1

ANTIDEGRADATION PLAN JULY, 2017 - JUNE, 2022

The Wood River Soil and Water Conservation

District

217 West F Street – Shoshone Idaho 83352 Revised 3—21-2017

2

Conservation Districts Background

Idaho’s conservation districts were organized as part of a national soil conservation movement in

response to the Dust Bowl era of the 1930s. What has become the Wood River Soil & Water

Conservation District (Wood River SWCD) originally formed District on June 29, 1943.

Conservation districts are governmental subdivisions of the state of Idaho whose leadership comes

from locally elected volunteer supervisors. The 51 Soil Conservation Districts in Idaho, including

the Wood River Soil & Water Conservation District, are authorized by Idaho state law under

Title 22, Chapter 27. Under 22-2722 titled “Powers of Districts and Supervisors”, it states that, “A

soil conservation district organized under the provisions of this chapter shall constitute a

governmental subdivision of this state, and a public body corporate and politic, exercising public

powers…” Conservation districts are not state agencies, but rather locally governed bodies that

receive some technical and financial assistance from the state.

Support and guidance to Idaho’s conservation districts is provided by the Idaho Soil Conservation

Commission (ISCC). Among the contributions and responsibilities of conservation districts, Idaho

law states that “… conservation districts and the state soil conservation commission lead no

regulatory efforts to conserve, sustain, improve and enhance Idaho’s private and state lands and

provide assistance to private landowners and land users to plan, develop and implement

conservation plans addressing soil, water, air, plant and animal resources.”

Conservation district are catalysts for coordinating and implementing natural resource

conservation programs and channeling expertise and assistance from all levels of government into

action at the local level. Idaho conservation districts emphasize a non-regulatory, incentive based

approach to achieve local support and successful project implementation. The methods used for

implementation rely heavily on proven science-based solutions and typically integrate

informational and educational components.

In addition to the support provided by the ISCC at the state level, Idaho’s conservation districts

also have a unique agreement at the federal level with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation

Service (NRCS). As a partner to local conservation districts, USDA-NRCS provides technical

assistance to landowners and land users as needed or requested within conservation district

boundaries. Each district in Idaho has a signed Mutual Agreement with the Secretary of

Agriculture and the Governor of Idaho that establishes a framework for cooperation that ensures

appropriate project leadership at the local level, although support and assistance may originate at

the state or federal level.

3

Wood River SWCD History:

Farmers who obtained howmestead land in western Linocln and eastern Gooding counties sought to organize a soil

conservation district there in the spring of 1943. They were primarily interested in obtainng technical help to plan

irrigation system and determince which crops could best be grown on the newly developed land.

Petitions were circulated throughout the area in May and a public hearing was held June 29, 1943. All of the 86

landowners who voted in a July 31 referendum favored foring the district. The Wood River Soil and Water

Conservatin Distcit was officaill organized September 10, 1943.

The origianl WRSCD contained about 138,622 acres in a rectangurlar shpaed area in wester Lincoln and eastern

Gooidng coutnies. The district contained no towns, but the village of Shoshone was located south of the district.

Roscoe C. Geraard, Shoshone, charied the original board of supervisors. Serving with Gerard were Sam Danner,

W.B. Whittekeind, Charles Barlome, and Donald Sandy, all of Shoshone. The roigianla board met monthly at the

Lne Star School north of Shoshone.

Supervisors immediately compiled infromation needed to develop a conservation program. They cmpleted. A

rough draft of the SWCD’s first conservaiton program in Decemrber of 1943, the SWCD had received 30

applications for assistance on 3,443 acres.

Even before conservaiton work began farmenre in other parts of Lincoln county were asking how they could be

included in the district . In 1945, the Dietrich and Marley areas were added to the distri and in 1950 Richfield

joined thw SWCD, brign the distrit to its current 777,660.

Renting heavy equipment, particularly for land leveling, was one of the first services the SWCD offered to its

cooperators. The Soil Conervaiton Service loanded equipment to the SWCD, which rente it to farmers for a

nominal fee. Supervisors were responsible for specific implements and kept machinery at their hmes until the late

1970’s.

The Wood River SWCD was chosen as Idaho’s pilot distict in 1951 to determine if conservation district could help

imporve forage production on public land. Sam Danner charied the committee that led this effort.

The SWCD’s auxilary conducted conservation education projects including youth poster contests, exhitits at county

fairs, and essay contest.

From its beginning the WRSWCD has emphasized conservation education for farmers and city fold. Tours

showing new farming methods and ways to control erosion have always played an important role in the district’s

educational program.

The advancements in conservation made in the district would not have eend possiblloe without help from the many

groups and agencies which have which have worked with the SWCD. The NRCS, Agriculture stablization and

Cnseraiton Servie , Farmers Home Administration, Extension Service, Lincoln county Commission and local canal

companies have made conservation a community-wide efforts in the district.

The SWCD has been nvolved in several larger projects. A project to improve irrigation in the Dietrich area was

completed in 1978. The SWCD also particiatped in riprapping a section of accomplished through the Resource

conservaiton and Development program.

In 1983 the SWCd was asked by the Big Wood River Canal Board to develop a projects that would include gravity

sprinkler lines, hydropower electric plants, and irrigatin system improvements. The SWCD has completed the

4

preliminary study of the Richfield Tract and is working with the canal board to obtain funds to impelmtn the

proposed practices.

Conservation tillage is an exciting and increasngly popular new conservation practice in the Wood River District.

Farmers including Kenneth Koeppen, Gary Robbins, and roy Hubert were amon the first t adotp conservation

tillage practices in the district and have found it a great benefit n reducing erosion and lowering fuel costs.

5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary…………………….………………………………………………....7

Certificate of Adoption….………………………………..……………….……………..8

Mission of the Wood River Soil & Water Conservation District ….……..9

Organization of the Board…………………………………………………….…….....10

District Evaluation …………….……………………………………………………….....11

.

