UM WMP REVIEW

Comments to Watershed Management Plan Review Team:

Need to assure real issues that are pinpointed in the WMP are addressed, not only the citizens’ concerns, but experts’ concern.

Testing in areas where high e.coli has been documented

CONCERNS

I do understand the UMP will be to identify and document; and suggest remediation of non-point source issues, but concerns still exist in my mind and wanted to make sure they were disclosed previous to the Plan’s submission to IDEM, OEPA & USEPA.

Cultural Differences – WASTE – Drainage
Do not address enough of the cultural differences and diversity in the plan. People may not be realizing how many Amish are in the watershed. Missing: Not so much the CAFO but the “sub” CAFO – the CAFO’s that DO NOT exceed any limits on any one animal. They combine them and do not exceed regulatory. Impacts are far more than the CAFO’s because they are heavy on using and illicitly discharging into the waters.

the little they are NOT being regulated are not even being considered because they fall under regulatory threshold. Legitimacy = threshold 200 swine…they will have 180. 400 fowl is regulated – 300 fowl –

large operations loopholes – barnyard management is voluntary – NRCS has money available

stacking the swine onto the fowl, onto of cattle, but nothing is triggering regulations –

800 animals are there…but the land is only suited for half of that population

Management on the ground – diverse populations – many are resistant, many are supportive – due to religion they may be exempt and should be considered in the implementation so we do not fail.

Set lower thresholds on targets –

Character of landscape, not there in the St. Marys – very strict Amish boarders – NEED Amish “insider” to help with the process!

Inputs are measurable like Ft. Wayne Utilities – what is coming out of the cities not just the treatment plants. What gets flushed out of the storm drains that is NOT measured. CSO IS measured – regular storm drain is just EXPECTED to get better over time.

Septics in Defiance County – cut arounds in the plan – cultural sensitivity – bypass the leach fields and solids and drain straight into a ditch because they do not want to be forced to do current practices because of their religious past.

WHY are septics still being considered as an acceptable practice, when 96% of the soils in the watershed are limited?

Subdivisions need to be limited in development. Unless you are actually providing city utility service it should not be approved through County Commissioners. If you CANNOT afford to tap into the infrastructure service, you are UNABLE to afford the building permits.

Drainage Board – County Council rubber stamps everything, the County Surveyor just

Process is broken for the drainage board in keeping the city safe. Review the PROCESS of how the drainage board approves new-build permits.

Lightly notes the need for buffers – plan does not get into what should be done to change government legislation. ONLY what kind of practices we can do to help these things. LIGHT= EDUCATE NEED to EDUCATE THE DRAINAGE BOARDS as to the practices they currently use as standard practices.

no suggestions on legislation to specifically target HOW they can fix and truly change current practices – general not specific

Exclusion:

Edgewater Blvd. South of the bridge – has been smelling more frequently – Tom Mann – is the HANDS-ON helpful Wastewater Superintendent on the sediment ponds

HALF of the entire watershed is in Allen County – Partnership for Water Quality not being considered as a partner for the implementation of the UM WMP

VEGETATION & TREE REMOVALS

Impervious surfaces contribute to more runoff and increases stormwater that has shown to reduce water quality. While concrete and asphalt increase, vegetation and trees within the watershed decline.

The following points seem to avoid water quality improvements because they fail to protect, naturalize, and provide a realistic framework for the watershed. Destruction continues without proper oversight, enforcement, holding suggestions of science based information as suggestions rather than inserting them into Municipality Code, Agricultural Rules, Legislative support of laws created for enforcement.

A majority of the time; tree removals only add impervious surfaces or mowed lawn-grasses. These tremendously important resources are removed and replaced with rip-rap, concrete, rooftops, structures and detention ponds.

Removal of Levee Vegetation: After Hurricane Katrina breached the levees in New Orleans, LA, the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) reviewed levee rules nationally. After review, the ACE made a blanket statement for the United States, “All trees must be removed 15 feet from all levees.”

