Upper Silver Creek: Open House Boards

Open House Photos August 19th & 20th (Troy & Hamel)

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan

Welcome!

Thank you for coming this evening to the Open House for the Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan.

Tonight you will have the opportunity to learn more about the Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan and provide input that will be used to help develop the plan.

Elements of the Watershed Plan:

Goals and Objectives:

y Document Existing Conditions y Document existing conditions. in the Watershed: t Soil Types, Land Cover, Topography y Decrease flood damage. t Pollutant Loading (Sediment, Phosporous, y Improve water quality.

Nitrogen) t Stream Conditions y Collaborate with multiple partners (landowners, t Areas of Frequent Flooding communities, agencies, etc) y Community Flood Survey for solutions and strategies. y Develop of Watershed Goals y Identify sources of funding. and Objectives y Educate about watershed y Watershed Based Plan: conditions. t Recommendations of best practices and strategies. y Establish partnerships for t Prioritize future actions and projects. implementation and future t Sources of potential funding to assist in actions. implementation.

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan

Where do You Live and Work «4 Eagarville Mount Clare Benld 138 «

Royal Lakes

Municipalities Bunker Hill 2 4

1

CR

CR, W FK

MONTGOMERY MADISON

SIL VER

CAHOKIA

h

.

Williamson Livingston

55 § ¨ ¦

rk Fo

Worden Litt le S

140

Hamel

140

ilve rC Old re ek Ripley

BOND MADISON

Su

« 157

Cr ee k

CAH OK IA

«4

CR

«

rF

« 159

Alhambra

ga

Wood River

ork

Bethalto

«

Sorento

New Douglas

«

Roxana

MONTGOMERY BOND

y Dr le

Sherry Cree k

dR

Staunton

t Lit

Rocky Bra nc

k E. F

oo .W

PADDOCK CR

MACOUPIN MADISON

Grov eB ran ch ork yF Dr

Miles

INDIA N CR

0

Walshville

Big Branch

Project Area

Fork Lake

Dorchester Wilsonville Sawyerville

Streams

MACOUPIN MONTGOMERY

Legend

143

«

Grantfork

Sa

nd

143

« 159

Edwardsville Marine

70 § ¨ ¦

«

Pierron

143

Troy

162

Caseyville

Collinsville

nch

RC SILVE St. 40 £ [ Jacob

R, E

FK

BOND CLINTON

Highland

nch

Please show us where you live and work by using the colored stickers indicated below: Bra

157

Bra

160

ke r

« Madison

Ca nt ee

55 § ¨ ¦

de ll

«

Mill Creek

Pontoon Beach

70 § ¨ ¦

«

nC

Maryville

W en

MADISON ST. CLAIR

an

255

270

k

§ ¦ ¨

§ ¦ ¨ ree

Unincorporated nch s Bra Judy

SUG AR C

R

Glen Carbon

MADISON M ADISSON CLINTON

Sp

« 157

Live Work

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan

Schedule tŝŶƚĞƌ ϭϰΖ

^ƉƌŝŶŐ ϭϰΖ

Dec

March April

Jan

Feb

May

^ƵŵŵĞƌ ϭϰΖ

&Ăůů ϭϰΖ

June

Sept

July

Aug

Oct

Nov

tŝŶƚĞƌ ϭϱΖ

^ƉƌŝŶŐ ϭϱΖ

Dec

March April

Jan

Feb

May

^ƵŵŵĞƌ ϭϱΖ

&Ăůů ϭϱΖ

June

Sept

Project Kickoff Aerial Inventory of Streams Analysis of Aerial Footage Existing Condition Mapping and Analysis Stakeholder Interviews Community Flooding Survey Public Open Houses - Round 1 Draft Existing Conditions Report Final Existing Conditions Report Development of Priority Issues and Areas of Focus Development of Recommended Best Management practices (BMPs) Draft Watershed-Based Plan Follow-up Meetings with Stakeholders Public Open Houses - Round 2 Revise Watershed-Based Plan Final Watershed-Based Plan

We Are Here

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan

July

Aug

Oct

Nov

We Want Your Input!

