DOCSLIB.ORG

Part II: Community Profile

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Part II: Community Profile Webster County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Part II: Community Profile Part II: Community Profile Location Webster County is located in the western portion of south-central Missouri. It is bordered on the northwest by Dallas County, on the northeast by Laclede County, on the east by Wright County, on the southeast by Douglas County, on the southwest by Christian County, and on the west by Greene County. The county covers an area of 380,161 acres, or about 594 square miles (Dodd, 1990). Incorporated communities include the Village of Diggins and the cities of Fordland, Marshfield, Niangua, Rogersville, and Seymour. Unincorporated settlement areas include Elkland in the northern section of the county and Northview in the central-eastern portion. The City of Marshfield is the county seat. Figure 2-1 September 2009 Draft 2-1 Webster County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Part II: Community Profile Development History Named after Daniel Webster, the U.S. Secretary of State, Webster County was organized out of Greene County in 1855 (Secretary of State, 18 January 2005). The county seat was named for Webster’s Massachusetts home, Marshfield (City of Marshfield, History, 13 January 2005). The first settlers came to the area around 1834, mainly from Kentucky and Tennessee, attracted by the abundance of game and fish and the productive native grasses that could be used to raise livestock with little effort. Settlement growth in the county was slow, but Marshfield prospered from its location off an old Indian trail to St. Louis that later became Wire Road when the telegraph line came through in 1862. During the Civil War, two Union fortifications were built in Webster County, one in Marshfield and the other in Sand Springs. The county saw a few skirmishes, but by 1863, the Union soldiers had evacuated and the fortifications were burned by the Confederates (Dodd, 1990, p. 1; City of Marshfield, History, 13 January 2005). The rate of settlement in the county increased in the 1870s, with the building of the St. Louis and San Francisco Railroad through Marshfield and the Kansas City, Springfield, & Memphis Railroad through southern Webster County. (City of Marshfield, History, 13 January 2005). Settlers raised beef, sheep, and hogs; and grain crops, predominately corn, were becoming more and more prevalent. By the late 1890’s, large apple orchards were established in Webster County, which became one of the leading apple-producing counties in Missouri. Tomato production began around 1900 and expanded rapidly. By 1925, Webster County was one of the largest strawberry-producing counties in the state. (Dodd, 1990, pp. 2-3). Livestock production decreased by the early 1900s with the growth of the grain and fruit industries. The fruit industries declined in Webster County between 1930 and 1945 as a result of the Depression, World War II, and other economic factors. In the 1930s, commercial dairying had become the most significant industry in the county. Today, Webster County is still second in the state in milk production. By 1950, grain cropping began to give way to hay and pasture farming, and beef cattle production began to increase. In 2002, Webster County ranked 28th in the state in the number of beef cattle. (Dodd, 1990, pp. 2-3; USDA 2002 Census). During the period 1945 to 2002, the number of farms decreased from 2,848 to 1,962. The average size of the farms increased from 126 to 163 acres. Since 1950, the percentage of part-time farmers has increased. In 2002, nearly 63 percent of the county’s farmers received a part of their personal income from something other than farming. (Dodd, 1990, p. 3; USDA 2002 Census). September 2009 Draft 2-2 Webster County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Part II: Community Profile Form of Government Missouri is divided into 114 counties and the City of St. Louis by the Revised Statutes of Missouri (RSMo) §46.040. Counties are political subdivisions of the state “for governmental, political, and public purposes” (Freyermuth, n.d.) and have a wide range of governmental responsibilities. The Missouri legislature has established four classes of counties, based on the assessed valuation of real and personal property (Freyermuth, n.d.; RSMo §48.820). Webster County is classified as a third class county and is governed by a three-member commission. Under the provisions of RSMo §49.010, counties are divided into two districts of nearly equal population (in Webster County, the northern district and the southern district). Each district elects one commissioner and the presiding commissioner is elected by the county as a whole. Commissioners serve four-year terms. There are currently two classes of cities in Missouri--third and fourth class cities, as well as villages and home rule charter cities (Freyermuth, n.d.). Fourth class cities are those with populations greater than 500 but less than 3,000 inhabitants. Villages/towns are incorporations with less than 500 inhabitants (RSMo §72.050). There are six incorporated