Section I:

Physical Characteristics of the District..…………………….....……12

Geographical Area………………..……………………………………………………...13

Land Cover Map…………..………………………………………………..….…….…..14

Land Status Map…………………………………………………………….……….……15

Lincoln County Workforce Trends..………………………………………….…..16

District Partners…………………………………………………………….……..………15 Section II:

Economic Conditions and Outlook………………..…..………….21

Population…………………………………………………………….……………………..22

Trends Impacting Conservation ………………………………………………….…22

Ag Census…………………………………………………………………………………...23 Section III:

Assessment of resource conditions, trends and needs……………

Soil ………………..………………………..………………………………………………….23

Water Resources………………………..………………………………...………..…..…28

Air Quality……………………………………..

Fish and Wildlife…………..

6

Section IV:

Identify and Prioritize Objectives:

District Priority #1 Water Quantity………………………………………………..

District Priority #2 Water Quality……………………………………………....….29

District Priority #3 Soil Erosion………..….………………………………......…...30

District Priority #4 Grazing Land Health ……………………………….………..31

District Priority #5 Species of Concern….………………………………………..32

District Priority #6 District Procedures / Information & Education …...33

Section V:

Water Quality component…………………………………..…....29

Stream Segments………..………………………………………………30

Description of water quality stream segments………………………......31

List of impacted waters in the district …………………..………………33

Budget…………………………………………………………………..34

7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Wood River Soil and Water Conservation District is one of 51 Conservation Districts in Idaho. Idaho Soil and Water Conservation Districts are political subdivisions of state government but are not state agencies. Conservation Districts are charged with carrying out a program for the conservation, use and development of soil, water, and other natural resources. Conservation Districts are the primary entities to provide assistance to private landowners and land users in the conservation, sustainment, improvement and enhancement of Idaho’s natural resources. They are catalysts for coordinating and implementing conservation programs, channeling expertise from all levels of government into action at the local level. Programs are nonregulatory; science-based technical assistance, incentive–based financial programs and informational and educational programs at the local level. It is the goal of the Wood River SWCD to provide technical assistance to landowners and land users through Conservation District efforts. Each Conservation District in Idaho has a signed Mutual Agreement with the Secretary of Agricultural and the Governor of Idaho that establishes a framework for cooperation. The Wood River SWCD provides an Annual Plan/Five-Year Resource Conservation Business Plan that is developed not only to guide the Conservation District, but also to encourage cooperation among landowners, government agencies, private organizations, and elected officials. Through knowledge and cooperation, all concerned can ensure a sustainable natural resource base for present and future generations in the Wood River Soil and Water Conservation District. This document identifies the resource needs in the Conservation District and presents a resource conservation action plan for meeting these needs.

8

Certificate of Adoption:

The Board of elected supervisors of the Wood River Soil and Water Conservation District on this the 13th day of _March 10, 2017____, do hereby approve the following document known as the Resource Conservation Business Plan. This Plan will be in effect for a five-year period ending June 30, 2022 during which time it will be updated annually and/or amended, as necessary. As evidence of our adoption and final approval, we do hereby affix our signatures to this document. Carl Pendleton____________Chairman _______________________________________________ Dan Durand…………………..Vice-Chairman _______________________________________________ Kerry Thompson……………Secretary/Treasurer___________________________________________ Kay Billington………………..Member _______________________________________________ Dee Koonce……………………Member _______________________________________________ Supporting Idaho Conservation Partners Curtis Elke___________ Natural Resources Conservation Service Teri Murrison _______ Administrator (Soil Water Conservation Commission) Benjamin Kelley ____ Idaho Association of Soil Conservation Districts

9

Wood River Soil & Water Conservation District Antidegradation Plan

For More Information Contact: {Carl Pendleton}, {208-886-2258)

Organization of the Wood River Soil & Water Conservation District A political subdivision of the State of Idaho – authorities, powers and structure contained in Soil Conservation District Law, Title 22, Chapter 27, and Idaho Code. The District was organized in September 10, 1943 to provide voluntary land and water conservation technical and financial assistance to landowners and uses within the Wood River SWCD boundary.

Function of the Wood River Soil & Water Conservation District To make available technical, financial and educational resources, whatever their source, and focus or coordinate them so that they meet the needs of the local land manager with conservation of soil, water and related natural resources.

Who We Serve & Why The people who want to make informed decisions on Natural Resources within the Wood River SWCD’s District boundaries. To conserve the natural resources for beneficial and sustainable use and to inform everybody of

conservation opportunities that are available.

Mission of the Wood River Soil & Water Conservation District To Coordinate, Inform and Educate landowners of practices & opportunities that will enhance water quality, reduce soil erosion, protect riparian areas, and enhance wildlife habitat.

Vision of the Wood River Soil & Water Conservation District To assist landowners in solving conservation resource problems.

Values of the Wood River Soil & Water Conservation District

Sustainable use of natural resources.

Support for agricultural activity that uses sustainable, economical and feasible practices.

Value and respect for the Idaho Conservation Partnership.

Conservation education for adults and youth.

Coordination with agencies and land users in the conservation and sustainable natural resources.

10

Natural Resource Priorities and Goals: The following priorities and goals are examples. Each Conservation District should develop priorities and goals applicable to the natural resources issues in their District. Priorities might include:

Animal Waste Management* Carbon Sequestration District Operations Fish and Wildlife * Information and Education* Irrigated Cropland Non-irrigated Cropland Pasture/Hayland Rangeland* Recreation Riparian Urban Water Quality* Water Resources (quantity) Woodland Other – District Determined

Seeding in fall of 2015

Monitoring summer of 2016

Spraying plateau fall of 2016 as new

owners took over!

Green Stripping Project 650 North 150 W Wildfire Restoration and Wildlife Rehabilitation Project

11

SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICT EVALUATION:

Through a Memorandum of Understanding the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and the Conservation District maintain an office to provide technical assistance to landowners in Lincoln Country. The office is located at 217 West F Street Shoshone, Idaho. The District has a 7 – Member locally elected Board of Supervisors and employees a part time Administrative Assistant. Supervisors include: Carl Pendleton, Dan Durand, Kay Billington, Kerry Thompson and Dee Koonce. Administrative Assistant: Barbara Messick. The District maintains a website and face book at: http//: www.wrswcd.weebly.com https://www.facebook.com/pages/Wood-River-Soil-and-Water-Conservation-District/457720200931782

Annual Budget Attached Annual Work Plan Attached List of District Partners Attached

USDA – Natural Resource Conservation Service The Natural Resources Conservation Service maintains the following staff in Shoshone or Lincoln County: District Conservationist- Patti Hurley, Soil Conservationist – Daniel Romano and Soil Conservation Technician – Katie Dennis.