Please take our survey!

Please take a moment tonight to fill out the community flooding survey for homes, businesses, and property owners in the Upper Silver Creek watershed. This will help in determining strategies and recommendations for addressing flooding problems in the watershed.

An online version of the survey is available at: www.surveymonkey.com/s/UpperSilverCreek The survey will be open until September 12th.

Thank you for your input and comments!

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan

Madison County Stormwater Plan « 16

4

C

Big r a nch

W

MACOUPIN MONTGOMERY

55

F

1.666165

«

Moo n C r ey eek

«

rl r a ock nc h

162

use

Mi Creek ll

157

1.5

3

« ««« § ¦ ¨ 3

3

3

15

64

r

Buc key e

B r a n ch

C India re e

F ork Cr eek

E

Sugar Creek er

nk c pa ran B

k

S

re

S ilv e

H Cr a g e ee m k ann

ke nc a

h

Lit t le

MADISON CLINTON

La Br

Ogles Creek

rC

e

h

k

6 Miles

Little Cantee

ee Cr

C

ree er k

oenber C reek ge

MADISON ST. CLAIR

n

0 De

Sc h

Lak e For k Fo rk Cre ek

ST. CLAIR CLINTON

203

cus t For

40

ork h F ek Cre

« «

Lo

BOND CLINTON

£ [

No M il rt l

h

Canteen Creek

Bla C re ck ek

ar ee k

C

160

k

«

S

«

n

«

143

n Br d a ll ch e

Br anc

111

«

B

We

C Ro hain ck s C of an al

270

Canteen Creek-Cahokia Sch Creek o ol h o

t as l oa Sh

70

§ ¦ ¨

255

k ek or Cre r

S

§ ¦ ¨ Co

§ ¦ ¨

Ea

ee k Cr

ek

157

Judy s h Branc nch Burdick Bra

India n n k

st ilve F

rC Silv e

tle e Lit y Cr e

3

East Fork Silver d San e k Creek Cre

4

on

159

«

«

ug

Mo

Cahokia Diversion Channel

Cree k

BOND MADISON

re ek

157

Su ga r C r eek

M re e o

«

203

s Dorri e k Cre

Sil

r

Burro Br g hs an ch

« oney k

C

t tle

140

159

143

Li

«

Silver Creek

«

Judys Branch-Mississippi River «

El m Br a n c

ork

ga r Su

143

u

as Gingr Creek

t

Yanke Cre e ek

D ry F ork

Indian Creek-Cahokia Creek

« « ¬

203

C

r

«

«

Headwaters Shoal Creek

§ ¦ ¨

ve

Wo Riv od er

140

3

Maline C reek

Dry Fork

MONTGOMERY MADISON

ho ki a Ca Cr eek

«

111

t rca k e

ea re

West F ork Cahok ia C

C r eek Joulte rs Creek

W E oo as d tF R or ive k r

140

B

MONTGOMERY BOND

ek

«

ch

e Cr

ields Sh nch Bra

Portage Des Sioux-Mississippi River

127

tle

111

Bran

eng k

ck te Ro hi reek C

«

avel a nd W Cr e ek

G rove

Lit

y Ro ck h c Bra n

C

«

er M ill C r eek

ork ek Cre

t Fla

iver

di

Lake Fork

Indi an C re e k

Lick Branc h

Ro Cr ck C Bran oal ee ch B lack r eek

100

s on nt De nch Bra

«

k

iss iss ipp iR

In

Rock y For k

e

M

an

67

ck ek

E ast For k Sherr y

£ [

MACOUPIN MADISON

Wood River

Pad d Cr o e

ch

Cr e ek

We st F Wood Rive H onoe rk r y B cut an

S o uth Bran L ittle Piasa Cr ch eek

r

M il l Cre k

k ee East Sugar Ca m p C re ek

ree k

Pia s

k

Br a Br nch igg s

JERSEY MADISON

l C ek re

C r

Pi

tle Lit ree C a

185

lCre ek Shoa

w ke As anc h Br

Fork uth So r Creek e Ott

Piasa Creek

«

G Cr ins ee

tle Lit Cre a as

Sherr y Cr eek

ek

JERSEY MACOUPIN

138

109

a ak st e

Sugar Creek

« «

Lo B ra ng n ch

Midd Fork le er nth Pa C r ee k

h anc Br ork F