Disease: “Twenty-four percent of Fort Wayne’s tree canopy is being removed due to the emerald ash borer” (Fort Wayne City Council, Karen Goldner, 2010).
Development: “Most of the forested corridor around the rivers have been removed” (Plan-It Allen, 2007).
Energy & Eminent Domain: Trees are being removed because they “pose a potential threat to power lines and are to be removed” (American Electric Power, 2011).
Value: Trees are being harvested because of the lucrative cost of Hardwoods. (Kenny Barker, Top Notch Tree Service, 2010).
Fire: large brownfield warehouse complex between Coombs Street Bridge / Coombs Street (River City Complex)
Fire: Local insulation manufacturer Momper had in a fire on October 30, 2011 – cause undetermined – which had “massive explosions of foam insulation barrels and trucks which required fire department water to douse, resulted in run-off into Junk Ditch” which is a direct tributary to the St. Mary’s and approximately 2.6 miles to the confluence of the St. Marys and Maumee River. This means that the insulation and related manufacturing material has the potential to contaminate the rivers. This is not the only “fire” or “spill” that has happened within the watershed in the last few years. http://www.indianasnewscenter.com/home/DNR-Evaluating-Fish-Kill-As-Result-Of-Momper-Insulation-Fire-132968443.html
RiverFront Development Plan – Currently in stage 2 of planning

ENFORCEMENT & LACK OF ABILITY TO INSPECT, REGULATE & DOCUMENT

The Upper Maumee Watershed (among other basins) needs stronger enforcement of current laws and more oversight of permits. There appears to be a lack of enforcement regarding current laws through proper review of permits for corporations. Stronger oversight and enforcement of permits need to occur, yet IDEM is “understaffed.”

“The state issued more than $2 million in environmental fines in northeast Indiana from 2004 through 2006, but not all the money was actually collected.

Indiana Department of Environmental Management records showed fines in northeast Indiana ranging from $300 to $382,725 during that period, according to The Journal Gazette review of the data published [December 2007] (Indy Star, “IDEM fails to collect fines in full” Dec. 10, 2007).    a. If fines were levied, and collected, when a company discharges beyond allowed permit effluent, the monies can be utilized to truly improve water quality for human health and be a deterrent for further pollution discharges, due to penalties.

Water quality suffer …

Confirming:

IDEM Extrapolation from Impaired Water List (2010) lists 2,882 segments that are classified as impaired and fail to comply or not meet water quality standards under the Clean Water Act for; Fish Consumption Advisory (FCA) for Mercury, FCA for PCBs, E. coli, nutrients, algae and impaired biotic community. Further research indicates that impairment may also be causing or caused by; pesticides, ammonia, siltation, low dissolved oxygen, habitat alterations, low organic enrichment, turbidity, pathogens, suspended solids, metals, priority organics, and other inorganics.

Were these TMDL’s ever established in 2012….if not, why?

Ohio EPA’s TMDL’s will be established for the Maumee, and are scheduled to be complete by July 31, 2012. (Ohio EPA Map Coordinator Report. Dec. 1, 2011) http://www.partnersforcleanstreams.org/Ohio%20EPA%20Coor%20Rpt%20%28fall-winter%20Summit%202011%29.pdf

AGRICULTURE

2.5 Surface Water Use Designations and Classifications Clarified

The following uses are designated by the Indiana Water Pollution Control Board (327 IAC 2-1-3 [327 IAC 2-1.5-5 for the Great Lakes system]):

Surface waters of the state are designated for full-body contact recreation.

All waters, except limited use waters, will be capable of supporting a well-balanced, warm water aquatic community and, where natural temperatures will permit, will be capable of supporting put-and-take trout fishing. All waters capable of supporting the natural reproduction of trout as of February 17, 1977, shall be so maintained.

All waters, which are used for public or industrial water supply, must meet the standards for those uses at the point where water is withdrawn.

All waters, which are used for agricultural purposes, must meet minimum surface water quality standards.

All waters in which naturally poor physical characteristics (including lack of sufficient flow), naturally poor or reversible man-induced conditions, which came into existence prior to January 1, 1983, and having been established by use attainability analysis, public comment period, and hearing may qualify to be classified for limited use and must be evaluated for restoration and upgrading at each triennial review of this rule.