SWC – Idaho State Soil Conservation Commission The Soil Conservation Commission has employed a new coordinator Rob Sharpnack who is housed in the Shoshone Field Office.

IDFG – STATE OF IDAHO FISH AND GAME The State of Idaho Fish and Game maintains the Clint Rasmussen- Mule Deer Program technician in Shoshone field office

12

Section I: Physical Characteristics

Lincoln County Wood River Soil and Water Conservation District

Wood River SWCD

13

14

15

16

17

Lincoln County Weather Topics: Heating Cost Index Cooling Cost Index Historical Temperature Historical Precipitation Historical Snow Historical Humidity Historical Wind Speed

Historical Weather

Heating Cost Index Lincoln County 387.86

Idaho 335.52

U.S. 212.57

Cooling Cost Index Lincoln County 64.15

Idaho 70.62

U.S. 139.82

The Heating Cost Index and the Cooling Cost Index are indicators of the relative heating and cooling cost of an area. They were calculated based on the average temperate and duration of the hot and cold days for the area. Please note, the actual heating cost and cooling cost are also dependent on other factors specific to individual residences such as the size of the house, the insulation condition, and the equipment efficiency, etc.

Average Temperature Annual Average Temperature:

Lincoln County 43.9 °F

Idaho 46.4 °F

U.S. 54.5 °F

18

Monthly Average Temperature

Lincoln County Mean Temperature Lincoln County Mean Min. Temperature

Lincoln County Mean Max. Temperature Idaho Mean Temperature U.S. Mean

Temperature

Jan Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

0255075100

Temperature (° F)

Precipitation Average Annual Precipitation:

Lincoln County 12.28 inches

Idaho 16.86 inches

U.S. 38.68 inches

Total Monthly Precipitation

Lincoln County Idaho U.S. (Average of All Locations)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

01234

Amount (inches) Average Number of Days with 0.1 Inch or More Precipitation in a Year (this gives an indication of the number of days in a year that it is useful to have an umbrella):

Lincoln County 36.71 days

Idaho 48.41 days

U.S. 66.51 days

Number of Days with 0.1 Inch or More Precipitation

Lincoln County Idaho U.S. (Average of All Locations)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

02468

Days

Snow Average Annual Snowfall:

Lincoln County 38.10 inches

Idaho 35.95 inches

U.S. 23.19 inches

19

U.S. (Average of All Locations)

Jan: 6.3 inches

Total Monthly Snowfall Lincoln County Idaho U.S. (Average of All Locations)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

0510-515

Inches Average Number of Days with 1 Inch or More Snow Depth in a Year:

Lincoln County 53.80 days

Idaho 49.19 days

U.S. 27.07 days

Number of Days with 1 Inch or More Snow Depth

Lincoln County Idaho U.S. (Average of All Locations)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

-505101520

Days

Humidity Annual Average Humidity:

Lincoln County 80.95%

Idaho 79.49%

U.S. 77.52%

Monthly Average Humidity

Lincoln County Idaho U.S. (Average of All Locations)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

708090100

Humidity (%)

Wind Speed Annual Average Wind Speed:

Lincoln County 18.74 mph

Idaho 20.58 mph

U.S. 16.92 mph

20

Monthly Average Wind Speed

Lincoln County Idaho U.S. (Average of All Locations)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

10203040

Wind Speed (mph)

* The temperature, snow fall, and precipitation information on this page were calculated from the historical data of 18,000+ U.S weather stations for the period of time from 1980 to 2010. The humidity and wind speed information were calculated from data from 15,000 worldwide stations for the period of time from 1980 to 2010.

Section II: Economic Conditions and Outlook

21

22

23

24

Lincoln County Population and Growth Trends Lincoln County

has

experienced

consistent

growth over the

past twenty

years and

accelerated

growth during

the past ten

years.

According to

US Census

Bureau

estimates, with 1203 square miles, Lincoln County in 2000 had a population density of

2.77 persons per square mile. Average family size averages 3.27 persons. With a lack of

continued job growth and development one can expect an out migration of younger

residents that will be counterbalanced by migration of people in into the county looking

primarily for environmental Livingroom and reduced cost of living Thus protection and

even enhancement of current environmental quality is a key element in maintaining the

population and economy of Lincoln County.

Economic Conditions and Outlook Economic development issues are highly important in Lincoln County, impacting

population and development patterns, transportation and public facility needs, and overall

quality of life for Lincoln County citizens. While agriculture is the dominant industry in

the County providing most of the basic industry employment. Lincoln County has

approximately a total of 771,584 acres, of this in BLM manages approximately 583,388

of those acres as public land, and the State of Idaho controls approximately 21,610 acres

leaving approximately 166,586 as privately owned.

Lincoln County needs to consider that residential development without a commensurate

increase in development activates of light industrial or commercial nature places the

county at risk in the future. Residential growth alone may not provide sufficient tax

revenues required to continue to develop and or extent services life fire, police, EMT and

education to the resident of Lincoln County. Lincoln County should develop and

implement policies that encourage the development of light industrial and commercial

activities in the county.

25

Wood River Soil & Water Conservation Partnerships:

How can we help is our motto: While we may not always be

able to participate, we do appreciate the opportunity to learn

other exciting efforts in Lincoln County.

Lincoln County Commissioners

Natural Resource Conservation Service

Office of Species Conservation

US Fish and Wildlife Service

Bureau of Land Management

Farm Service Agency

City of Shoshone

City of Richfield

City of Dietrich

Shoshone School District

Richfield School District

Dietrich School District

United States Environmental Protection

Agency

Department of Environmental Quality

Idaho Fish and Game

Pheasants forever

Idaho Ducks Unlimited

Idaho Department of Agriculture

Idaho Department of Water Resources

Idaho Soil and Water Conservation

Commission

Boy Scouts of America

FFA -

Natural Resources Camp

Big wood Canal Company

37 37 M Water master

BLM Bureau of Land Management

Mary and Grady Garrett

Idaho Forest Service

Big Wood Canal Company

37 /37 Water Master (Kevin Lakey)

Lincoln County Senior Center

Lincoln County Sherriff Dept.