communities in Webster County; Diggins is incorporated as a village and Fordland, Marshfield, Niangua, Rogersville, and Seymour are fourth class cities. Fourth class cities are regulated by RSMo §79. Such cities are governed by a mayor and board of aldermen. The mayor presides over the board but may vote only to break a tie. Villages, regulated under RSMo §80, are governed by a board of trustees. The board elects a presiding officer (chair) and a clerk, and appoints the village’s officers. Table 2-1 lists the incorporated communities in Webster County, government form and regular meeting dates of the governing bodies. Table 2-1: Webster County Local Governments Local Form of Government Meeting Dates Government Webster County Commission Mon. & Tues. Diggins Chair/Board of Trustees 2nd Mon. Fordland Mayor/Board of Aldermen 2nd Tues. 5:00 p.m. Marshfield Mayor/Board of Aldermen/City 2nd & 4th Thurs. 6:00 p.m. Administrator Niangua Mayor/Board of Aldermen 2nd Mon. 7:00 p.m. Rogersville Mayor/Board of Aldermen/City 1st & 3rd Mon. 7:00 p.m. Administrator Seymour Mayor/Board of Aldermen 2nd & 4th Thurs. 6:00 p.m. September 2009 Draft 2-3 Webster County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Part II: Community Profile Physical Characteristics Geology and Physiography Webster County is located on the Ozarks Plateau of the Interior Highlands physiographic province. The county lies within the Springfield Plateau and the Salem Plateau divisions of the Ozarks Plateau. The southern part of the county is mostly on the Springfield Plateau while the northern section of the county lies on the Salem Plateau. The Springfield Plateau is characterized as a prairie-like, gently rolling plain. The Salem Plateau is typified by steep ridges and bluffs bordering rivers, streams and deep drainage channels. The Eureka Springs Escarpment, a northeasterly running narrow belt of hills, separates the Springfield and Salem plateaus. Webster County has the largest area of land with elevations of 1,600 feet and higher in the Ozark uplift region. The highest elevation, 1,740 feet, is in the eastern part of the county, and the lowest, 1,100 feet, is in the area where the Niangua River leaves the county. Figure 2-2 Several faults are located in the county. The Bolivar-Mansfield fault system is the most prominent, crossing the county from the northwest to southeast. This fault system is a series of parallel faults with throws up to 300 feet. Smaller faults, with displacement usually less than 150 feet, are located in the southern part of the county. These include the Fordland, Diggins and Sarvis Point faults. These faults are inactive and are not considered a seismic risk (Dodd, 1990, p. 83). September 2009 Draft 2-4 Webster County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Part II: Community Profile Webster County is underlain by limestones, dolomites, shales, siltstones and sandstones. Most of the exposed bedrock in the county consists of cherty limestone and cherty dolomite. Bedrock formations, from oldest to youngest, include the Gasconade Dolomite, Roubidoux Formation, Jefferson City Dolomite, Cotter Dolomite, Compton formation, Northview Formation, Pierson Formation, Elsey Formation, Burlington- Keokuk Limestone, and Pennsylvanian sandstone. The Northview Formation, consisting of silty shales, acts as an aquitard or barrier to the downward percolation of groundwater; water moves laterally along the top of the shale formation, often resurfacing as a spring. The major source of groundwater supplies in the county is from deep wells in the Cambrian and Ordovician age dolomites which produce from 300 to more than 600 gallons of water per minute. (Dodd, 1990, p. 87). The topographic landscape exhibits features of karst, including sinkholes, losing streams, springs and caves. These features result from the weathering and dissolution of the underlying limestone and dolomite bedrock by surface waters and carbonic acids in the atmosphere. These karst features allow surface water, including contaminants from development and poorly planned livestock operations, to enter the groundwater system relatively quickly with little filtration. Hydrology and Drainage Webster County lies within eight watersheds. The northern half of the county is drained by the Pomme de Terre River, Niangua River and Osage Fork of the Gasconade River, all of which flow in a northerly direction. A southeastern section of the county lies within the Upper Gasconade River watershed, which also flows to the north. Most of the southern portion of the county lies within the watersheds of the Upper James River, Finley Creek, Beaver Creek, and Upper Bryant Creek. The Upper James River, Finley Creek, and Beaver Creek are within the White River Basin, flowing south to eventual impoundment in Table Rock Lake. The extreme southeast corner of the county is drained by Upper Bryant Creek which drains to the North Fork of the White River. The Pomme De Terre River, a tributary of the Osage River, originates near the City of Marshfield, flowing in a northeasterly direction to impoundment in Pomme de Terre Lake near Hermitage, Missouri.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cultural Affiliation Statement for Buffalo National River