All waters, which provide unusual aquatic habitat, which are an integral feature of an area of exceptional natural beauty or character, or which support unique assemblages of aquatic organisms may be classified for exceptional use (or designated as outstanding state resource waters in the Great Lakes system). All waters of the state, at all times and at all places, including the mixing zone, shall meet the minimum conditions of being free from substances, materials, floating debris, oil, or scum attributable to municipal, industrial, agricultural, and other land use practices, or other discharges (327 IAC 2-1-6 [327 IAC 2-1.5-8 for the Great Lakes system]):

that will settle to form putrescent or otherwise objectionable deposits,

that are in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious,

that produce color, visible oil sheen, odor, or other conditions in such degree as to create a nuisance,

which are in amounts sufficient to be acutely toxic to, or to otherwise severely injure or kill aquatic life, other animals, plants, or humans, or

which are in concentrations or combinations that will cause or contribute to the growth of aquatic plants or algae to such degree as to create a nuisance, be unsightly, or otherwise impair designated uses.

Click to access wras_wabash-upper_part1.pdf

NUTRIENTS

At the Indiana Sustainable Agriculture Conference (July 2014) – CAFO waste is being hauled across the boarders of Ohio, into Indiana.

There are only 17 inspectors in the Office of Land to inspect who monitor the estimated 625 CFOs and CAFOs Indiana, in addition to landfills, waste transfer stations, septage haulers, and illegal dumping and illegal waste tire dumping complaints. This has resulted in minimal oversight that has been reduced to every five years in some industries, such as CAFOs, which routinely expose the public and the waterways to viruses and other harmful waste products. IDEM does not have the enforcement ability to maintain records of all applications and operations.

IDEM notifies CAFO operators of inspections in advance. “Due to biosecurity issues, inspections are planned and announced in advance, unless we are responding to a complaint.”

Animals held in CAFOs are particularly vulnerable to pathogens like viruses, so protective, biosecurity measures against them are necessary when humans enter the barns.” http://www.nuvo.net/indianapolis/barbara-sha-cox-leads-the-statewide-fight-against-cafos/Content?oid=1344207

There needs to be a nutrient application plan that has proper oversight. The rules appear good on the surface, but the lack of inspectors and funding negate the effectiveness and enforcement of the rules. Rules being developed by the Indiana State Chemist will regulate livestock waste as a fertilizer material, which can be good, disposing of composted waste on farmland rather than using chemicals. However, the rules do not take into account the pathogens in manure. All this makes it important to increase setbacks from homes, schools and waterways and address pathogens in manure to protect public health. Since there are already allowances to spread manure on frozen fields, all of these issues will allow more runoff into our waterways. Rules should include land applications being prohibited in sensitive environmental areas (i.e. floodplains, wetlands) Karst areas should be included as well for State Rules, however there are no karst areas in northeast Indiana.

The proposed rule is considering organic to be 35% true manure, yet many other things will be present that would not be “organic”. Due to the passing of Indiana House Bill 1112 – waste from industry can be added to soil and then it is considered “amended,”- even though this material may be a far cry from safe.

Sneaky Industry & More Pollution for Indiana

“Organic” labeling simply means anything that contains carbon, but this labeling seems stealthy to the average reader. SO the labeling “organic” can be used to explain pathogens, residue from feed additives, cleaning solutions and antibiotics.

TITLE 355 STATE CHEMIST OF THE STATE OF INDIANA Proposed Rule states organic fertilizer as described in 355 IAC 7-3-2; shall keep and maintain records of all such applications.

355 IAC 7-3-2 “Animal feeding operations that cause a violation of pollution control laws,” will be held to the same standards of CAFO’s and CFO’s from that point on. This is good because it means it will require an NPDES permit, yet without adequate inspectors, how will the public or IDEM know if they are in violation?

See the full document here: LSA Document #11-364 http://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/20110727-IR-355110364PRA.xml.pdf

Therefore it is important to disclose and publish land application information since it is “self reported”:

When the manure is applied?

Where is it applied?

How much/acre is it being applied?