Governor – Butch Otter

Senator – Michelle Stennett

Representative – Steve Miller

Representative – Sally Toone

Idaho State Water Board

Idaho Department of Environmental Quality

Cannon Envirothon

Idaho Department of Lands

Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation

North Side Canal Co.

University of Idaho Extension Lincoln County

Blaine Soil Conservation District

Nature Conservancy

Wood River Land Trust

26

Section III: Assessment of resource conditions, trends and conservation needs

of district.

Population Lincoln County’s population has risen 12.8 percent in the last 10 years to 5,297 in 2015, outpacing other counties in the region. The city of Shoshone, considered the gateway to Sun Valley, is the county seat with a population of 1,488. Lincoln County continues to rely on agriculture with several large dairies contributing to the industry’s regional growth. Manufacturing was nearly nonexistent prior to Glanbia Food’s whey processing plant in Richfield and Rocky Mountain Hardware, which machines high-end brass fixtures and hardware in Shoshone. As a bedroom community to both the Wood River Valley and Jerome/Twin Falls, workers have an easy commute. Affordable housing continues to be an issue in the Wood River Valley resulting in growth of subdivisions and residential construction over the long term. An inventory of building lots exists in Lincoln County following the real estate bubble, leaving a high ownership ratio of 73 percent and low multi-family at 4.4 percent. The average household size is large—3.24.

Labor Force & Employment Unemployment has been a roller coaster in Lincoln County. The seasonally adjusted rate peaked at 13.1 percent in 2010 from a record low of 3.5 percent in 2007. Since 2010 the unemployment rate has steadily decreased to a low of 4.4 percent in 2015. Economic diversification has created new jobs over the last five years, mainly in manufacturing and the services. Dairies have brought stability to a workforce that traditionally sought jobs in seasonal industries such as tourism, landscaping and agriculture. Prior to the recession, retail had been popping up to serve the highway traffic between Twin Falls and the Wood River Valley.

27

Manufacturing jobs are stable and raising area wages. Hay, grains, corn and other crops that can be green chopped for dairy silage are the primary commodities. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management’s regional headquarters and the National Interagency Fire Center dispatch operation are seasonal employers. The Idaho Transportation Department has a sizeable presence in Shoshone. The surrounding small communities all saw interest in new housing prior to the downturn. The county is expected to continue steady growth. Non Farm Payroll Jobs for 2015

Wages & Income Per capita income in Lincoln County has spiked over the last decade increasing 44 percent, more than doubling the state and nation’s growth. In 2015, Lincoln County’ per capita ranked 6th regionally and 19th statewide. Per capita income decreased nearly one percent in 2015 to $36,100. Lincoln’s per capita income was ranked 35th in 2009 when milk prices were in the trough From 2014 to 2015, Lincoln’s average covered employment’s wage grew by 2.3 percent with a three percent drop in average employment. The outlook is for continued slow but steady growth even with the sustained higher population growth. Wages are expected to remain on the low end, due to the mix of service and ag jobs.

Prepared by Jan Roeser, Regional Economist, Idaho Department of Labor • 420 Falls Ave, Twin Falls, Idaho 83301 Phone: (208) 735-2500, ext. 3639 • email: jan.roeser@labor.idaho.gov • Labor Market Information website: lmi.idaho.gov

28

Soil Survey for CUSTER-LEMHI AREA is in north-central Idaho. It consists of areas in Custer and Lemhi Counties and a small area in the northern part of Blaine County. It includes parts of the Salmon, Challis, and Targhee National Forests. The total area is 1,959,720 acres, or about 3,062 square miles. The lowest point in the survey area, which is at an elevation of about 3,700 feet, is north of Salmon, along the Salmon River. The highest point, which is at an elevation of about 10,390 feet, is just south of Monument Peak, along the Idaho-Montana border. The general soil map in this area shows broad areas that have a distinctive pattern of soils, relief, and drainage. Each map unit on the general soil map is a unique natural landscape

Natural Resources The natural resources in the survey area include soil, water, timber, and minerals. Most of the jobs in the area are dependent on these resources. The farmland along the major rivers and their tributaries is used for pasture and for alfalfa and some grain crops. Because of the extremely mountainous topography, gravelly soils, and low precipitation, most of the land in the area is used as rangeland. Surface water is used primarily for irrigation, livestock, and recreation.

29

30

Section IV: Identify and Prioritize Objectives: (IDAPA 60-o5.02.025.04)

Priority 1: Water Quantity, Grazing Land Health & Species of Concern, Water Quality, Soil Health Conditions, District Procedure and Information and Education: Priority 1: Water Quantity

District projects related to Water Quantity include continued efforts to provide irrigation improvements on the

702 Pipeline, Glanbia Mitigation Project with riparian protection and willow planting and management. These

efforts are focused on the enhancement of variable rate irrigation as long term sustainability of the agricultural

community.

Priority 2:Grazing Land Health & species of Concern:

Priority 3: Water quality Maintain an economic stability of the ranching industry and multiple uses by assisting cooperators to improve forage quality and quantity of rangeland within the district. Promote the development of coordinated resource management plans under EQIP. Develop relationships with BLM, USFS, USFWS, NMFS, NRCS and IDFG to assist with public land grazing issues and enhancements. Assist Ranchers to address Sage Grouse and Wolf Management on public grazing lands. Priority 4: sol Health Conditions: Provide administrative assistance to NRCS on USDA/Farm Bill programs Promote and provide information to improve control of noxious weeds on both public and private lands in cooperation with county weed supervisor. Evaluate water conservation opportunities of sprinkler irrigation versus flood irrigation. Priority 5: District Procedures and Information and Education The district maintains an active presence in all area schools within the district.

Wood River SWCD maintains their accounting system on QuickBooks and completed a single audit of this

year’s financial activity providing accountability for funds administered through the district.

By October 30, all 5th and 6th grade students will have had the opportunity to participate in the conservation

poster contest and all 9th through 11th grade students will have had the opportunity to participate in the

conservation speech contest.

Information will be provided to the Envirothon Advisor for the State Envirothon.

Conservation District cooperator addresses and files will be updated.

The District will review and if needed update their policy and procedures manual and accountability policy.

By October 15, the District will have completed their annual audit and provided the audit to the Division of

Financial Management and others requiring this information.