    CULTURAL AFFILIATION STATEMENT BUFFALO NATIONAL RIVER, ARKANSAS Final Report Prepared by María Nieves Zedeño Nicholas Laluk Prepared for National Park Service Midwest Region Under Contract Agreement CA 1248-00-02 Task Agreement J6068050087 UAZ-176 Bureau of Applied Research In Anthropology The University of Arizona, Tucson AZ 85711 June 1, 2008 Table of Contents and Figures Summary of Findings...........................................................................................................2 Chapter One: Study Overview.............................................................................................5 Chapter Two: Cultural History of Buffalo National River ................................................15 Chapter Three: Protohistoric Ethnic Groups......................................................................41 Chapter Four: The Aboriginal Group ................................................................................64 Chapter Five: Emigrant Tribes...........................................................................................93 References Cited ..............................................................................................................109 Selected Annotations .......................................................................................................137 Figure 1. Buffalo National River, Arkansas ........................................................................6 Figure 2. Sixteenth Century Polities and Ethnic Groups (after Sabo 2001) ......................47
    [Show full text]
  • Springfield Area Directory of Environmental Agencies and Organizations
    Springfield Area Directory of Environmental Agencies and Organizations Springfield/Greene County Choose Environmental Excellence 2010 Welcome to the Springfield Area Directory of Environmental Agencies and Organizations… …The purpose of this directory is to provide information about government agencies, not-for-profit and member-based organizations serving Springfield and Greene County that are active in protecting our natural environment. The directory has been compiled by Springfield/Greene County Choose Environmental Excellence as a service to the community. The directory will be periodically updated to include new submissions as they are received. In addition to providing contact information for several environmental agencies and organizations, each listing in the directory also provides information that will allow the user to determine which agency or organization will best meet a particular need. Additions to the Directory, as well as suggestions for improvement, can be made by submitting information to: Barbara J. Lucks Springfield/Greene County Choose Environmental Excellence PO Box 8368 Springfield, MO 65801 Re: Springfield Environmental Directory Or send an e-mail to: [email protected] This directory is also available on the following web sites: www.springfieldmo.gov/cee www.OzarksEnvironment.com i Table of Contents Introduction to the Directory i Table of Contents ii U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 1 U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) 2 MO Dept. of Conservation (MDC) – Nature Center 3 MO Dept. of Conservation (MDC) – Service Center 4 MO Dept. of Conservation (MDC) – Storm Drain Stenciling Project 5 MO Dept. of Natural Resources (MDNR) – Air Pollution Control 6 MO Dept. of Natural Resources (MDNR) – Hazardous Waste Management 7 MO Dept.
    [Show full text]
  • Subterranean Journeys March 2017 a Springfield Plateau Grotto Publication Volume 12 Issue 1
    Subterranean Journeys March 2017 A Springfield Plateau Grotto Publication Volume 12 Issue 1 Contents March 2017 Volume 12 Issue 1 Page President’s Column 3 James River Valley Caves, Jonathan Beard 4 Bats and Caves, a Teen Perspective 12 Golden Age of Missouri Show Caves, Jonathan Beard 15 Ozark Big-Eared Bat (COTO) Project, Jonathan Beard 19 About the Springfield Plateau Grotto 22 Subterranean Journeys Subterranean Cover Photo: A collage of vintage brochures from Missouri Show Caves compiled by Jonathan Beard. 2 President’s Column We’re almost three months into 2017 and it’s already shaping up to be a great year for SPG members. On a regular basis, we’ve got multiple members doing different things every weekend. There is no shortage of things to do. We’ve got the recurring monthly Cave Research Foundation trips to caves in Buffalo River National Park, monthly Barry County ridgewalking weekends, work at the Ozarks National Scenic Riverways, the on-going Shoal Creek Cave survey, not to mention other multiple surveys Jon, et al have in progress. Breakdown Cave, which SPG manages, is closed during the winter months so that hibernating bats are not disturbed. The cave will open for the year on April 1st, so those of you who joined the grotto over the winter will now have a chance to get an introduction to the cave. It’s a GREAT cave to cut your caving teeth on, if you haven’t had a chance to yet. And remember, Breakdown Cave is accessible to members anytime from April 1st to November 15th.
