Water quality focus of study
By LARRY KLINE
IR Staff Writer
The Lake Helena watershed has numerous problems, which will only multiply with continuing growth in the Helena Valley — and major portions of the possible solutions cannot be forced through with regulations, officials said this week.
The success or failure of the push to clean up the watershed, which includes the Prickly Pear, Tenmile and Silver creek drainages as well as man-made Lake Helena, in many ways will be determined by the amount of voluntary efforts by landowners and stakeholders throughout south-central Lewis and Clark and northern Jefferson counties.
“All the real hard work lies ahead of us,” PBS&J Water Resources Program Manager Gary Ingman told a group gathered at the East Valley Middle School this week. “It’s going to be a huge job, but nobody’s interested in seeing this fail.”
Ingman was reviewing a report drawn up by the state Department of Environmental Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency — which officials said serves as the starting point for a holistic study and cleanup of the watershed.
The document — called a framework restoration plan for the watershed— analyses the sources of a number of problems in the valley: elevated levels of nitrogen and phosphorous, contamination by heavy metals, sedimentation and water temperature issues. Some of those issues are tied to habitat alteration, changes in stream flow and the degradation of streamside, or riparian, areas. The Lake Helena project is the largest study of its kind, bigger than any watershed analysis the DEQ or the EPA have undertaken, Ingman said.
“Even though it’s been three and a half years, we’re just getting started,” he added.
Ingman has worked on the report since its beginnings in 2003. The EPA’s project manager for the study, Ron Steg, was working in Washington, D.C., during the week, so Ingman was tapped to present the study to a group of landowners, city water and wastewater plant officials, and watershed steering committee members on Wednesday.
The watershed is listed by the DEQ as failing to meet federal Clean Water Act standards. A federal judge has ordered the agencies to complete such framework documents, which include so-called “total maximum daily loads” — benchmarks for contaminants and other problems — for impaired waters in the state by 2012.
Neither the federal Clean Water Act or the state Water Quality Act give the agencies authority to implement changes to many problem sources, such as the more than 20,000 septic systems in the valley, or riparian management on private land.
“We’re not going to be forcing anybody to do anything,” Ingman said.
The driving goal, he said, is to restore water quality in Montana’s streams and reservoirs, and attain state and federal quality standards.
“All the real hard work lies ahead of us,” Ingman said. “It’s going to be a huge job, but nobody’s interested in seeing this fail.”
DEQ Water Quality Planning Bureau Chief George Mathieus agreed.
“This is a framework that by no means answers all of the questions,” he said.
The issues
The plan addresses a variety of other issues in the valley:
n Ingman called sedimentation “probably the most pervasive problem in this watershed” in terms of in-stream miles. The biggest sources are runoff from dirt roads, agricultural operations, timber harvesting practices and streambank erosion — and its important to remember these factors together have cumulative impacts, he said.
The plan calls for streambank restoration, better site design in new construction, and adherence to best management practices in timber and ag operations.
n The watershed has concentrations of metals, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and zinc — materials found in streambed sediments and, in some areas, fish tissues. The biggest cause is hard-rock mining, while natural sources also contribute to the issue. Ingman said possible solutions include the continued cleanup at the Upper Tenmile Superfund site, and expanding remediation to other mining sites.
n Steams in the basin have been dewatered and human influence over riparian habitats has removed shading trees — both issues affect water temperature, which can inhibit fish reproduction. Prickly Pear Creek has unnaturally high temperatures, Ingman said.
Septic systems have been grabbing the headlines — an ongoing debate over their effects on groundwater, which in turn is mostly thought to be connected to surface water, has made its way into a Helena courtroom.
The watershed contains elevated levels of nitrogen and phosphorous, which together stimulate the growth of algae on stream bottoms and in reservoirs. Large amounts of algae can impair aquatic ecosystems, Ingman said.
Higher levels of the elements can be found in the lower Prickly Pear, Tenmile and Sevenmile creeks, along with Lake Helena.
Collectively, septic systems are “the single largest source of nitrogen” in the watershed, while Helena’s wastewater treatment plant is the biggest supplier of phosphorus in the basin. Other major contributors of both elements are agriculture and natural sources.
While the plan calls for a roughly three-quarters reduction in nitrogen and phosphorous, the exponential subdivision of land in the Lake Helena drainage will lead to growing municipal and septic-system discharges in coming years, Ingman said.
Future land-use decisions need to take water-quality concerns into account, he said.
“The growth issue is huge,” Ingman said. “We’ve got a documented nutrient problem now … the writing is on the wall.
“It’s a dilemma,” he added. “It’s going to take some tough local decisions.”
The document calls for a half-percent reduction in nitrogen from septic systems — the change estimated to address failing systems in the watershed — while it asks the city of Helena to significantly reduce its nitrogen and phosphorous contributions. It calls for a 92 percent reduction in nitrogen alone.
City officials have reacted strongly, saying the plan creates two standards for clean water and fails to address any significant reduction in contaminants from septic systems. City, state and federal officials have pledged to continue working together to formulate agreeable reductions at the city’s plant and other solutions to the problems.