r

B reek ea

L

« B

Otter Creek

op

Po h in

h

M i dd S h oa le F l

16

111

amsBr an Ad

ch

B

«

«

We st F o r Sho a k

Piasa Creek

k

E

e sC r e hil

o C nc ra Elm Cr e ek

P

267

g Sp rin k e Cre

« nd y Sa ree k C

This map produced by HeartLands Conservancy (2014) w ith base data provided by USGS (2014), Madison County (2014), and H tL d C (2014) H tL d C 618 566 4451

Watersheds in Madison County Overview of Stormwater Plan The Madison County Stormwater Plan is the overall framework for stormwater management in the county which guides regulations, identifies flood and water quality problems, establishes best management practices, and prioritizes work to be done.

The Upper Silver Creek watershed is one of ten watersheds that will be part of the overall Stormwater Plan. Direction and approval for the Stormwater Plan comes from the Madison County Stormwater Commission, whose members include County Board members and municipal representatives.

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan

Existing Conditions Land Cover, Slope, Soils «

Eagarville

Mount 4 Clare

Lake Ka-Ho

Benld

Mount Clare

«

«

Eagarville

4

Lake Ka-Ho

Benld

138

Dorchester

Sawyerville

« 138

Dorchester

Wilsonville

Mount Olive

White City

Sawyerville Walshville

Mount Olive

White City

Wilsonville

«

Walshville

159

Bunker Hill

Bunker Hill

Staunton

Staunton Sorento Williamson

Williamson New Douglas

Livingston

159

55

« 140

Old Ripley

Alhambra

«

¦ ¨ §

Worden

Holiday Shores

Hamel

New Douglas

Livingston

§ ¦ ¨

Worden

Holiday Shores

«

55

Hamel

« 140

4

Alhambra

« 4

« 157

« 157

Grantfork

«

Grantfork

159

« «159

157

Edwardsville

Edwardsville Marine

Marine

§ ¦ ¨ 70

Glen Carbon

Pierron

«

Glen Carbon

143

« 160

§ ¦ ¨ «

HighlandLegend

£ [

Troy 162

« 160

270

Maryville

40

Legend

Highland

« 162

Troy

Watershed Plan Project Area

St. Jacob

Pierron

143

70

¦ ¨ §

159

Maryville

«

¦ ¨ §

«

270

Watershed Plan Project Area

Streams

£ [

St. Jacob

Surface Water

Streams

40

Surface Water

Municipalities

Municipalities

Collinsville

Collinsville

Slope (degrees)

Elevation

0-5

Value High : 700 feet Mid : 570 feet Low : 440 feet

5 - 15 15 - 25 25 - 35

0 0.5 1

O'Fallon

2

Miles 4

3

0 0.450.9

4

« 4

Project Area

Soil types Oconee silt loam

O KI A

Downsouth silt loam Beaucoup silty clay loam

C AH

Pierron silt loam Wakeland silt loam Birds silt loam

Legend Wilbur silt loam

Water

R

CR

Caseyville silt loam; 267B

Wood R. W. FK.

Barren

Winfield-Orthents-Urban land complex

CR, W FK

CR, W FK

Forest

Branc h

Weir silt loam Menfro-Orthents-Urban land complex

ranch ve B Gro

Rural Grassland

Elco silt loam

Big Branch

Urban Grassland

Coop

Elco silty clay loam

CAHOKIA

CAHOKIA

Agriculture (row crops)

ch ran eB ov

138

Gr

Big Branch

«

a e s ed

Beaucoup silty clay loam

Branc h

Low/Medium Density Urban

Orion silt loam

Project Area

Dr y

Wetland

Edwardsville silt loam

ch

Honeycut Branch

Streams

OKIA C

16

Coop

High Density Urban

e Uppe S e C ee

Legend

C AH

«

Land Cover Type

So s

« «

Piasa Cr.