    [Show full text]
  • White River Forum II: Second Annual Meeting of the White River Forum John Havel
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Technical Reports Arkansas Water Resources Center 11-2-2009 White River Forum II: Second Annual Meeting of the White River Forum John Havel Kenneth Steele Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/awrctr Part of the Fresh Water Studies Commons, Hydrology Commons, Soil Science Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Recommended Citation Havel, John and Steele, Kenneth. 2009. White River Forum II: Second Annual Meeting of the White River Forum. Arkansas Water Resources Center, Fayetteville, AR. MSC287. 28 This Technical Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Arkansas Water Resources Center at ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Technical Reports by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. ~~ White River Forum II ABSTRACTS Technical Session: Water Quality and Conservation Issues in the White River Basin Mountain Home, Arkansas November 2, 2000 94. 93" 92. LAKE TANEYCOMO / r - 36" \., - MISSOURI ' r--f.TVOV LJAIIIA ARKANSAS 0 10 20 MILES 6 16 I to ~LOMETERS (map pro••ided b) USGS) Publication No. MSC-287 Arka nsas Water Resources Center 112 Ozark Ball University of Ar kansas Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 White River Forum II Mountain Home, Arkansas Nov 2, 2000 Technical Session: Water Quality and Conservation Issues in the White River Basin Preface This second annual meeting of the White River Forum is proof of widespread interest in the water quality of the Upper White River watershed. The participation of numerous elected officials, state and federal agencies, universities, businesses, and local citizens indicates that interest in understanding policy issues crosses political boundaries and occupations.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Christian County, Mining by Wayne Glenn
    EARLY CHRISTIAN COUNTY MINING By Wayne Glenn, 2009 After finishing a book on Christian County’s first 150 years, this author decided to look into an element of the county’s history that I had become aware of when doing research for that book. I had seen a few references to the county’s mining past, but I had no idea how significant the search for gold, lead, iron ore, coal, zinc, copper, etc. were in helping settle the southeast quarter of Christian County. Having time for additional research, I quickly came upon many 19th century references to mining in future Christian County (before 1859) and even more detailed information about local mining after the county was established. It is even likely that the search for minerals played a role in the movement to create Christian County from already existing counties. In my book on Christian County’s 150 year history, we recited passages from geologist Henry Schoolcraft’s monumental writings on his 1818-1819 trip to future Christian County and its surrounding territory. In reality, American-born Schoolcraft (1793-1864) came to southwest Missouri Territory to learn about its mineral potential. While Schoolcraft took a wide-angle look at everything he saw, his area of greatest concern was the existence and volume of minerals in the area. He wrote of his first hand observation of primitive mining and smelting that had been done by the Osage Indians in future Christian and Greene Counties. He stated in a book he wrote on Missouri mines that he believed valuable lead mines were about 20 miles above the junction of the “Findley River” (Finley Creek) and the larger James River.
    [Show full text]
  • Nonpoint Source Bank Erosion and Water Quality Assessment, James River at River Bluff Farm, Stone County, Missouri
    The Ozarks Environmental and Water Resources Institute (OEWRI) Missouri State University (MSU) FINAL REPORT Nonpoint Source Bank Erosion and Water Quality Assessment, James River at River Bluff Farm, Stone County, Missouri Field work completed May 2012- May 2013 Prepared by: Marc R. Owen, M.S., Assistant Director Robert T. Pavlowsky, Ph.D., Director Ezekiel Kuehn, Graduate Assistant Assisted in the field by Lindsay M. Olson, Graduate Assistant Prepared for: James River Basin Partnership Joseph Pitts, Executive Director 117 Park Central Square Springfield, MO 65806 August 16, 2013 OEWRI EDR-13-002 1 SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES The James River Basin Partnership (JRBP) is working with a landowner to implement a conservation easement along the west bank of the James River in Stone County. This conservation easement is part of a Section 319 Grant from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources and the Environmental Protection Agency Region VII designed to reduce nonpoint source pollution to the James River. The Ozarks Environmental and Water Resources Institute (OEWRI) will complete a bank erosion and nonpoint modeling study to determine the annual bank erosion rates and related sediment and nutrient loadings to the James River for the 6 km (3.7 mi) long easement segment. Sediment released to the channel by erosion can supply excess nutrients to river and cause sedimentation problems downstream. Portions of the James River are listed on the 303 D list of impaired waters for nutrients, and phosphorus (P) has been identified as the limiting factoring in eutrophic conditions in the basin (MDNR, 2001). Riparian easements remove the potential for future development or other disturbances that can increase runoff and nonpoint loads to the river.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper White River Basin Physiography and Hydrography
