNR and Pheasants Forever.
2.) A part-time staff person to be housed at the Vermilion County SWCD/NRCS office
to conduct one-on-one contacts with landowners. Costs for this individual would
be $20,000 per year and does not include any type of benefits.
3.) Costs of installing in-stream practices such as rock riffles and pool and riffles to
provide habitat for aquatic species is unknown at this time. It will be dependant on
the feasibility as well as the identification and quantity of sites.
Channel Obstructions/Flooding
A majority of the costs associated with addressing problems associated with channel
obstruction and/or flooding are related to educational activities.
1.) Costs of creating and mailing an educational and/or informational brochure
outlining best management practices with regard to drainage could cost
approximately $2,000. The cost to hold a workshop highlighting the same types of
information would cost approximately $500.
2.) Costs to conduct a river survey by canoe would be between $200 to $500 depending
on whether canoes had to be rented or their use was donated.
3.) The cost of a part-time staff person to conduct one-on-one contacts with riparian
landowners would be approximately $20,000 per year. This individual would
encourage landowners to enroll flood prone areas into CRP, particularly practices
like filter strips, riparian forest buffers, and wetlands. In addition this staff person
could encourage landowners to seek technical and financial assistance to implement
stream bank stabilization practices where needed.
Other Water Pollutants
A majority of the costs associated with addressing the Atrazine problem in the NFVR
watershed will be related to educational activities. These costs include
1.) Staff time and postage to conduct one mailing a year to producers in the watershed
would be approximately $200 - $300 per year.
2.) Staff time to work on ordering or creating an Atrazine brochure. Total average costs
would be $1,600 (80 hours @ $15-$25 per hour). Similar rates of cost could be
expected for working with the fertilizer dealers to promote distribution of the brochure
(10 hours total for the watershed for a total of $200).
3.) Funding for mailings, speakers, meals, etc. for informational workshops. Costs can be
estimated to be approximately $500.00 per year.
4.) Funding for a monitoring program for Atrazine. See employee costs (#3) under Water
Quality Monitoring.
61
Table 17. Partial Cost Summary List
Category Strategy Landowner
Cost
External
Funding
Needs
Staff Funding
Source Partners
Water Quality
Nutrient (nitrate)
management
on 50,000 corn acres
Nutrient
Management
Plan Development
$3/acre = $150,000
Incentive payments
$10/acre = $500,000
2 hrs/client @
$25/hr x 500
clients =
$25,000
IEPA (319)
IDOA (CPP)
USDA-NRCS
Landowners
USDA-NRCS
IDOA, IEPA
SWCDs
Conservation tillage on
20,000 acres
by 2015
None
Incentive payments
$15 - $20/acre
$300,000 - $700,000
(assuming no limit on
acreage enrolled)
2 hrs/client @
$25/hr x 200
clients =
$10,000
IEPA (319)
IDOA (CPP)
USDA-NRCS
Landowners
USDA-NRCS
IDOA, IEPA
SWCDs
Bismarck Community
Sewage Collection
System In place by 2010
Currently unknown
Sewer hookup
charge?
$4,647,000
40 hours @
$20/hour
$800
USDA Residents of
Bismarck
On-site residential
septic systems inspected
and/or renovated
System renovation
$2,000 each
Vermilion County
Department of Health
staff person $75,000
Included in
External
Funding Needs
Currently
unknown
SWCD
VCDOH
Filter strips, riparian
Buffers, 300 acres
Costs of seeding
Drill rental
available
at SWCD
Incentive payments
Seeding costs
$54 - $188 / acre
$16,200 - $56,400
2 hrs/client @
$25/hr x 100
clients = $5,000
USDA-FSA
Landowners,
USDA-NRCS,
USDA-FSA,
SWCDs
2 water control
structures,
and 5 edge-of-field
bio-reactors by 2015
To Be Determined 2 @ $1,500 = $3,000
5 @ $1,000 = $5,000
5 hrs/client @
$25/hr x 7
clients = $875
IEPA (319)
LVWQC
USDA-NRCS
Landowners,
LVWQC, SWCD
USDA-NRCS
Restrict livestock access
from NFVR
streambanks
Dependant on
practices Cost-share
40 hours @
$20/hour per
client
USDA-NRCS Landowners
USDA-NRCS
Stabilize 1 priority
streambank erosion sites
per year
None 400 feet each @ $53.86
$21,544
40 hrs/site @
$75/hr x 1 site
$3,000
IDOA (SSRP)
IEPA (319)
LVWQC, NFSSA
Landowners,
IDOA, IEPA
LVWQC, NFSSA
Establish 100 acres of
covercrops by 2010 Seeding costs Incentive payments
$20 / acre = $2,000
2 hrs/client @
$25/hr x 10
clients = $500
IDOA (CPP)
IEPA (319)
Landowners
IDOA, IEPA,
SWCD
Education for lawn &
turf management,
on-site
residential septic
maintenance
None
Each year, 2 mailings@
$1,000= $2,000;
2workshops @ $1,500=
$3,000
Half-time staff, $40,000
80 hours @
$20/hr = $1,600
IEPA (319)
LVWQC
IEPA, LWWQC
SWCD, VCDoH
NFVR water quality
monitoring (coliform,
atrazine, nitrate,
phosphorus, sediment)
None
Average of 500 samples
per year @ $100=
$50,000;
Half-time staff, $40,000
Included in
External
Funding Needs
currently unknown
IEPA (319)
Aqua Illinois ?
LVWQC ?
Aqua Illinois,
IEPA, LVWQC,
SWCD
Channel
obstructions/
flooding
Log jam clearing
“urban” retention basins No additional costs
Log jam/beaver dam
removal
10 @ $5,000 = $50,000
Urban Retention basins
2 @ $10,000 = $20,000
300 hours / year
$30/hr = $9,000
NFSSA
SWCD
Landowners
NFSSA, SWCD
Wildlife Wildlife conservation
practices
40% cost share
up to $1,000,
50 landowners=
$50,000
Incentive Payments
$1,500 / participant
$75,000
2 hrs/client @
$25/hr x 50
clients = $2,500
IDNR,
USDA-FSA
USDA-NRCS
Pheasants Forever
Landowners,
USDA-NRCS,
SWCDs, IDNR
62
IX. Selection of Implementation Strategies/Alternatives
The planning committee has selected implementation strategies based on cost-effectiveness as
well as feasibility. The strategies have been listed below in order of priority. It is also
important to note that these activities and timelines are subject to revision and are presented for
planning purposes only.
IEPA Identified Water Quality Impairments
Lake Vermilion (RBD)
Reduce Nitrates in Lake Vermilion, River Segments BPG05, BPG10, and Hoopeston
Branch (BPGD)
A majority of the implementation strategies outlined to reduce nitrates focus on education and
the implementation of best management practices (BMPs) such as f