Streams

a e s ed MACOUPIN MONTGOMERY

Project Area

e C ee

16

May Branch

Legend

Miles 3.6

Topography

e Uppe S May Branch

a d Co e

2.7

MACOUPIN MONTGOMERY

Slope

1.8

Mascoutah silty clay loam

Bran

R

.

d

INDIA

Sherry Creek

Ruma silt loam

Virden silt loam

Marine silt loam

Bra

Bunkum silty clay loam

Ro c ky

MADISON BOND

55

nc h

Ruma silty clay loam

¦ ¨ §

MACOUPIN MADISON

Urban land Dumps

SILVE R CR

oo W

MONTGOMERY MADISON

Sherry Creek

.

Fk

N CR

E.

PADDOCK CR

eyc ut

Ho n

SILVE R CR

N CR

INDIA

Piasa silt loam Winfield silty clay loam Winfield silt loam

PADDOCK CR

nch

Bra

Herrick silt loam

k or yF Dr le

ky

Wakenda silt loam

t Lit

Ro c

Streams

Aviston silt loam

Dry For k

MONTGOMERY MADISON

k

MACOUPIN MADISON

F or

Fk E.

d oo .W

R.

Tamalco silt loam Homen silt loam

Litt le S

« 140

« 111

«

Menfro-Hickory silt loam

ilve r

Ruma-Hiclory silt loam

Cre

140

Pierron-Burksville silt loam Geff sitll loam

ek

Ridgway silt loam Menfro silt loam Menfro silty clay loam Orthents, silty

rk

Orthents, loamy

rk

Virden-Fosterburg silt loams Herrick-Biddle-Piasa silt loams

Cr ee k

Oconee-Darmstadt-Coulterville silt loams

Bunkum-Atlas sily clay loams

Sa

«

Sug ar Fo

Coulterville-Darmstadt silt loams

nd

111

Hickory clay loam

159

nd

«

«

143

Sa

4

«

Coulterville-Grantfork silty clay loams

Sug ar Fo

«

«

157

143

Cr ee k

« 159

Hickory silt loam Atlas-Grantfork silty clay loams Bethalto silt loam 112A

R

143

¦ ¨ §

119C2

MADISON

¦ ¨ §

«

70

SU GA RC

« 157

127A 127B 16A 250D

790A

h

MADISON CLINTON

S

1

2

897D3 8D

4 Miles

8D2

ree k

tle Lit SIL V

8G 993A

En

Miscellaneous water

£ [

Water

50

2

3

Miles 4

Soils

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan

FK

nC

nte e MADISON ST. CLAIR

8F2

0 0.5 1

Land Cover

ch

897D2

0

CR , E

Fork ke La

897C2

DIT CH

tle

se

882B2

IN G

k

4 Miles

Lit

u lho oo Sch

882B

ST. CLAIR CLINTON

C re e

ch an Br st Ea

CAH

6C2

RD

50

6B2

h nc

HA

2

ra n c

gl e

Cr e e

k

CR DITCH ER

¦£ ¨ § [ 64

1

Br a

Fork ke La

an Br

Ca

657A

CR DITCH ER

161

OK IA C AN AL

5C2

g le

n ch s Bra

SILVER

583B

En

«

Judy

515C2 581B

SIL V

0

441C2 470B2

MADISON ST. CLAIR

157

lB

438C2

40

Spa nke r

«

Cant een Cr

nc h

AN AL IA C OK CAH

o o lh

£ [

160

Creek Mill

o Sch

255

a Br

3428A

h

«

FK CR, E SILVER

l

k ee

Bra nc

de

162

Creek Mill

¦ ¨ §

e us

We n

3415A

We nd el l

«

n ch s Bra J udy

re er C Silv

ek

L ch an Br st Ea

itt

le

MADISON CLINTON

S ST. CLAIR CLINTON

270

Water Quality Existing Impairments What is an impaired stream?