What percentage is manure and what percentage is “other organic”?

AIR QUALITY CONCERNS

“Indiana is the fourth worst emitter of mercury air emissions from electric utilities.66 The

state of Indiana has 24 coal burning power plants.67 The total reported releases by coal fired power plants of mercury into the air was 4,927 lbs in 2000.68 The 2004 FCA relating to a mercury advisory applies to 15 lakes and reservoirs and 26 streams and rivers.69 These bodies of water appear on the Final 303(d) list for 2004 70. There are 12 bodies of water classified as “Group 5″ for which no fish in these waters are

to be consumed.71 According to the EPA, there are 524 impairments regarding FCAs in Indiana 72 for mercury. There are no approved TMDLs by the EPA for this contaminant.73 Using data from the 303(d) list for 2004 and comparing it to the TMDL Reports, the parameters of concern do not include mercury at all. Most of the TMDL reports focus exclusively on E. coli bacteria and/or other contaminants. In fact, there are only 13 TMDL reports in total provided by IDEM. Moreover, the TMDL development schedule for the 2002 303(d) pertaining to mercury includes the Grand Calumut River.74 Although this body of water was given a range of development from 1998-2004, currently there is no TMDL for it. There is one for Little Calumut, which also has an FCA for mercury, but only pertains to E. Coli, dissolved oxygen, cyanide and pesticides.” (Coal-fired Power Plants – Revised submission/additional information

A14/SEM/04-005/16/RSUB. APPENDIX 12 SEM-04-005: Coal Fired Power Plants

Filed January 18, 2005 in response to Secretariat’s Determination of December 16,

2004. http://www.cec.org/Storage/86/8196_04-5-RSUB_en.pdf pg 23)

According to the 2006 emission report for Superior Aluminum, the emitted 11.7 tons of CO2, 24.3 tons of NO2, .015 tons of lead, 13.7 tons of particulate matter at 10 microns, 11.1 tons of particulate matter at 2.5 microns, 9.2 tons of SO2, and 14.1 tons of Volatile organic compounds (VOC). The proposed copper plant (LaFarga LLC) has been approved to emit 86.76 tons of PM, 87.63 tons of PM at 2.5 and 10 microns, 23 tons of SO2, 65.53 tons of Nox, 67.91 tons of VOC’s, 37.76 tons of CO, 71,702.5 tons of Green House Gas emissions as CO2e, 20.2 tons of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP), and 8.67 tons of Hydrochloric Acid (HCl) – the single worst HAP. (SEE MAP 6A)

The monitors that are in place to track the levels of heavy metals, ozone and the 6 criteria pollutants, are located 7.4- 10.5 miles upwind of where the plants are located. To ensure that pollutant levels in the area are compliant with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), the EPA regulates the monitors. As a result of the monitors’ upwind locations, it is no comfort knowing the only air monitors will not be capturing a majority of the emissions from New Haven.

http://monitoringprotocols.pbworks.com/f/2010%20IDEM%20Probabilistic%20Monitoring%20Plan.pdf

When the attendees of the IPFW meeting requested monitors on neighboring properties to track downwind emissions, President and Chief Operating Officer Mark Millet said they “They were committed on putting up monitors.” but denied the installation of monitors off the property, because of the “likelihood they would be accountable for emissions coming from other sources”. When residents left the meeting, Mr. Millet then clarified to a select few (Celia Garza reported October 18, 2011) that SDI would be installing process monitors, which essentially are video monitors, to keep a visual log of smoke coming from the stacks. Process monitors do not actually test emission levels.

As we all know, what goes up must come down. Residents are also concerned for the quality of the water in a nearby ditch. It has been requested by citizens over the last several years to have the Bandelier Ditch #3 dredged or reconstructed in some way to help alleviate flooding on both farmland and the local roads. The project has been labeled “SDI”, and was only considered by the Allen County Surveyor, Al Frisinger, when the company announced it was moving in. The first public meeting on the ditch’s reconstruction was held on January 12, 2012. The plan to reconstruct Bandelier Ditch #3 has not been finalized by the Surveyor and/or Allen County Drainage Board.

