2018 SWCS International Annual Conference July 29-August 1, 2018 Albuquerque Convention Center

1. Reducing Sediment and Nutrient Loads to Beaver
Lake through Stream Restoration
Matthew A. Van Eps, PE and Sandi J. Formica
Watershed Conservation Resource Center
Soil and Water Conservation Society, 73rd Annual Conference, Albuquerque, NM 7/31/2018

2. Stream Restoration in the Beaver Lake Watershed
• Beaver Lake provides drinking water for over 420,000
people in NWA
• Major economic engine for NWA
• Several tributaries to the lake are on the 303(d) list
• State NPS priority for nutrient reduction

3. Implementing River Restoration in the
Beaver Lake Watershed
Beaver Lake Watershed Projects
• West Fork White River at Brentwood
• White River Streambank at Noland Treatment Plant
• Mullins Branch Stream at University of Arkansas
• West Fork White River at Fayetteville Airport
• West Fork White River Mitigation Bank
• Stream Restoration at Kessler mountain
• Streambank Stabilization White River
• Future Projects???
Funding Sources
• Federally funded grants
• Local funding from municipalities
• Private Foundations
• In-kind services
• state government
• watershed groups & volunteers
• water districts
2009-2017

4. Implementing River Restoration in the Ozarks
Project Partners
• Project partners are a critical component of successful projects
• Each Project has a minimum of four partners
• Arkansas Natural Resource Commission – 319 grants
• US Environmental Protection Agency – 319 & wetland grants
• Natural Resources Conservation Service - RCPP
• City of Fayetteville
• University of Arkansas
• Private Foundations
• Beaver Water District
• Arkansas Game & Fish Commission
• US Fish & Wildlife Service
• CH2M Hill
• West Fork Environmental Protection Assoc.
• Illinois River Watershed Partnership
• Beaver Watershed Alliance
• Washington County Cooperative Ext. Serv.
• Northwest Arkansas Land Trust

5. Severe Streambank Erosion
Source of Sediment and Nutrients to Rivers
Bankfull Flow Event on the White River
• 400 square mile watershed area
• On the State 303 (d) list

6. Severe Streambank Erosion is a
Source of Sediment and Nutrients to Rivers
West Fork White River Watershed Assessment (Formica, et, al 2004)
• Major tributary to Beaver Lake, drinking water source to NWA
• 124 mi2 rural watershed
• Estimated annual sediment load – 36,000 tons
• 66% from accelerated streambank erosion
• State 303 (d) listed stream since 1998
• aquatic life use not supported - high turbidity & excessive silt
1709
391
8
1104
2787
8
5168
15391
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
Source
Pasture
Forest
Forest Harvest
Urban Areas
Construction
NPDES Permits
Road, Ditches,
Gullies
Streambank
Erosion
Less than 2 mm
particle size

7.  Projects include a streambank
monitoring component
 Measure erosion rates before
and after restoration
 Sample bank materials
 Quantifying sediment &
nutrients from streambanks
provides information:
 Watershed planning
• Prioritize sites for restoration
• Demonstrates project
effectiveness
• Determine best use of funding
• Address TMDLs or other
water quality issues
Evaluation of Streambank Erosion and
Estimating Sediment and Nutrient loadings

8. Streambank erosion rates are measured before and
after stream restoration is implemented
Evaluation of Streambank Erosion and
Estimating Sediment and Nutrient Loadings
Measured Streambank Profile-Osage 14
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0123456
Horizontal Distance (ft)
VerticalDistance(ft.)
2006 Profile 2007 Profile
Erosion Direction
Streambank Material
Water Surface
Toe Pin

9.  Samples collected from
streambank horizons
 Measured
 Bulk Density
 Particle Size Distribution
 Sample Analysis
 Total Phosphorus
 Total Nitrogen
Evaluation of Streambank Erosion and
Estimating Sediment and Nutrient Loadings