Wood River SWCD will have provided new supervisors training.

31

Section V:

Water Quality (Lincoln)

The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is the state agency designated to protect the state’s water

quality. DEQ's Surface Water Program is responsible for ensuring Idaho's streams, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, and wetlands

meet their beneficial uses and Idaho water quality standards. Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act establishes

requirements for states and tribes to identify and prioritize water bodies that do not meet water quality standards. This

analysis is published and submitted to the EPA in Idaho's Integrated Report. Idaho must develop a water quality

improvement plan, called a total maximum daily load (TMDL), for those water bodies not meeting water quality

standards. In Idaho, TMDLs are assessed on a subbasin level, which means water bodies and pollutants within a

hydrologic subbasin are generally addressed in a single document.

The Wood River Soil Conservation District (WRSWCD) has parts of four subbasin within its boundaries; 37.3% of the

WRSCD is part of the Lake Walcott Subbasin; 36% of the conservation district is part of the Little Wood River

Subbasin, and 18.2 and 8.5% of the district is part of the Big Wood River and Upper Snake-Rock Subbasins respectively.

The Wood River SWCD works with the Upper Snake-Rock Watershed Advisory Group (WAG) and the Wood River

WAG (representing the Big Wood River and the Little Wood River Subbasins) to provide local public input and

guidance to DEQ when developing a TMDL and assist in implementing antidegradation projects to restore and maintain

Idaho’s waters to the appropriate condition.

Table of Subbasin Assessments, TMDLs, Implementation Plans, and Five-Year Reviews

Subbasin Name

Hydrologic

Unit Code

(HUC) TMDL Status

Implementation

Plan Status

Five Year Review

Status

Big Wood

River Subbasin

17040219

Approved by EPA

May 2002

Errata approved

by EPA

February 2012

Temperature

Addendum

Approved by EPA

December 2013

Agriculture

Completed

October 2006;

Revised

February 2014

Little Wood

River Subbasin

17040221 Approved by EPA

September 2005

Agriculture

Completed

March 2010

Snake River

(Upper Snake-17040212 Mid Snake TMDL

Phase I Approved by Completed June Completed April

32

Subbasin Name

Hydrologic

Unit Code

(HUC) TMDL Status

Implementation

Plan Status

Five Year Review

Status

Rock) Subbasin EPA April 1997

Upper Snake Rock

TMDL Approved by

EPA August 2000

Upper Snake Rock

TMDL Modification

Approved by EPA

September 2005

City of Twin Falls TSS

Revision Submitted to

EPA January 2011

2001 2010

Walcott Lake

Subbasin

17040209

Approved by EPA

June 2000

Fall and Rueger Springs

Creeks Aquaculture

Addendum TMDLs

Approved by EPA

March 2007

Lake Walcott TMDL

2013 Addendum:

Marsh Creek

Approved by EPA

January 2015

Completed

December 2001

Completed

May 2012

A complete list of the stream segments of concern can be found in Exhibit B starting on page ___ of this document

as developed by Idaho Department of Environmental Quality.

33

Exhibit B:

Big Wood River Subbasin

Subbasin at a Glance

Hydrologic Unit Code 17040219

Size 1,496 square miles (957,495 acres)

Water Bodies with EPA-

Approved TMDLs

(Category 4a)

Big Wood River, Croy Creek, Eagle Creek, East Fork

Wood River, Greenhorn Creek, Lake Creek, Magic

Reservoir, Malad River, Quigley Creek, Rock Creek,

Seamans Creek, Thorn Creek, Warm Springs Creek

Beneficial Uses Affected Cold water aquatic life, salmonid spawning, primary

and secondary contact recreation, drinking water

supply

Major Land Uses Range, forest, agriculture

Date Approved by EPA May 2002

Approval Letter

Date Errata Approved by

EPA

February 2012

Approval Letter

Date Tributaries

Temperature Addendum

Approved by EPA

December 2013

Approval Letter

Waterbodies located partially or wholly in Gooding SWCD

Subbasin Characteristics

The Big Wood River subbasin is located in south-central Idaho and is made up of three elevation-ecological areas in

Blaine, Gooding, Lincoln, and Camas Counties. These areas include the Sawtooth National Forest (above 5,800 feet in

elevation), the Wood River Valley (4,000–5,800 feet in elevation), and the agricultural area (below 4,000 feet elevation).

The Wood River Valley has atypical ecological characteristics of the lower elevation area. All physical and biological

characteristics of the Big Wood River subbasin are related to these elevation-ecological areas.

2002 Subbasin Assessment and TMDL

The overall purpose of this subbasin assessment and TMDL is to characterize and document pollutant loads within the

Big Wood River subbasin. Twenty stream segments on the §303(d) list were evaluated; an additional four stream

segments that were not on the §303(d) list were also evaluated.

34

The document recommends that four streams (Horse Creek, Owl Creek, Baker Creek, and East Fork Wood River) be

removed from the §303(d) list. These streams are meeting their beneficial uses and/or state water quality standards.

The document also recommends two additional stream segments be listed on the next §303(d) list. The first is in the Big

Wood River main stem from Base Line to Magic Reservoir. The second is in the Big Wood River main stem from

Interstate 84 to the Snake River (or the Malad River).

TMDLs were established for sediment, nutrients, and bacteria. Flow alteration will be evaluated further. A TMDL was

not being established at this time for streams polluted by nitrite + nitrate. Temperature and dissolved oxygen TMDLs will

be deferred until 2003 pending collection of more information. A TMDL was not established for turbidity at this time

since the sediment TMDLs will create reductions in turbidity. The TMDL recommends that ammonia be delisted as a

pollutant of concern.