Stakeholders key to many solutions
Many of the solutions to the issues identified in the Lake Helena watershed require voluntary actions by landowners and stakeholders, PBS&J Water Resources Manager Gary Ingman and other officials said.
Recommendations listed in a report Ingman has worked with for nearly four years, one created by the state Department of Environmental Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, can’t affect water rights, and many of the concerns — septic systems (excluding failing facilities) and streamside shading, for example — can’t be regulated under current law.
“It really does become — I don’t think ‘responsibility’ is the right word — it is up to the stakeholders in the community,” DEQ Bureau Chief George Mathieus said.
He noted the issues identified aren’t unprecedented — communities across the nation have addressed with water-quality problems for decades.
The document does identify new restraints for sources the agencies can regulate — such as Helena’s wastewater treatment plant.
But Ingman said the time has come for new ideas.
“I personally feel that there’s all kinds of opportunities for creative solutions,” he said. “I just think we need to have a cooperative spirit.”
He said there’s a movement to develop a possible Lake Helena watershed committee.
He and others also mentioned other possibilities, such as changing water diversion and discharge points on Prickly Pear Creek to give to relieve stress on the overworked waterway.
Ingman said Lake Helena itself, an unexpectedly man-made reservoir created with the construction of Hauser Dam, could be improved to serve as a “polishing pond” for water flowing into the Missouri River.
The lake initially was a low, wet area, which filled when the dam was built. Some officials have said groundwater surfaces at Lake Helena.
With the construction of a maze of dikes, Ingman said, the water body could be turned into a wetland-like habitat. The dikes would slow the water and create protection from the wind, allowing vegetation to take hold. The lake would in essence become a filtering mechanism, and water flowing into the Missouri would be almost perfect, Ingman said.
But for now, the improvements are only an idea.
“There are some ideas out there,” county Water Quality Protection District outreach coordinator Jim Wilbur said.
Lewis and Clark County has pursued grant funding to coordinate watershed groups, and officials are studying the concept of a septic maintenance district, which could work toward fixing deficient systems, he said.
Part of the solution for homeowners with on-site treatment system is educational outreach, Wilbur said. People, especially those who move to the valley from urban settings, don’t understand the basics of septic-system maintenance, including the need to pump the tanks.
The planning effort, combined with the possible involvement of community watershed groups, can increase the chances of securing grant money to address some of the issues, Mathieus said.
The Lake Helena watershed has numerous problems, which will only multiply with continuing growth in the Helena Valley — and major portions of the possible solutions cannot be forced through with regulations, officials said this week.
The success or failure of the push to clean up the watershed, which includes the Prickly Pear, Tenmile and Silver creek drainages as well as man-made Lake Helena, in many ways will be determined by the amount of voluntary efforts by landowners and stakeholders throughout south-central Lewis and Clark and northern Jefferson counties.
“All the real hard work lies ahead of us,” PBS&J Water Resources Program Manager Gary Ingman told a group gathered at the East Valley Middle School this week. “It’s going to be a huge job, but nobody’s interested in seeing this fail.”
Ingman was reviewing a report drawn up by the state Department of Environmental Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency — which officials said serves as the starting point for a holistic study and cleanup of the watershed.
The document — called a framework restoration plan for the watershed— analyses the sources of a number of problems in the valley: elevated levels of nitrogen and phosphorous, contamination by heavy metals, sedimentation and water temperature issues. Some of those issues are tied to habitat alteration, changes in stream flow and the degradation of streamside, or riparian, areas. The Lake Helena project is the largest study of its kind, bigger than any watershed analysis the DEQ or the EPA have undertaken, Ingman said.
“Even though it’s been three and a half years, we’re just getting started,” he added.
Ingman has worked on the report since its beginnings in 2003. The EPA’s project manager for the study, Ron Steg, was working in Washington, D.C., during the week, so Ingman was tapped to present the study to a group of landowners, city water and wastewater plant officials, and watershed steering committee members on Wednesday.
The watershed is listed by the DEQ as failing to meet federal Clean Water Act standards. A federal judge has ordered the agencies to complete such framework documents, which include so-called “total maximum daily loads” — benchmarks for contaminants and other problems — for impaired waters in the state by 2012.
Neither the federal Clean Water Act or the state Water Quality Act give the agencies authority to implement changes to many problem sources, such as the more than 20,000 septic systems in the valley, or riparian management on private land.
“We’re not going to be forcing anybody to do anything,” Ingman said.
The driving goal, he said, is to restore water quality in Montana’s streams and reservoirs, and attain state and federal quality standards.
“All the real hard work lies ahead of us,” Ingman said. “It’s going to be a huge job, but nobody’s interested in seeing this fail.”
DEQ Water Quality Planning Bureau Chief George Mathieus agreed.
“This is a framework that by no means answers all of the questions,” he said.