Legend Branch ove Gr

Impaired Streams (303d listed streams, 2014)

Big Branch

Streams

FK

CAHO KIA CR, W

R.

d

SILVER CR

MONTGOMERY MADISON

R

¦ ¨ § 55

Approximately 34,762 miles of streams in Illinois are assessed on a regular basis.

This is out of a total of approximately 119,244 stream miles in Illinois. Out of the 34,472 miles of assessed streams, approximately 15,398 miles (44%) have been designated as “impaired”.(1)

k

ar Fork

CR

ee

Cr

Sa nd 270

ys Jud

Bra

ch ran ll B de

¦ ¨ § 70

n ch SILVE

R CR

,E

SUGAR CR

W en

¦ ¨ §

FK

40

se

B

ork eF

nt ee nC

re e

k

k

Lak

ou

h

Mill Cre e

Sc

o lh ho

Ca

0 0.75 1.5

MADISON ST. CLAIR 3

Miles

What is causing the impairment?

For Silver Creek, the impairment is caused by dissolved oxygen, manganese, phosphorus, and sedimentation. For Troy Creek, the impairment is caused by phosphorus.(1)

£ [ nc ra

Streams in Illinois are regularly analyzed by the Illinois EPA for a variety of conditions including biological, physicochemical, physical habitat, and toxicity data. Streams are analyzed using categories including: aquatic life, fish consumption, public water supply, aesthetic quality, and primary contact.

Each assessed stream segment is then rated as Fully Supporting (good), Not Supporting (fair), or Not Supporting (poor) for each applicable category. If a stream is rated at fair or poor, then the stream is categorized as “impaired” .

How many impaired streams are there in Illinois?

Sug

CAH OK IA

Sherry C reek

Ro ck y

PADDOCK CR

Br an ch

I ND

I AN C

MACOUPIN MADISON

rk

E

oo W k.

F .

D r y Fo

MACOUPIN MONTGOMERY

Project Area

tl Lit

ilv eS

ek Cre er MADISON CLINTON

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan

(1) Source: Illinois Integrated Water Quality Report and Section 303(d) List, 2014; Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Bureau of Water

Water Quality Existing Pollutant Estimates Legend

Methodology - Estimating Pollutant Loads

« 138

« 138

Nitrogen load estimates (lb/year) 0 - 20000 20001 - 45000

121231 lb/year

45001 - 70000 70001 - 95000 95001 - 120000

79838 lb/year

Overview: Nutrient and sediment loads for the Upper Silver Creek watershed were calculated using the Spreadsheet Tool for Estimating Pollutant Load (STEPL). STEPL employs simple algorithms developed though scientific research to calculate nutrient and sediment loads from different land uses.

120001 - 145000 54548 lb/year

11897 lb/year

¦ ¨ §

89669 lb/year

55

88080 lb/year

STEPL computes watershed surface runoff, nitrogen and phosphorus loads, and sediment delivery based on various land uses and management practices.

« 140

« 140

75843 lb/year

«

61667 lb/year

65444 lb/year

« 4

159

Data sources: The most recent National Land Cover Database (2011) was used as the source for land use data. Animal (livestock) data was obtained from the 2012 county level agricultural census database. Runoff volumes were based on longterm precipitation records from the Southern Illinois University weather station at Belleville. The remaining user input parameters were obtained from the STEPL On-line Data Access System ( http://it.tetratech-ffx.com/steplweb/steplweb.html)

« 157

« 143

«

54941 lb/year

143

« 159

39368 lb/year

« 157

«

52013 lb/year

34797 lb/year

34691 lb/year

143

¦ ¨ § 70

¦ ¨ §

«

270

160

20957 lb/year 24665 lb/year

« 162

Sediment calculations: The annual sediment load (sheet and rill erosion only) is calculated based on the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) and the sediment delivery ratio. Gully and streambank erosion are based on streambank stability assessments that are currently ongoing and will be added to the calculations upon completion.