2002 TMDL: Streams and Pollutants for Which TMDLs Were Developed

Big Wood River

Sediment, nutrients, bacteria

Eagle Creek

Sediment, nutrients

Lake Creek

Nutrients

Placer Creek

Nutrients

Cove Creek

Sediment, nutrients

Greenhorn Creek

Sediment, nutrients

Quigley Creek

Sediment, nutrients

Croy Creek

Sediment, nutrients

Seamans Creek

Sediment, nutrients

Rock Creek

Sediment, nutrients, bacteria

East Fork Rock Creek

Sediment, nutrients

Thorn Creek

35

Sediment, nutrients

2011 Errata to the Big Wood River Watershed Management Plan

This document corrected calculation errors in four tables that appeared in the final Big Wood River Watershed

Management Plan (a total maximum daily load, or TMDL), approved by the US Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) on May 15, 2002. The calculation errors were a result of not using the correct design flow capacity for three

wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). The errors did not come to light until a National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System (NPDES) draft permit reissuance for the City of Hailey. The City of Ketchum and the Meadows

WWTPs were also affected. DEQ and EPA recognized the errors and DEQ corrected Table H, page xviii; Table XX,

page 64; Table HHH, page 76; and Table PPP, page 89. The revised tables are included in this errata and supersede

those in the 2002 TMDL.

2013 Addendum

This document addresses three water bodies in the Big Wood River subbasin that have been placed in Category 5 of the

2010 Integrated Report for temperature impairment. Temperature TMDLs were developed for two of these water

bodies: Quigley Creek and Rock Creek. Effective target shade levels were established for Quigley Creek and Rock Creek

based on the concept of maximum shading under potential natural vegetation resulting in natural background

temperature levels. Black Canyon Creek was found to have insufficient water to be assessed. No sources or pathways of

pollutants were identified for Black Canyon Creek and the two assessment units of this water body are proposed for

delisting in the next Integrated Report cycle.

2013 Addendum: Streams and Pollutants for Which TMDLs Were Developed

Quigley Creek

Temperature

Rock Creek

Temperature

Subbasin Documents

The Big Wood River Watershed Management Plan (May 2002)

Big Wood River Watershed Total Maximum Daily Load: Implementation Plan for Agriculture (October 2006;

Revised February 2014)

Errata to the Big Wood River Watershed Management Plan (November 2011)

Big Wood River Tributaries Temperature Total Maximum Daily Loads: Addendum to the Big Wood River

Watershed Management Plan (October 2013)

Little Wood River Subbasin

Subbasin at a Glance

Hydrologic Unit Code 17040221

Size 1,132 square miles (724,480 acres)

36

Water Bodies with EPA-

Approved TMDLs

(Category 4a)

Dry Creek, Fish Creek, Little Wood River, Muldoon

Creek, Silver Creek

Beneficial Uses Affected Cold water aquatic life, salmonid spawning, secondary

contact recreation

Major Land Uses Range, agriculture, forest

Date Approved by EPA September 2005

Approval Letter

Waterbodies located partially or wholly in Wood River SCD

Subbasin Characteristics

The Little Wood River subbasin lies in south-central Idaho. The river originates in the Pioneer Mountains of the

Sawtooth National Forest and discharges in the desert plains at the Big Wood River.

2005 Subbasin Assessment and TMDL

Nutrients were measured in the form of total phosphorus and total inorganic nitrogen. High annual averages of total

inorganic nitrogen, combined with elevated total phosphorus levels, indicate that nutrients could be at levels capable of

contributing to nuisance aquatic growth. Nutrient TMDLs have been completed for Fish Creek (both above and below

Fish Creek Reservoir) and for the Little Wood River from Silver Creek to the Big Wood River.

Sediment was measured in the water column as total suspended solids and as percent fines. Where percent fines were

elevated, streambank erosion inventories were completed to determine if streambanks were the source of sediment.

Streambank erosion TMDLs for sediment were completed on Dry Creek, both segments of Fish Creek, and the Little

Wood River from Silver Creek to the Big Wood River.

Bacteria and temperature both have numeric water quality standards and, as such, have numeric values that have to be

met. Where numeric bacteria standards were exceeded, additional samples were collected; a bacteria TMDL was

completed for Fish Creek above Fish Creek Reservoir. Where water temperatures were elevated, the canopy cover of the

water bodies was measured to develop TMDLs. Temperature TMDLs were completed on Loving Creek, Muldoon

Creek, both segments of Fish Creek, and the Little Wood River.

Flow alteration has been identified as pollution for many of the water bodies. However, the US Environmental

Protection Agency does not consider flow alteration as a pollutant as defined by the Clean Water Act. Since TMDLs are

not required for water bodies impaired by pollution but not pollutants, TMDLs were not developed for flow alteration.

The water bodies with flow alteration have been identified as such and put on a list of water bodies impaired by

pollution.

Where biological and water chemistry data indicated that beneficial uses were being fully supported, those water bodies

were proposed for removal from the §303(d) list. Both Fish Creek Reservoir and Little Wood River Reservoir were

recommended for removal.

2005 TMDL: Streams and Pollutants for Which TMDLs Were Developed

Little Wood River (headwaters to reservoir)

37

Temperature

Little Wood River (Silver Creek to Big Wood River)

Sediment, nutrients, temperature

Fish Creek (above Fish Creek Reservoir)

Sediment, nutrients, bacteria, temperature

Fish Creek (below Fish Creek Reservoir)

Sediment, nutrients, temperature

Dry Creek

Sediment

Muldoon Creek

Temperature

Loving Creek

Temperature

Subbasin Documents

Little Wood River Subbasin Assessment and Total Maximum Daily Load (August 2005)

Little Wood River Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan for Agriculture (March 2010)

Snake River (Upper Snake-Rock) Subbasin

Subbasin at a Glance

Hydrologic Unit Code 17040212

Size 2,438 square miles (1,536,880 acres)

Water Bodies with EPA-

Approved TMDLs

(Category 4a)

Billingsley Creek, Briggs Creek, Cedar Draw, Clear

Creek, Clear Lakes, Clover Creek, Deep Creek, Dry

Creek, McMullen Creek, Mud Creek, North/Dry

Cottonwood Creek, Pioneer Reservoir, Riley Creek,

Rock Creek, Sand Springs, Snake River and

tributaries, tributaries to Yahoo and Deep Creeks,

Vinyard Creek, West Fork Dry Creek

Beneficial Uses Affected Cold water aquatic life, salmonid spawning, primary

and secondary contact recreation

38

Major Land Uses Rangeland, agriculture

Date Mid-Snake River

TMDL Approved by

EPA

April 1997

EPA Approval Letter

Date Approved by EPA August 2000

EPA Approval Letter

Date Modification

Approved by EPA

September 2005

EPA Approval Letter

Date City of Twin Falls

TSS Revision Approved

by EPA

March 2011

EPA Approval Letter

There are no listed Lake Walcott waterbodies located partially or wholly in Wood River SCD

Subbasin Characteristics

The Upper Snake-Rock subbasin is located in southern Idaho, primarily in Gooding, Jerome, and Twin Falls Counties.