Save Maumee needs to mention that the two SDI properties neighbor The Casad Depot (owned by the U.S. Military), that held a large stockpile of Mercury on its property, and is in the same drainage area as these two SDI owned facilities.

“By the end of the 1990s, there were 29 different types of materials stored at the New Haven Depot, as part of the Defense Logistics Agency’s – Defense National Stockpile Center. These included chrome ore, lead, tin, copper, zinc, nickel, graphite, rubber, and mercury. By 2003, this had been reduced to 27 different types of materials. Mercury remained among the materials stored at the site. There were approximately 557 metric tons (614 tons) of mercury stored in 16,151 steel flasks. These flasks were about the size of a 3-liter soda bottle and held 76 pounds of mercury.”

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/new-haven.htm

STORMWATER & DRAINAGE & HEAVY METALS

Environmental Engineer/Enforcement Officer Jack Bajor, for the water division of Region 5 EPA, was contacted with concerns over stormwater discharge from Superior Aluminum. He began making phone calls to the City of Fort Wayne to receive information on their stormwater permit (INR 200184). The City agreed to investigate the site personally and eventually found that there were no violations. It was determined that Superior Aluminum is discharging sanitary wastewater into the appropriate sanitary sewer and uses process water for cooling. The City of Fort Wayne is, however, reviewing a potential need to adjust the status of the industrial user within their pretreatment program. The natural drain that accepts the discharge water is unregulated by the county surveyor’s office.

The natural drain begins on the southwest side of Superior Aluminum, and flows north then east on Edgerton Rd. It travels directly past Casad Military Depot, where several flasks of mercury were leaking for years. A copy of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was requested from Casad Depot and the EPA, but to date we have not received the EIS. Without a copy of their EIS there is no way of knowing for sure whether or not the area is still contaminated. With the addition of the copper plant’s industrial storm water discharge needs, Superior Aluminum’s current discharge permits, and no EIS from the Casad Depot, there will definitely be a need to ensure that the quality of the land and water surrounding the operations are documented, to ensure the health of the community and those downstream. (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/new-haven.htm).

All ditches and natural drains in this area do eventually flow directly into the Maumee River, which have the potential to impact the water quality in the entire Maumee Watershed and Great Lakes Region. With the reconstruction of a ditch that drains into the Maumee River, coupled with the added heavy metal emissions into the air, and the fact that the company would be potentially draining their detention pond into the ditch during flood events, there are some deep concerns for the negative impact this will have on the larger region.

IDEM shut down Mercury monitors throughout Indiana in 2010. “The cut would save the agency about $285,000 annually. But critics say it would impact the state’s ability to assess whether regulation to reduce mercury pollution is working. “

“The environmental group Improving Kids’ Environment said it is “concerned about the loss of monitoring” because 41 percent of all samples in 2004-2005 exceeded Indiana’s water quality standard for mercury. The organization plans to urge Easterly to restore the monitors.”

http://indianaeconomicdigest.com/main.asp?SectionID=31&SubSectionID=135&ArticleID=53562&TM=31091.6

How do Mercury (Hg) & heavy metals enter our water and fish? The burning of fossil fuels like coal! Indiana is 96% reliant on coal for electricity needs.

(Indianapolis Star Image, 2009) Story – http://www.indystar.com/article/20090202/LOCAL18/902020350/Hoosier-streams-still-high-levels-mercury

Indiana House Bill 1112 passed on February 16, 2011 which will allow industrial waste to be added to soil to then be considered “amended soil” (soil better than it was before). Currently, there are no maximum limits for land application to be assessed (for industrial waste), and no oversight for application! The bill was introduced by Indiana State Representative, Phyllis Pond (District 85). Abigail King approached Rep. Pond at the River Summit in Fort Wayne, IN 2010, and asked her if she is concerned about the toxicity of the soil if no maximum limits are set for the industrial waste? Rep. Pond responded, “Yes, I am concerned about the toxicity of the soil if too much is added.” This Bill is rumored to be written by Steel Dynamics Inc.

http://www.in.gov/legislative/bills/2011/HB/HB1112.2.html – Indiana HB 1112

Sneaky Industry & More Pollution for Indiana

Land Use: Zoning

Fort Wayne City Utilities also sells their water to many surrounding municipalities. Downstream, (approx) 9 miles northeast of the confluence, lies the most urban area of the Upper-Maumee and remains an Area of Concern (AOC). Much of the land-use near the Maumee River in this AOC is used / designated / zoned as “heavy industrial” and “intuitional”. The settling ponds for Fort Wayne and surrounding cities’ sanitary sewer, is zoned institutional.