£ [

24596 lb/year

40

68674 lb/year

29181 lb/year

23614 lb/year

0 0.75 1.5

3 Miles

Nitrogen Loads Legend Sediment load estimates (t/year)

Note: The estimated pollutant loads are based on a model, and do not necessarily reflect individual parcel/site conditions. The model will be used to help evaluate best management practices (BMPs).

Legend

« 138

«

« 138

«

138

138

Phosphorus load estimates (lb/year)

401 - 800

5001 - 10000

801 - 1200

10001 - 15000

1794 t/year

1201 - 1600

15001 - 20000

1601 - 2000

20001 - 25000

2001 - 24000

25001 - 30000

1210 t/year

Note: Sediment load estimates does not include gully and streambank estimates at this time. Gully and streambank estimates are still being calculated and will be included in the Existing Conditions Report this fall.

17922 lb/year

786 t/year

1434 t/year

¦ ¨ §

28039 lb/year

¦ ¨ §

1291 t/year

55

1610 t/year

12406 lb/year

21898 lb/year

20628 lb/year

55

20374 lb/year

«

«

140

140

«

«

140

140

1203 t/year

1409 t/year

1102 t/year

«

17730 lb/year

« 4

«

159

13956 lb/year

15198 lb/year

« 4

159

«

«

157

«

157

«

143

143

«

1404 t/year

143

«

«

13302 lb/year

143

«

159

159

959 t/year

« 157

814 t/year

829 t/year

¦ ¨ §

1306 t/year

« 143

« 157

¦ ¨ § 70

270

70

160

« 162

« 157

671 t/year

143

«

597 t/year 580 t/year

«

¦ ¨ §

270

160

162

12372 lb/year

7578 lb/year

7845 lb/year

¦ ¨ §

« «

9072 lb/year

5136 lb/year 5086 lb/year

£ [

5647 lb/year

40

«

£ [ 40

157

1742 t/year

1348 t/year

0 0.75 1.5

3 Miles

Sediment Loads

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan

16603 lb/year

5486 lb/year

693 t/year

5681 lb/year

0 0.75 1.5

3 Miles

Phosphorus Loads

Water Quality Overview Water Quality Benefits Ensuring clean water in the Upper Silver Creek Watershed has numerous benefits including: clean, safe supplies of drinking water; stream, ponds, and lakes suitable for recreation; navigable shipping channels further downstream; and healthy habitats that supports a wide variety of plant and animal life.

Water Quality Benefits: Helping to keep shipping channels open downstream.

Water Quality Benefits: Ensuring clean supplies of drinking water for communities.

Photo Source: Bond-Madison County Water Website

Sources of Non-Point Pollution

Water Quality Benefits: Ensuring lakes, ponds, and streams are suitable for recreation.

Photos: Heritage Park in Marine

There are two types of water pollution: “point source” pollution and “non-point source” pollution. Point source pollution is discharged through a pipe or some other discrete source.

Photo Source: Flickr and Foursquare

Non-point source pollution is the result of many sources, when combined, can create impaired streams, lakes, and water bodies.

Examples of non-point source pollution are metals, chlorides, oils, trash, fertilizers (nutrients), pesticides, and pet waste (E. coli).

Water Quality Benefits: A healthy watershed that supports a wide variety of plant and animal life.

The graphics above and left illustrate common sources of non-point source pollution.