Over 95% of the subbasin is a Snake River Basin/High Desert ecoregion. Its topography consists of tablelands with

medium to high relief, and its vegetation is made up predominantly of a sagebrush-grass zone with minimal riparian

vegetation in the Middle Snake River or its tributaries. The land use in the subbasin is 54% desert shrublands (on which

grazing is a major activity) and 41% agricultural land (both irrigated and dryland).

1999 Subbasin Assessment and TMDL

In the Upper Snake-Rock subbasin, 31 water bodies/stream segments were listed on the 1996 §303(d) list, including 10

segments of the middle Snake River. The TMDL covers 93 miles of the Snake River, including 28 named tributaries.

The middle Snake River TMDL, discussed below, also covers portions of this subbasin.

The middle Snake River is a managed water system where normal flow regimes are no longer present, which allows

sediment to accumulate. In general, the middle Snake River and its tributaries are impacted by runoff from irrigated crop

production, rangeland, pastureland, animal holding areas, feedlots, dredging, hydro-modification, and urban runoff.

Natural springs have exhibited hydro-modification and streambank modification from activities relating to sedimentation,

aquaculture, hydropower, irrigated crop production, and land development.

TMDLs were not written for ammonia, nitrogen, pesticides, oil and grease, or temperature. Data did not show that

nitrogen, pesticides, or oil and grease were exceeding water quality standards or impacting beneficial uses. It is

recommended that pesticides and oil and grease be removed from the §303(d) list; nitrogen levels will continue to be

reviewed by DEQ. Clover Creek was found to be polluted by ammonia, but ammonia is not listed on the §303(d) list for

Clover Creek. It is recommended that ammonia be added to the next §303(d) list for Clover Creek; a TMDL will be

completed after this occurs. Temperature TMDLs have been deferred until after new water quality standards are

developed for temperature.

1999 TMDL: Streams and Pollutants for Which TMDLs Were Developed

Alpheus Creek

39

Sediment (total suspended solids), phosphorus

Billingsley Creek

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Blind Canyon Creek

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Cedar Draw

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Clear Springs

Sediment (total suspended solids), phosphorus

Clover Creek

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Cottonwood Creek

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Crystal Springs

Sediment (total suspended solids), phosphorus

Deep Creek

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Dry Creek (2 segments)

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Dry Creek (West Fork)

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Ellison Creek

Sediment (total suspended solids), phosphorus

McMullen Creek

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Mud Creek

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Riley Creek

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Rock Creek

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

40

Thousand Springs Creek

Sediment (total suspended solids), phosphorus

Vineyard Creek

Sediment (total suspended solids), phosphorus

Bliss Reservoir

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Lower Salmon Falls Reservoir

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Pioneer Reservoir

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Shoshone Falls Reservoir

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Upper Salmon Falls Reservoir

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

Middle Snake River (10 segments)

Sediment (total suspended solids), pathogens (fecal coliform bacteria), phosphorus

1997 Middle Snake River Watershed Assessment and TMDL

Watershed at a Glance

Hydrologic Unit Code 17040212 (Upper Snake-Rock Subbasin)

17040213 (Salmon Falls Subbasin)

Size 94 square miles (60,160 acres)

Beneficial Uses Affected Aquatic life, primary and secondary contact recreation

Major Land Uses Irrigated agriculture, confined animal feeding

operations, food processing, aquaculture, urban,

hydroelectric development

A large portion of the economy and culture of south-central Idaho is dependent on water provided by the middle Snake

River and its tributaries. The middle Snake River has 14 segments listed as priority segments on the 1996 §303(d) list.

The middle Snake River's hydrologic system is shaped by precipitation, the river itself, tributaries, irrigation return flows,

ground water flow, and geothermal sites. With the exception of precipitation, all of these sources receive nutrient inputs

from human activities. Severely diminished instream flows have historically limited the middle Snake River's ability to

assimilate these nutrient-rich inputs.

41

This document is the first phase in a phased TMDL and focuses on reductions in total phosphorus. Proposed industry

total phosphorus reductions will be implemented within 5 years of the approval of this TMDL and will be maintained for

an additional 5 years to reach an instream target of 0.75 milligrams per liter total phosphorus at Gridley Bridge in

Hagerman, Idaho. Total phosphorus reductions will come from aquaculture, food processors, municipalities, confined

animal feeding operations, irrigated agriculture, and the hydroelectric industry.

Additional phases of the phased TMDL focus on sediment reduction (phase II), nitrogen reduction (phase III), flow

(phase IV), and other pollutants and stressors (phase V). These phases have been addressed simultaneously in the Upper

Snake Rock TMDL.

1997 TMDL: Streams and Pollutant for Which TMDLs Were Developed

14 sections of the middle Snake River, including Bliss, Shoshone Falls, Upper Salmon Falls, and Lower Salmon Falls

Reservoirs

Total phosphorus

Aquaculture Wasteload Allocations

Draft wasteload allocations for aquaculture facilities were developed in July 2004. These allocations are designed to meet

the total phosphorus reductions as specified in the Middle Snake River and Upper Snake Rock TMDLs. The allocations

affect 37 TMDLs for total phosphorus and total suspended solids and six associated segments of the Snake River.

