Cedar Creek Watershed Management Plan September 9, 2005 Prepared by: St. Joseph River Watershed Initiative 3718 New Vision Drive, Fort Wayne, IN 46845 260-484-5848 x 120 Funding source: Section 319 Grant ARN 01-383 Indiana Department of Environmental Management Cedar Creek Watershed Management Plan i See also: Attachment A: Water Quality Monitoring Analysis for the Cedar Creek Watershed Attachment B: Aerial Photographs of Various Areas of Concern in the Cedar Creek Watershed Cedar Creek Watershed Management Plan ii Table of Contents Table of Figures v List of Tables vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VIII Distribution List x Our Vision for the Cedar Creek Watershed xi Location of the Cedar Creek Watershed xii PART 1. PARTNERSHIPS AND SCOPE OF THE PLAN 1 1.1 Charge for developing the watershed plan 1 1.2 Organizing the community 1 1.2.1 The St. Joseph River Watershed Initiative 1 1.2.2 The Alliance of Indiana Rural Water 2 1.2.3 Cedar Creek Wildlife Project, Inc. 2 1.2.4 Soil & water conservation districts 2 1.2.5 Natural Resources Conservation Service 2 1.2.6 The cities of Fort Wayne, Auburn, Garrett and Waterloo 3 1.2.7 County Surveyors’ offices and drainage boards 3 1.2.8 The Nature Conservancy 3 1.2.9 Wood-Land-Lakes Resource Conservation and Development 4 1.2.10 ACRES Land Trust 4 1.2.11 Izaak Walton League 4 1.2.12 County health departments 4 1.2.13 Indiana University – Purdue University Fort Wayne (IPFW) 4 1.2.14 DeKalb County Planning Board 5 1.2.15 Allen County Parks and Friends of Metea Park 5 1.2.16 Fort Wayne-Allen County comprehensive plan 5 1.2.17 Auburn Parks and Recreation 6 1.2.18 Allen County Partnership for Water Quality 6 1.2.19 Hoosier Environmental Council 6 1.2.20 Hoosier Riverwatch 6 1.2.21 Maumee River Basin Commission 6 1.2.22 Other active groups 7 1.3 Structure of the planning group 7 1.4 Concerns of stakeholders 8 PART 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE CEDAR CREEK WATERSHED 11 2.1 Location of the Cedar Creek watershed 11 2.2 Drainage area and population in the watershed 11 2.3 Physical description of the watershed 13 Cedar Creek Watershed Management Plan iii 2.3.1 Topography 13 2.3.2 Endangered species 14 2.3.3 Soils 15 2.3.4 Vegetation 17 2.3.5 Fauna 18 2.3.6 Hydrology and morphology 18 2.3.7 Climate of Northwestern Indiana 19 2.4 Land use 19 2.4.1 Settlement and historical changes 20 2.4.2 Current statistics 21 2.4.3 Future development plans 26 2.4.4 Significant sites in the watershed 26 PART 3. BENCHMARKS: CURRENT STATUS OF THE WATERSHED 30 3.1 Cedar Creek on 303(d) list for E. coli and other impairments 30 3.2 Existing Water Quality Data 30 3.2.1 Local water quality monitoring efforts 30 3.2.1.1 The St. Joseph River Watershed Initiative 31 3.2.1.2 The City of Fort Wayne 34 3.2.1.3 The Bacteria Source Tracking Project 34 3.2.1.4 The Allen Co. Regional Water & Sewer District engineering report 35 3.2.1.5 Waterloo Area Source Water Protection Plan 36 3.2.1.6 DeKalb County Well Testing Project, 1990 36 3.2.2 State water quality monitoring 36 3.2.2.1 The 303(d) List of Impaired Streams 37 3.2.2.2 IDEM Intensive Segment Survey 37 3.2.2.3 IDEM Macroinvertebrate Study, 1995 37 3.2.2.4 Ranking of Indiana basins 38 3.3 Point sources of pollution 38 3.4 NPDES Discharge Data 39 3.5 Non-point sources of pollution 40 3.6 Fish consumption advisories 41 3.7 Other documentation and sources of information about the Watershed 42 3.7.1 St. Joseph WRAS 42 3.7.2 St. Joseph River WMP 42 3.7.3 St. Joseph River Watershed Initiative Strategic Plan 42 3.7.4 The DeKalb County Comprehensive Plan 42 3.7.5 The Fort Wayne-Allen County Comprehensive Plan 42 3.7.6 Indiana Stream Reach Characterization and Evaluation Report 43 PART 4. PROBLEMS, CAUSES AND STRESSORS TO THE CEDAR CREEK 44 4.1 E. coli counts keep surface water of Cedar Creek in non-attainment for WQS 44 4.2 Pesticide and nutrient runoff threatens the surface and ground water quality 45 Cedar Creek Watershed Management Plan iv 4.3 Erosion and sediment loading threaten drainage, water quality and aquatic habitat 48 4.4 Urban sprawl and unregulated development contribute to loss of agricultural and forested lands. 52 4.5 Log jams and stream obstructions affect habitat, drainage, flooding 53 4.6 Loss and filling of wetlands decreases water quality and storage capacity 55 4.7 Lack of education among stakeholders about the watershed hinders action 55 PART 5. SOURCES OF PROBLEMS AND STRESSORS TO THE CEDAR CREEK 57 5.1 Sources of E. coli problems in the Cedar Creek watershed 57 5.1.1 Failure of Onsite Septic Systems 57 5.1.2 Combined Sewer Overflows (CSO) 60 5.1.3 Geese and other wildlife 61 5.1.4 Improper management of livestock operations and manure disposal 63 5.1.5 Domestic animal sources 64 5.2 Sources of pesticide and nutrient runoff 64 5.2.1 Runoff from agricultural land 65 5.2.2 Runoff from urban/suburban areas 67 5.2.3 Pesticide application in or near drainage ditches 67 5.3 Sources of erosion and sediment loading 67 5.3.1 Ditch maintenance activities 67 5.3.3 Construction Activities 69 5.3.4 Gravel mining in or adjacent to streams 69 5.4 