SUPERFUND SITE:

“Fort Wayne Reduction [a.k.a Adams Center Landfill] is a 35-acre Superfund site located along the south bank of the Maumee River and situated in a 100-year flood plain of the river. It is considered to be two Superfund sites. The landfill operated as a residential and industrial landfill and accepted hazardous waste from 1966 to 1974. Waste Management Inc. agreed to fund site cleanup because, “the site soils were contaminated with a large variety of contaminants, including volatile organic compounds (VOCs), heavy metals, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and polycyclic aromatic compounds. Groundwater is contaminated with VOCs and heavy metals.” The construction started in 1990 with drum removal occurring in 1993. Over 27,000 drums were removed from the site.” (EPA Region 5) This site has been considered remediated since 1996, but is still listed on the EPA website, updated December 2011. http://www.epa.gov/R5Super/npl/indiana/IND980679542.html

http://www.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/ftwaynereduction/

Many drums have a common nominal volume of 55 US gallons (200 L) and nominally measure just under 34.5 inches (880 mm) tall with a diameter just under 24 inches (610 mm) and differ by holding about thirteen gallons more than a Barrel of Crude Oil . In the US, 25-US-gallon (95 l; 21 imp gal) drums are also in common use and have the same height. This allows easy stacking of mixed pallets. An explicit definition of these drums is not quantified on the EPA website.

LUST’s

The Leaking Underground Storage Tanks are being remediated through real-estate law. If a property is sold, the buyer is to remove the LUST before obtaining the title to the property. The LUST are not prioritized by “potential” to leak into the groundwater and don’t include information on contents.

Nearly 56 percent of Indiana’s total reported on-site releases from the 2010 analysis were related to manufacturing, an overall increase of about 7 percent from 2009’s figures. Electric utilities made up approximately 43 percent of the total onsite releases in 2010. (Toxic releases up in 2010 IDEM says, Chesterton Tribune, Jan. 9, 2012) http://www.chestertontribune.com/Environment/19121%20toxic_releases_up_in_2010_idem_s.htm

Toxic Release Inventory per EPA, reported 650 toxic chemicals were released in Indiana. (Journal Gazette Dec. 4, 2011, Toxins released in Indiana on rise; Environmentalists decry IDEM as doing too little.”)

Identifying land use areas and targeting the most potential for runoff

1. Will reduce algal blooms
2. Natural areas have been removed and replaced with impervious surfaces (i.e. roads, homes, concrete, industry) or mowed lawn grass

The carbon offset purchase

For example, a company may purchase “carbon credits,” to compensate the watershed taking away green space. So a company builds a parking lot, but that area has to be replaced with “green space” somewhere else, since it is being taken away. The company then purchases already restored land (i.e. Solomon Farm, Heartland Restoration/Earth Source) to offset the carbon that is added by the company’s construction. This is counterproductive because these areas are already planted and pristine…so the offset is not truly helping the watershed.

Ohio/Indiana water sampling 8 locations in Indiana

INDIANA PORTION: (not yet published for the public…here is the list via UMWP minutes)

1.Black Creek Ditch (Amish & ag.)
2.Gar Creek – hand dug drainage area (Lamont Drain) also the one with the high mercury readings from Indy Star Newspaper, 2009, downstream of superfund site, drains the Casad Depot that housed hundreds of thousands of liters of Mercury for US Military, Steel Aluminum/SDI drain
3.Gordon Creek (south fork)
4. Marie Delarm Creek (aka. Ham Interceptor Ditch) – Notestine Rd. – large & deep, Amish are east of Lenekers & E. of Bruick Rd.
Gravel bed, HISTORICAL: Johnny appleseed had his farm there-, Tusison Creek, Landon Rd.
5. Martin Ditch
6. Maumee River – Bullerman Ditch
7 Maumee River – Grover Ditch
8. Maumee River – Marsh Ditch – Marsh Ditch was the one with the 3,000 e.coli count in 2010