10. Streambank Material Sampling Results*
Summary of Average Values
Location Material Class Bulk Density (lb/ft3) TP (lb/ton) TN (lb/ton)
Niokaska - Gulley
Fine 80 0.6 2.3
Coarse 148 0.2 0.6
Niokaska - Sweetbriar
Fine 102 0.6 1.6
Coarse 135 0.3 0.6
White River Fine 99 1.0 1.9
Mullins Branch Fine 96 0.4 2.3
West Fork White River
Fine 93 0.6 2.0
Coarse 97 0.3 0.6
Osage Creek
Fine 71 0.9 2.4
Coarse 112 0.3 0.6
Bulk Density: 71 to 148 lb/ft3
Total Phosphorus: 0.2 – 1.0 lb/ton of sediment
Total Nitrogen: 0.6 – 2.4 lb/ton of sediment
* Results of the materials analysis is preliminary and in review process

11. Project Example: White River Streambank
Restoration
Site Overview
• Bank Height
• 16 ft
• Watershed Area
• 400 mile2
• Bankfull Flow
• 11,500 cfs

12. Pre-Restoration Site Monitoring
 Bank Erosion Monitoring Results
 Ranged from 3.1 to 21.7 feet over
a 7 month period
 Included two major flood
events - April and May 2011
 Air Photo Evaluation of Lateral
Bank Erosion - 2009 - 2011
 Average rate over three years
was 14 ft/year
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
VerticalDistance(ft)
Horizontal Distance (ft)
White River Bank Stabilization Project-Bank Profile 5
1/19/2011
8/17/2011
Measured Erosion: 21.4’

13. Pre-Restoration Site Monitoring
 Results of Bank Material Sampling
 Pre-Restoration Estimated Loadings
 Calculated over 7 month monitoring period
 Sediment: 4,800 tons
 T Phosphorus: 4,700 lbs
 T Nitrogen: 8,700 lbs
 Estimated for average flow year
 Sediment: 3,600 tons/year
 T Phosphorus: 3,500 lbs/year
 T Nitrogen: 6,500 lbs/year
Soil Type
Bulk Density
(lb/ft3)
TP (lb/ton) TN (lb/ton)
Silt Loam 104.9 1.0 1.7
Clay Loam 88.0 1.0 2.3

14. Implementation of Restoration
Heavy Equipment Construction – Feb & Mar 2012
 Toe-wood Construction
 Built out from 16 ft high cutbank
 Widest point 40 feet
 Gravel from point bar on opposite side was removed to
maintain design cross-sectional area
 Constructed to bedrock

15.  Multi-level Bench Construction
 Inner berm bench is built on top of
toe-wood
 Bankfull bench is built on top of
inner-berm bench
 Soil Mattresses Constructed on
both Benches
 Coconut fiber erosion control fabric
filled with soil
 Hardwood stakes were used to secure
mattresses
Implementation of Restoration
Heavy Equipment Construction – Feb & Mar 2012

16. Site Transformation
Immediately Following ConstructionBefore ConstructionTwo Months After ConstructionSix Months After Construction18 Months After Construction2 Years After Construction4 Years After Construction

17. White River Post Restoration
Load Reductions
 Post-surveys indicate a 95-100% reduction
in annual sediment and nutrient loads from
streambank erosion for an average flow
year:
 3,600 tons/year of sediment
 3,500 lbs/year of total phosphorus
 6,500 lbs/year of total nitrogen
Total Cost - $352,000
 Survey & Design
 Construction and Materials
 Extensive Re-vegetation
 Public Outreach
 Monitoring and grant administration