Sources contributing to loss of prime agricultural and forested lands 70 5.4.1 Changes in agricultural economy 70 5.4.2 Urban sprawl 71 5.5 Issues surrounding logjams and stream obstructions 72 5.5.1 Removal methods 72 5.5.2 Public involvement in decision-making 73 5.5.3 The permitting process 73 5.6 Loss of functional wetlands 74 PART 6. CRITICAL AREAS OF CONCERN, POLLUTION LOADS AND REDUCTION TARGETS IN THE CEDAR CREEK 76 6.1 Bacteria and Pathogens 81 6.2 Pesticides and Fertilizers 82 6.3 Sediment and Erosion 83 6.4 Loss of Agricultural and Forested Lands 85 6.5 Log jams and Stream Obstructions 85 Cedar Creek Watershed Management Plan v 6.6 Loss of Wetlands 87 6.7 Lack of education about the Cedar Creek Watershed among stakeholders 87 PART 7. GOALS AND INDICATORS FOR CEDAR CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT 89 PART 8. APPLICATION OF MEASURES TO ACHIEVE GOALS IN THE CEDAR CREEK WATERSHED 94 APPENDICES A Appendix A: List of Committee Members and Working Group A Appendix B. Endangered, Special Concern, and Extirpated Species in Indiana B Appendix C: NPDES Permitted Facilities in the Cedar Creek Watershed F Appendix D: Sample Stream Information Record G Appendix E: Areas of Concern for bacteria contamination. H Appendix F: The Bacteria Source Tracking Project J Appendix G: Bacteria Loads for Various Sampling Sites in the Cedar Creek Watershed M Appendix H Atrazine Loads for Cedar Creek, Site 100 X Glossary DD Sources EE Table of Figures Figure 1 The St. Joseph River Watershed Initiative has been collecting water quality data on the St. Joseph River and its tributaries since 1996. .......................................................................................................................................1 Figure 2 The Three Rivers Water Filtration Plant processes 34 million gallons of water per day for residents of Fort Wayne and New Haven. Photo courtesy of the City of Fort Wayne. ....................................................................1 Figure 3 The Garrett City Ditch is a tributary of the Cedar Creek. Photo by Jane Loomis........................................2 Figure 4 Construction activity in 2003 upgraded the Garrett Wastewater Treatment Plant. Photo by Jane Loomis.3 Figure 5 State Nature Preserves protect some of the land in the Cedar Creek Watershed. Photo by Jane Loomis....4 Figure 6 Chapter House of the Izaak Walton League in Allen County. Photo by Jane Loomis. .................................4 Figure 7 Conservation tillage practices help to protect the watershed by reducing topsoil erosion. Photo courtesy of Allen County SWCD. .................................................................................................................................................5 Figure 8 Fencing livestock from the stream can help reduce pollution from bacteria. Photo by J. Kirby Thompson. .......................................................................................................................................................................................5 Figure 9 Jan Hosier of IDNR's Hoosier Riverwatch works with a group of volunteer trainees along Cedar Creek in Auburn, July 2004. Photo by Jane Loomis. ..................................................................................................................6 Figure 10 Spring blooms in the Cedar Creek Watershed. Photo by J. Kirby Thompson. ...........................................7 Figure 11 Erosion from the roadside enters the Peckhart Ditch. Photo courtesy of the St. Joseph River Watershed Initiative.........................................................................................................................................................................8 Figure 12 Corn fields flooded by heavy rains. Photo courtesy of Allen County SWCD.............................................8 Cedar Creek Watershed Management Plan vi Figure 13 Lack of shading along streams and ditches affects wildlife and aquatic habitat because of thermal pollution. Photo courtesy of St. Joseph River Watershed Initiative..............................................................................9 Figure 14 Dredging operation on a ditch in the Cedar Creek Watershed. Photo courtesy of St. Joseph River Watershed Initiative....................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Figure 15 Acres of the Cedar Creek Watershed occupied by county. Chart courtesy of Allen County SWCD.......11 Figure 18 Cedar Creek canyon area features striking topography. Photo by Tom Dustin, courtesy of Cedar Creek Wildlife Project website...............................................................................................................................................14 Figure 19 Field depression tile system installation in the SWPI project area, spring 2005. Photo by Jane Loomis. .....................................................................................................................................................................................15 Figure 20 Soils of the Cedar Creek Watershed. Map courtesy of the St.