OHIO Upper Maumee River Water testing locations here (31 sites) – NEVER scientifically tested these tributaries – no funding for them to date (Feb 2014) http://www.epa.ohio.gov/dsw/tmdl/monitoring_MaumeeRiver.aspx

BIOASSESSMENT

Macro-invertebrates, fish tissues, biological

GLRI – said they need Rep. Marlin Stutzmans support

Approach the Union Steward for the City of Ft. Wayne Pollution Control Plant and ask him to do some water testing (please please) he said he will not approve overtime without overtime pay.

Speak to Dan O’Connell, director of Fort Wayne/Allen County Convention and Visitors Bureau about how we can help them market activities regarding our local rivers, and the watershed.

Other asides:

There are NO “outstanding” river segments in the Upper Maumee Watershed in Indiana. There are about 2,000 river miles deemed as such, but that figure represents less than 9% of the estimated 24,000 total stream miles in Indiana. (Indiana Register, National Resource Commission, Information Bulletin #4 – http://www.in.gov/legislative/register/20070530-IR-312070287NRA.xml.pdf

Rip-Rap has been addressed as a problem for flooding but do not plan to implement anything to address the current Upper Maumee rip-rap areas.

The Action Registrar looks great for a standard WMP

Official Request: As Treasurer of the Upper Maumee Watershed Partnership and Steering Committee for the Upper Maumee Watershed Management Plan;

Needs to hire personnel immediately to implement WMP and use available $75,000

LIST of what $75,000 delineated for project budget and projections.

SEEKING:
Plant Plugs and erosion control vegetation embedded logs @ cost of $10,000

GPS / GIS PICTURE LOG Documentation

Cost Share CHART of worth for inking services and donations

Treasurer suggests SECTION 3.4.6 MARSH DITCH SUBWATERSHED LAND USE

IDEM TO APPROVE BY March 1st 2013

Conservation and Re-establishment of natural riparian area

MILESTONES & SUGGESTIONS

Kyle Quant has done a fabulous job only including scientific data collection.

* Enforce current environmental laws

* Support legislation that protects natural areas.

* Monitor tile outlets, straight pipe outlets, septic systems and NPDES discharge points and document each discharge point to make easily available to the public.

* Proper review of permits for corporations including more oversight and stronger enforcement of permits. If fines are issued when a company discharges beyond allowed permit effluent, the monies can be utilized to truly improve water quality for human health.

Protect human health

1. Determining whether water bodies meet regulatory standards and/or support designated uses by reading and posting information from the IDEM 305 (b) requirements. http://www.in.gov/idem/4679.htm

a. Even though large reports are written, it should be outlined and summarized for the average reader to understand.

2. Is water safe for drinking, fishing, swimming, or only intermittent body contact?

3. Monitor water and identify quality problems through our presence on waterways. 4. Posting the Toxic Release Inventory for public awareness at http://epa.gov/tri/

a. The EPA website for TRI is enormous, so we need to highlight the  important information to the public to keep their attention focused on a  “sound byte”/ relevant information.

B. Target potential water quality problems & “Benchmark” current trends

1. Document watershed conditions and water quality trends over time

2. Screen for potential point & non-point source pollutants in the watershed  a. In-kind water testing from City of Fort Wayne Water Filtration Plant

can be available for Save Maumee

3. Point Source facilities and non-point source pollutants need to be identified

4. Work should help to reduce amounts of phosphorus applied

5. Geomap (all of the above) information and RSS-feed it to the web

C. Identify laws, limits and facilities and relay them to the public

1. Keep public informed with new and/or changing legislation and how the public

may be affected

2. Monitor those handling bulk fertilizer (including manure and chemical), that   may be contributing to non-point source pollution  a. Laws should hold these waste producers to limits on runoff, but without

proper monitoring and oversight, enforcement is not possible.  b. Include assessments from Hoosier Riverwatch and IDEM and have them easily available on our website (Physical, Biology, Chemistry, Habitat, Toxicity)