    N " 94°12'0"W 94°0'0"W 93°48'0"W 93°36'0"W 93°24'0"W 93°12'0"W 93°0'0"W 92°48'0"W 92°36'0"W 92°24'0"W N " 0 ' 0 4 ' 4 2 ° 2 ° 7 3 7 3 Dade Greene Webster N " Wright N 0 " ' 0 2 ' 1 2 ° Upper James River 1 7 ° 3 Jasper 7 3 Lawrence Wilsons Creek - James River Finley Creek N " N 0 " ' James River Sub-Basin 0 ' 0 ° 0 ° 7 3 7 3 Christian Douglas Crane Creek - James River Upper Newton Bull Shoals Lake - White River N Beaver Creek " N " 0 ' 0 8 ' 8 4 ° 4 ° 6 3 6 Flat Creek Lake Taneycomo - 3 Stone White River Barry Lower James River - Little North Fork Table Rock Lake White River Lower Taney Table Rock Lake - Ozark N " N 0 McDonald " ' 0 6 White River ' 3 6 ° 3 6 ° 3 6 Bull Shoals Lake Sub-Basin 3 T a b l e R o c k L a k e Bear Creek - Upper Table Rock Lake - Lower Bull Shoals Lake White River Middle Table Rock Lake Missouri Table Rock Lake - Big Creek - White River Bull Shoals Lake Arkansas N Kings River - B u l l S h o a l s L a k e " N " 0 ' 0 4 ' 4 2 ° Table Rock Lake 2 ° 6 3 6 3 Bear Creek Benton Carroll Long Creek Bull Shoals Lake - B e a v e r L a k e White River Beaver Lake - Boone Baxter £ White River Marion Osage Headwaters Creek Crooked Creek Outlet N " N " 0 ' 0 2 Crooked Creek ' 2 1 ° 1 ° 6 3 6 Beaver Reservoir Sub-Basin 3 Clear Creek Upper War Eagle Creek Kings River N " N 0 " ' Washington Madison 0 0 ' ° 0 6 Richland Creek ° 3 6 3 Middle Fork White River Newton Searcy West Fork Lake Sequoyah - White River White River Stone N " N " 0 ' Headwaters 0 8 ' 8 4 ° 4 ° 5 3 White River 5 3 Crawford Van Buren Franklin Johnson Pope 94°12'0"W
    [Show full text]
  • Status of the Watershed
    Status of the Watershed A Report from the Upper White River Basin Foundation On Water Quality in the Ozarks October 2008 Upper White River Basin Foundation P.O. Box 6218 Branson, MO 65615 www.uwrb.org 2 Status of the Watershed A Report from the Upper White River Basin Foundation On Water Quality in the Ozarks October, 2008 The Foundation The Upper White River Basin Foundation (the “Foundation”) is a not-for-profit watershed organization with offices in Branson, Missouri. Its mission is to promote water quality in the upper White River watershed through bi-state collaboration on research, education, pubic policy and action projects in Arkansas and Missouri. The basin region is shown in the accompanying map. Established in 2001, the Foundation was formed to address threats to the beautiful rivers, lakes and streams which have supported economic development in the region and contributed to the attractive lifestyle of the Ozarks. Through the support of its board of trustees and several water quality grants, the Foundation has undertaken a variety of projects to fulfill its mission. More information about the Foundation can be found on the organization’s website at uwrb.org. The Problem The Foundation’s board has regularly discussed the extent to which its programs and projects are having an impact on water quality in the basin watershed. This is a difficult issue because many factors influence what is happening to the water. An even more fundamental issue involves what is actually meant by the term “quality,” prompting the question “quality for what purpose?” We understand the answer to this latter question in common terms like suitability for fishing, swimming, water sports and with appropriate treatment, drinking.
    [Show full text]
  • James River Freeway in Springfield, MO
    March 30, 2021 The Honorable Billy Long United States House of Representatives 2454 Rayburn HOB Washington D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Long, The Ozarks Transportation Organization would like to express our support of additional funds to widen James River Freeway in Springfield, MO. The freeway is in desperate need of additional lanes to solve safety and congestion issues on the roadway. With over 80,000 cars a day using the freeway, it serves as an essential arterial to get people to work and goods moving in and through our community. There have been over 804 crashes over the last ten years, which many might have been avoided if speeds were not slowed to 46 miles per hour in the evening peak hour. The region is proud of the collaboration we have in selecting projects using a data driven approach to agree on our top priorities. The cities of Springfield, Republic, Nixa, Ozark, Willard, Strafford and Battlefield along with Greene and Christian counties agree James River Freeway is a priority for the region. We must keep the freeway system moving in to keep business moving. The widening of James River Freeway will be a straightforward project, as environmental clearance is approved pending final details on sound wall locations. MoDOT has done considerable work to prepare for the construction of additional lanes from National to Kansas Expressway and construction is planned for FY22. We look forward to the completion of this important project and hope that you will request that congressional funds are directed to the widening of James River Freeway. Thank you for your service and your consideration of this project.