Sources: Top graphic - Environmental Protection Agency; middle - University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Department of Landscape Architecture; left - NC Department of Environment & Natural Resources

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan

Flooding Existing Floodplain «

Eagarville

4

Legend

Dorchester

Mount Benld Clare

«

Project Area

138

Lake Ka-Ho

Sawyerville

Wilsonville

Highways & state routes Waterbodies

White City

Walshville

Streams in Project Area Mount Olive

Bunker Hill

100-year Flood Zone in Project Area

MACOUPIN MONTGOMERY

County Boundaries Communities

0

1

2

4 Miles

Staunton

MACOUPIN MADISON

Williamson

MONTGOMERY MADISON

New Douglas

Livingston

MADISON BOND

Worden

Holiday Shores

§ ¦ ¨ 55

Bethalto

East Alton

MONTGOMERY BOND

« 140

Hamel

Rosewood Heights

Alhambra

« 140

Wood River

« 111

«

«

4

159

Roxana South Roxana

« 157

« 143

« 143

Hartford

Grantfork

Edwardsville

« 159

Marine

« 111

« 157

Glen Carbon

« 143

Highland Mitchell

Pierron

§ ¦ ¨ 70

§ ¦ ¨

« 111

270

« 160

Maryville Pontoon Beach

Troy

« 162

St. Jacob

£ [ 40

Collinsville

« 111

§ ¦ ¨ 255

« 157

MADISON ST. CLAIR

Fairmont City

ST. CLAIR CLINTON

Caseyville O'Fallon

MADISON CLINTON

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

This map produced by HeartLands Conservancy (2014) w ith base data provided by USGS (2014), ESRI (2014), Madison County (2014), and HeartLands Conservancy (2014). w ww .HeartLandsConservancy.org 618-566-4451

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan

Flooding Overview A Long-Term Approach Addressing Flooding Issues Solving all flooding problems will not happen overnight. Long term strategies will be needed to reduce flooding impacts in the watershed.

This plan will be an important step in the process, especially with a mailed and online survey in the fall of 2014 that will help identify areas of flooding that occur outside of designated floodplains.

Additional study and analysis will likely be a key outcome of this process. This plan will be a key component of the Madison County Stormwater Plan.

Help Us Identify Existing Areas of Flooding Tonight there are detailed maps that the planning team is using to assist in identifying locations of existing flooding. Spend a few minutes discussing existing areas of flooding such as: t Locations of roads that are frequently over topped by flood events. t Locations of homes, businesses, or structures that are impacted by flooding. t Areas of erosion or other damage caused by flooding or stormwater.

Photos courtesy of Marine, IL

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan

Benefits of Watershed Planning Recent Articles About Watershed Planning Watershed plans are a great way for multiple partners (local leaders, stakeholders, agencies, landowners, etc) to develop goals and objectives for the watershed.

A plan will then help prioritize future actions and projects, and identify sources of funding and partners that can assist in implementation.

Recent articles in FarmWeek have highlighted the benefits of watershed plans and opportunities for sources of funding such as the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) and EPA 319 grants.

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan

Thanks for Coming!

Next Steps What are the Next Steps?

Thank you for attending the open house to learn more about the Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan and to provide your input and comments!

Tonight’s meeting is one part of the overall watershed plan. Upcoming next steps include: t Existing Conditions Report (Watershed Resource Inventory) - November, 2014 t Results of Community Flooding Survey - November, 2014 t Draft recommended best management practices and areas of focus - Winter, 2014/2015 t Draft Watershed Based Plan - Spring, 2015 t Follow-up meetings with stakeholders and Open House #2 - Spring, 2015 t Revisions to Watershed Based Plan - Summer, 2015 t Final Watershed Based Plan - October, 2015

Stay Involved!

Be sure to sign up for our mailing list.

Process to Date The partners involved with the process thus far (Madison County, HeartLands Conservancy, National Great Rivers Research and Education Center, Madison County Soil and Water Conservation District and Midwest Streams) have been working on the plan since last winter. Some of the work thus far has included: t Aerial analysis of Silver Creek and streams to identify areas of erosion and stream issues. t Technical analysis for the existing conditions report. t Meetings with communities, landowners, and other stakeholders. t Field checks along Silver Creek and tributaries.

The pictures to the right show some of the work to date.

Meeting with landowners this summer.

Field check of Silver Creek to review erosion.

Measuring streambank heights along Silver Creek.

Meeting with landowners this summer.

Upper Silver Creek Watershed Plan