The issues
The plan addresses a variety of other issues in the valley:
n Ingman called sedimentation “probably the most pervasive problem in this watershed” in terms of in-stream miles. The biggest sources are runoff from dirt roads, agricultural operations, timber harvesting practices and streambank erosion — and its important to remember these factors together have cumulative impacts, he said.
The plan calls for streambank restoration, better site design in new construction, and adherence to best management practices in timber and ag operations.
n The watershed has concentrations of metals, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and zinc — materials found in streambed sediments and, in some areas, fish tissues. The biggest cause is hard-rock mining, while natural sources also contribute to the issue. Ingman said possible solutions include the continued cleanup at the Upper Tenmile Superfund site, and expanding remediation to other mining sites.
n Steams in the basin have been dewatered and human influence over riparian habitats has removed shading trees — both issues affect water temperature, which can inhibit fish reproduction. Prickly Pear Creek has unnaturally high temperatures, Ingman said.
Septic systems have been grabbing the headlines — an ongoing debate over their effects on groundwater, which in turn is mostly thought to be connected to surface water, has made its way into a Helena courtroom.
The watershed contains elevated levels of nitrogen and phosphorous, which together stimulate the growth of algae on stream bottoms and in reservoirs. Large amounts of algae can impair aquatic ecosystems, Ingman said.
Higher levels of the elements can be found in the lower Prickly Pear, Tenmile and Sevenmile creeks, along with Lake Helena.
Collectively, septic systems are “the single largest source of nitrogen” in the watershed, while Helena’s wastewater treatment plant is the biggest supplier of phosphorus in the basin. Other major contributors of both elements are agriculture and natural sources.
While the plan calls for a roughly three-quarters reduction in nitrogen and phosphorous, the exponential subdivision of land in the Lake Helena drainage will lead to growing municipal and septic-system discharges in coming years, Ingman said.
Future land-use decisions need to take water-quality concerns into account, he said.
“The growth issue is huge,” Ingman said. “We’ve got a documented nutrient problem now … the writing is on the wall.
“It’s a dilemma,” he added. “It’s going to take some tough local decisions.”
The document calls for a half-percent reduction in nitrogen from septic systems — the change estimated to address failing systems in the watershed — while it asks the city of Helena to significantly reduce its nitrogen and phosphorous contributions. It calls for a 92 percent reduction in nitrogen alone.
City officials have reacted strongly, saying the plan creates two standards for clean water and fails to address any significant reduction in contaminants from septic systems. City, state and federal officials have pledged to continue working together to formulate agreeable reductions at the city’s plant and other solutions to the problems.
Stakeholders key to many solutions
Many of the solutions to the issues identified in the Lake Helena watershed require voluntary actions by landowners and stakeholders, PBS&J Water Resources Manager Gary Ingman and other officials said.
Recommendations listed in a report Ingman has worked with for nearly four years, one created by the state Department of Environmental Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, can’t affect water rights, and many of the concerns — septic systems (excluding failing facilities) and streamside shading, for example — can’t be regulated under current law.
“It really does become — I don’t think ‘responsibility’ is the right word — it is up to the stakeholders in the community,” DEQ Bureau Chief George Mathieus said.
He noted the issues identified aren’t unprecedented — communities across the nation have addressed with water-quality problems for decades.
The document does identify new restraints for sources the agencies can regulate — such as Helena’s wastewater treatment plant.
But Ingman said the time has come for new ideas.
“I personally feel that there’s all kinds of opportunities for creative solutions,” he said. “I just think we need to have a cooperative spirit.”
He said there’s a movement to develop a possible Lake Helena watershed committee.
He and others also mentioned other possibilities, such as changing water diversion and discharge points on Prickly Pear Creek to give to relieve stress on the overworked waterway.
Ingman said Lake Helena itself, an unexpectedly man-made reservoir created with the construction of Hauser Dam, could be improved to serve as a “polishing pond” for water flowing into the Missouri River.
The lake initially was a low, wet area, which filled when the dam was built. Some officials have said groundwater surfaces at Lake Helena.
With the construction of a maze of dikes, Ingman said, the water body could be turned into a wetland-like habitat. The dikes would slow the water and create protection from the wind, allowing vegetation to take hold. The lake would in essence become a filtering mechanism, and water flowing into the Missouri would be almost perfect, Ingman said.
But for now, the improvements are only an idea.
“There are some ideas out there,” county Water Quality Protection District outreach coordinator Jim Wilbur said.
Lewis and Clark County has pursued grant funding to coordinate watershed groups, and officials are studying the concept of a septic maintenance district, which could work toward fixing deficient systems, he said.
Part of the solution for homeowners with on-site treatment system is educational outreach, Wilbur said. People, especially those who move to the valley from urban settings, don’t understand the basics of septic-system maintenance, including the need to pump the tanks.
The planning effort, combined with the possible involvement of community watershed groups, can increase the chances of securing grant money to address some of the issues, Mathieus said.
Current rating: 3 with 16 ratings.
Click here to register
Reader Comments:
Share Article