Public comments were accepted on the document in August 2004. Based on the information and comments received,

DEQ modified the document and resubmitted it for public comment in the following three parts:

Upper Snake Rock TMDL Modification Part 1 (February 2004)

Upper Snake Rock TMDL Modification Part 2 (April 2005)

Upper Snake Rock TMDL Modification Part 3 (May 2005)

Subbasin Documents

Middle Snake River Watershed Management Plan: Phase 1 TMDL Total Phosphorus (January 1997)

The Upper Snake Rock Watershed Management Plan: The Upper Snake Rock Subbasin Assessment & the

Upper Snake Rock Total Maximum Daily Load (December 1999)

TMDL Executive Summary: Upper Snake/Rock Subbasin TMDL (July 2000)

The Upper Snake Rock TMDL Modification (July 2005)

The Upper Snake Rock Implementation Plan (June 2001)

Upper Snake Rock Subbasin TMDL (2000 & 2005) City of Twin Falls TSS Revision (January 2011)

Upper Snake Rock/Middle Snake TMDLs (HUC ID17040212): 5-Year TMDL Review (April 2010)

Walcott Lake Subbasin

Subbasin at a Glance

Hydrologic Unit Code 17040209

42

Size 3,638 square miles, (2,296,320 acres)

Water Bodies with EPA-

Approved TMDLs

(Category 4a)

D16 drain, Duck Creek, East Fork Rock Creek, Rock

Creek, Snake River and tributaries, South Fork Rock

Creek, Spring Creek

Beneficial Uses Affected Salmonid spawning, cold water aquatic life

Major Land Uses Rangeland, nonirrigated agriculture

Date Approved by EPA June 2000

EPA Approval Letter

Date Rock Creek

Addendum Approved by

EPA

October 2000

EPA Approval Letter

Date Fall Creek

Aquaculture Addendum

Approved by EPA

March 2007

EPA Approval Letter

Date Rueger Springs

Creek Aquaculture

Addendum Approved by

EPA

March 2007

EPA Approval Letter

Date Lake Walcott 2013

Addendum: Marsh

Creek Approved by EPA

January 2015

EPA Approval Letter

There are no listed Lake Walcott waterbodies located partially or wholly in Wood River SWCD

Subbasin Characteristics

The general physical and biological characteristics of the Lake Walcott subbasin have a strong influence on the water

quality of the subbasin. Additionally, the scattered population centers and land uses of the subbasin exert a significant

influence on the water quality of the subbasin. Land use in the subbasin is predominantly rangeland and agricultural

lands used for non-irrigated agriculture. Limited irrigated agriculture also exists in the subbasin where water is either

pumped from the ground or diverted from the Snake River. The major population center of the subbasin is the

Burley/Heyburn area.

2000 Subbasin Assessment and TMDL

43

This document describes eight water bodies that are listed on the 1996 and 1998 §303(d) lists prepared by the State of

Idaho. Sediment is the most common listed pollutant in the subbasin. Sediment was a listed pollutant on all 1996

§303(d) listed water bodies within the subbasin. Other listed pollutants include nutrients, low dissolved oxygen,

pesticides, oil and grease, flow alteration, and unknown causes.

2000 TMDL: Streams and Pollutants for Which TMDLs Were Developed

Snake River

Sediment

Rock Creek

Sediment

East Fork Rock Creek

Sediment

South Fork Rock Creek

Sediment

Milner Reservoir

Sediment, oil and grease, total phosphorus, dissolved oxygen

2006 Fall Creek TMDL

The intent and purpose of the Fall Creek TMDL is to establish water quality load allocations for sediment, nutrients, and

bacteria in Fall Creek as part of the overall Lake Walcott TMDL. Fall Creek is not a §303(d)-listed water body but is

described in the 2000 Lake Walcott TMDL as a “perennial stream feeding the Snake River in the Walcott Subbasin.”

The receiving water body to Fall Creek is the Snake River, which is §303(d) listed. Consequently, the Fall Creek TMDL

is necessary to protect the beneficial uses of the Snake River as part of the Lake Walcott TMDL. The Fall Creek TMDL

is not a TMDL modification of the Lake Walcott TMDL; it is an addition to the Lake Walcott TMDL and does not

modify in any way the Lake Walcott TMDL that presently exists in the Snake River. Rather, the intent is to bring the

aquaculture facilities associated with Fall Creek into alignment with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

General Aquaculture Permit so that wasteload allocations can be applied to these aquaculture facilities under the Lake

Walcott TMDL to meet water quality provisions for the Snake River.

The TMDL establishes the allowable loadings or other quantifiable parameters for Fall Creek and thereby provides the

basis for the state to establish water quality-based controls that should provide the pollution reduction necessary to

achieve downstream water quality standards and beneficial uses of the Snake River.

2007 Rueger Springs Creek TMDL

The intent and purpose of the Rueger Springs Creek TMDL is to establish water quality load allocations for sediment,

nutrients, and bacteria in Rueger Springs Creek as part of the overall Lake Walcott TMDL. Rueger Springs Creek is not

a §303(d)-listed water body. However, it is generally described in the Lake Walcott TMDL as one of many “scattered

springs … throughout the region.” The receiving water body of Rueger Springs Creek is the Snake River, which is §303(d)

listed. Consequently, the Rueger Springs Creek TMDL is necessary to protect the beneficial uses of the Snake River as

part of the Lake Walcott TMDL.

The Rueger Springs Creek TMDL is not a TMDL modification; it is an addition to the Lake Walcott TMDL and does

not modify in any way the Lake Walcott TMDL. It does bring the aquaculture facility associated with Rueger Springs

Creek into alignment with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Aquaculture Permit so that a

44

wasteload allocation can be applied to this facility under the Lake Walcott TMDL and meet water quality provisions for

the Snake River. The Rueger Springs Creek TMDL, therefore, is an iterative watershed management tool for

implementing state water quality standards and is based on the relationship between pollution sources and instream water

quality conditions.

The Rueger Springs Creek TMDL establishes the allowable loadings or other quantifiable parameters for Rueger Springs

Creek and thereby provides the basis for the state to establish water quality-based controls. These controls should

provide the pollution reduction necessary for Rueger Springs Creek to achieve downstream water quality standards and

beneficial uses of the Snake River.

Subbasin Documents

The Lake Walcott Subbasin Assessment, Total Maximum Daily Load, and Implementation Plan (2000)

The Fall Creek Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) of the Lake Walcott Watershed Management Plan (Lake

Walcott TMDL) (November 2006)

The Rueger Springs Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) of the Lake Walcott Watershed Management Plan

(Lake Walcott TMDL)

(January 2007)

Lake Walcott Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Agricultural Implementation Plan (December 2001)

Lake Walcott Subbasin Assessment and Total Maximum Daily Loads: Five-Year Review (Includes Rueger

Springs and Fall Creek TMDLs) (May 2012)

Lake Walcott Total Maximum Daily Load 2013 Addendum: Marsh Creek Temperature and E. coli TMDLs

(December 2013)