Design and/or present pollution prevention programs

River Occupation through active on-water activities and patrol

1. This summer Save Maumee is planning to have a “camp on your riverbank” and delineate pictures on a map that we take over the weekend (will include workshops) – still work in progress

“Green ABC’s” from Waynedale Alliance is a local program for children; tying each letter of the alphabet with a green living concept or term, kids and adults, too become familiar with the term & pave the road to green living.”

Project Wet/Project Wild from IDEM

Send volunteers to Hoosier Riverwatch Program to train and commit to doing volunteer water monitoring

Enforcement of current laws by our watchdog presence on the waterways, reporting problems and issues

Respond to emergencies by physically going to a site someone has called about

Seek out professionals to assist in our program goals

Assess program goals on an annual basis

Work to improve the following threats to our community & watershed:

Identify failures to control sediment (i.e. construction, scoured, eroded banks etc.)

Identify illegal clearing of buffer areas, wetlands and floodplains

Identify fish kill sources if not immediately evident

Identify and remove invasive aquatic species and educate the public on native plantings to improve diversity of fauna and flora.

Watch over industry that has exceeded pollution limits

Identify discharges exceeding allowable limits

Continue to identify and discuss funding options to separate sewers to reduce sewage overflows (County Economic Development Income Tax Funds, Legacy Fort Wayne funds)

Benchmarking current water quality to exhibit whether water conditions are improving or deteriorating.

Investigate use of computer modeling with information from available Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and smart technology with GPS locating devices

Seek out professionals for information gathering, presenting and scholarly research

Provide social media outreach by maintaining email, Twitter, Facebook, Blog Posts & website.

Identify and appraise

the general condition of the watershed land-use, and the major components – by geomorphic, geologic soil and vegetation criteria – in relation to its hydrologic function.

the conditions of the riparian areas and how they are functioning. Are there trends in habitat conditions that warrant further study or management action?

the probable effect of existing and expected land uses in floodplains and the rivers potential to flow over these floodplains (since the 100 and 500 year floodplains are now having to be redrawn yearly), and sediment production.

the watershed conditions – by watching existing and expected land uses that are likely to affect the watershed. For example removing natural areas (unmowed green space) can affect groundwater recharge and base flow. Paying particular attention to likely effects of urbanization.

the areas which are particularly vulnerable to watershed damage from potential water pollution sources.

Reassess our progress and effectiveness in the Waterkeeper role.

Legislation:

HB 1032 Restriction on fertilizer containing phosphorus for lawns – The purpose of House Bill 1032 is to prevent unnecessary phosphorus run-off from residential lawns by:

• Establishing restrictions on the application of fertilizer that contains phosphorus on residential lawns or turf areas;

• Requiring distributors, retailers and licensed commercial lawn care applicators to provide a phosphorus-free alternative to consumers; and

• Requiring distributors, retailers and licensed commercial lawn care applicators to provide consumer educational information. House Bill 1032 applies only to fertilizer use on residential lawns. HB 1032 specifically exempts fertilizers used for flower or vegetable gardens, pasture, cropland, trees, shrubs, turf grown on turf farms, or any form of agricultural or livestock production. The scope of the bill is simply to restrict the use of phosphorus fertilizer on residential lawns to prevent it from degrading drinking and surface water resources. http://www.in.gov/legislative/bills/2012/IN/IN1032.1.html

Many States Have Already Passed Similar Legislation There is growing recognition of this problem nationally as evidenced by the fact that several other states have already passed legislation regulating the use of phosphorus fertilizers. Those states include Florida, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin. http://www.hecweb.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Check-out-HECs-fact-sheet-on-HB-1032.pdf

H.R. 872 – Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act – would exempt pesticide users who spray over water from the Clean Water Act’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h112-872

2.5 Surface Water Use Designations and Classifications Clarified