18. Mullins Creek
University of Arkansas Campus
Before Restoration
Small Urban Stream – 0.75 mi2

19. Mullins Creek
University of Arkansas Campus
Construction
Just after construction

20. Mullins Creek
University of Arkansas Campus
6 years old

21. River and Streambank Restoration Summary
Project Area
mi2
Length
ft
Age
yr
Cost
Sediment
Reduced*
Ton/yr
T. Phos.
Reduced*
Lb/yr
West Fork White River
Brentwood 18 1,800 9 $406,000 1,880 640
White River
Downstream Noland WWTP 400 1,000 6 $352,000 3,600 3,500
Mullins Creek - urban
University of Arkansas 0.75 1,800 6 $425,000 52 24
West Fork White River
Fayetteville Airport 83 4,600 4 $1,360,000 4,072 1,817
West Fork White River
Dead Horse Mountain Road 120 2,500 ++ 3 $550,000 1,860 1,080
Ground Cherry Creek - urban
Kessler Mountain Regional Park 0.75 2,000 2 $435,000 61 48
White River
At the Noland WWTP 400 1,300 1.5 $577,000 3,600 3,200
*Preliminary Results
Total
15,000
ton/yr
10,000 lb/yr
Established Track Record of Successful Stream Restoration Projects - Beaver Lake Watershed
Nearly 3 miles of restoration completed

22. Keys to Success: Ongoing Inspection,
Maintenance and Flood Repairs
• Inspection following flood
events
• Ongoing Maintenance
• Vegetation management
• Hand repairs of structures
• Flood Repairs
• Minimum time - five years
following construction
• Cost have been covered:
• Original grant
• Partners
• 2011 Flood Disaster – FEMA
• Funding should be established
when project is initiated
White River
4 months after completion
Niokaska Restoration
Gulley Park
Three Days Old

23. Project Focus Area
 West Fork White River (WFWR)
 Major Tributary to White River that forms Beaver Lake –
The drinking water source for over 420,000 residents of
NW Arkansas
 Priority for sediment and phosphorus reduction
 Mississippi River Basin Critical Conservation Area
 Impaired stream on the state 303 (d) List
 State non-point source program priority for nutrient reduction
 Project focus is one-third of WFWR Watershed
 Highest concentration of priority sites for restoration
 Creates potential funding opportunity for other areas in
the future
 Total Project Funding – $8.8 Million
 $4.3M federal award
 $4.5M cash and in-kind
West Fork White River Watershed Initiative
A 2016 RCPP Project (USDA-NRCS)

24. Project Includes Three Primary Components
 PL-566 Watershed Program:
 Turn-key projects to restore reaches of river with
multiple landowners
 Enables restoration of agricultural lands and other
properties
 EQIP Program:
 Implementation of Practices to Improve Water Quality
 Monitoring Program:
 Evaluate Improvements
West Fork White River Watershed Initiative
A 2016 RCPP Project (USDA-NRCS)

25. Project Outcomes: PL-566 Watershed Program
 Restore 1 to 2 miles of river and streams
 Restore a minimum of 2 to 4 miles of riparian buffers
 Achieve 75% reduction of sediment and nutrient loads
from accelerated streambank at restored sites
 3,000 to 7,000 tons sediment/year
 1,500 to 3,500 lbs of phosphorus/year
 Restore wetlands in adjacent floodplains
 Obtain 5 conservation easements
West Fork White River Watershed Initiative
A 2016 RCPP Project (USDA-NRCS)

26. Conclusions and Recommendations
 Streambank erosion can be a major source of sediment and
nutrients depending on the basin
 Watershed sediment and nutrient loads can be greatly
reduced through river restoration projects
 Example: White River Project estimated minimum sediment & total
phosphorus reductions over 10 years:
36,000 tons of Sediment
35,000 lbs phosphorus
 Recommend source of funding be developed for ongoing
inspection and maintenance for five years
Successful projects with documented sediment and nutrient
reductions bring additional opportunities for funding

27. Reducing Sediment and Nutrient Loads to Beaver
Lake through Stream Restoration
9 months After Restoration
Before Restoration
White River
Noland WWTP
Questions?
Matthew A. Van Eps, P.E., Associate Director
Watershed Conservation Resource Center
vaneps@watershedconservation.org (501) 352-7294