    [Show full text]
  • Springfield, Missouri Integrated Planning Support: Task 1 Data Collection Plan
    Springfield, Missouri Integrated Planning Support: Task 1 Data Collection Plan Draft July 2015 Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Water Supply Users ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Surface ....................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Groundwater ............................................................................................................................................................. 7 Industrial ................................................................................................................................................................. 12 Agricultural .............................................................................................................................................................. 12 Available Data ..................................................................................................................................................... 12 Methods for Estimating Cattle Access ................................................................................................................ 15 Recreational Users ......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Upper White River Watershed Integrated Economic and Environmental Management Project Related Publications
    FAPRI–MU Report #09-08 Upper White River Watershed Integrated Economic and Environmental Management Project September 2008 www.fapri.missouri.edu Published by the Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute at the University of Missouri– Columbia (FAPRI–MU), 101 Park DeVille Drive, Suite E; Columbia, MO 65203 in September 2008. FAPRI–MU is part of the College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources (CAFNR). http://www.fapri.missouri.edu This project was partially funded by the US EPA Region 7, through the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (subgrant #G05-NPS-09), under Section 319 of the Clean Water Act. Contact author for FAPRI–MU Report #09-08 is Verel Benson ([email protected]). Any opinion, fi ndings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily refl ect the view of the US EPA or MODNR. Permission is granted to reproduce this information with appropriate attribution to the author(s) and FAPRI–MU. For more information, contact Pamela Donner ([email protected]) Coordinator Publications & Communications, FAPRI–MU. Upper White River Watershed Integrated Economic and Environmental Management Project FAPRI–MU Report #09-08 By Verel W. Benson Claire Baffaut Dennis Robinson Walaiporn Intarapapong Todd Farrand Wendi Rogers Kyoungmin Nam Acknowledgements We wish to acknowledge the contributions and the cooperative efforts of Ralph Davis from the University of Arkansas, Water Resources Center; Indrajeet Chaubey, Marty Matlock, Chad Cooper, and Brian K. Schaffer, University of Arkansas, Department of Biological & Agricultural Engineering; and Jennie Popp, H. German Rodriguez, and Nathan Kemper, University of Arkansas, Department of Agricultural Economics & Agribusiness.
    [Show full text]
  • Bacteria Source Tracking to Support Watershed Planning, Pearson Creek, Greene County, Missouri
    Ozarks Environmental and Water Resources Institute (OEWRI) Missouri State University (MSU) Bacteria Source Tracking to Support Watershed Planning, Pearson Creek, Greene County, Missouri. FINAL REPORT Prepared by: Marc R. Owen, M.S., Assistant Director, OEWRI Babur S. Mirza, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Biology, MSU Grace F. Roman, Graduate Assistant, OEWRI John C. Kincaid, Laboratory Assistant, Department of Biology, MSU Robert T. Pavlowsky, Ph.D., Director, OEWRI Ozark Environmental and Water Resources Institute Missouri State University Temple Hall 342 901 South National Avenue Springfield, MO 65897 Completed for: Timothy Davis, Environmental Compliance Manager Greene County Resource Management Department 940 Booneville Ave Springfield, MO 65802 417-868-4147 [email protected] February 8, 2019 OEWRI EDR-19-001 1 SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES Pearson Creek, a tributary of the James River, in Greene County Missouri is on the state’s 303d list of impaired waters due to high concentrations of E. coli bacteria. Pearson Creek consistently exceeds the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) water quality standards for Whole Body Contact Recreation (WBCR) Class-A designation of 126 MPN/100 mL from both urban and rural nonpoint pollution sources (Richards and Johnson 2002, Owen and Pavlowsky 2014, MDNR 2014, MDNR 2018). The City of Springfield and Greene County have been working to identify bacteria sources that will ultimately reduce E. Coli concentrations in the stream. In 2017, Greene County started monitoring bimonthly water quality at the United States Geological Survey (USGS) gaging station at Farm Road (FR) 148. That same year, the City of Springfield provided funding for a wastewater exfiltration study aimed at pinpointing specific bacteria (and other pollutants) source areas along Pearson Creek.
    [Show full text]