Farming, Counties Continue to Protect Big Darby
 
(Note: It's definitely an Election Year, as witnessed by the following. To hear the congresswoman go on about this area in which I live, one would think that 'threats' to it are as plentiful as apples in an orchard. The reality is that the real threats come from just such cavalier press releases, as much so as the language deception cousins emanating from the self-proclaimed 'environmental' or 'conservation' groups. American Rivers' employees have never shown their faces in this farm country -- at least, not publicly. They may have canoed down the Big or Little Darbys, but the extent of their interest here is purely mercenary, on that you can safely bet -- just as virtually all the interest in this area that would separate the farmers from their property rights, as the CRP, CREP and other programs do. No matter how tasty the bait, there's still a heckuva Hook in it.)
 
April 29, 2004
 
By Congresswoman Deborah Pryce (OH-15)
 
For nearly a decade, American Rivers, a well-respected, national river conservation organization, has identified annually ten significant American waterways deemed to be at-risk for becoming irreparably damaged.  This year, in its report for 2004, the group named Big Darby Creek in central Ohio as one of America’s Most Endangered Rivers.  American Rivers states that its goals are to identify waterways worth preserving, and to improve public policy decisions that affect the listed rivers.
 
In response to the Report and to the deteriorating condition of the stream, there has been some blame directed at officials and residents of Union and Madison Counties for employing farming practices deleterious to Big Darby’s health, and for opposing the Little Darby National Wildlife Refuge. 
 
In its Report, it should be noted that America Rivers states that the farms in the Darby watershed have for decades buffered this area from encroaching development, and are a primary reason for Big Darby’s unique pristine quality, despite the creek’s close proximity to a major urban area.  For years, farmers in the area have worked to protect this treasured resource; if recent changes in farming practices along Big Darby have resulted in diminishing water quality, it is likely that these farmers will amend these practices to improve the health of Big Darby. 
 
During the debate over the Little Darby National Wildlife Refuge, many of the legitimate concerns of area residents were marginalized and dismissed as knee-jerk, “Not in My Backyard” (NIMBY) objections, and some proponents paternalistically suggested that the two counties should understand that the Refuge was ultimately in their best interests.  Unfortunately, some of these misguided criticisms have resurfaced pursuant to the American Rivers report. 
 
While the Refuge and its permanent prohibitions against future development could have lessened the threat of developing areas near Little Darby, it would have provided no protections from the City of Columbus continuing its growth westward toward Big Darby or its tributaries in western Franklin County.  Moreover, it would have taken decades before enough land could be amassed to begin to have a significant effect on water quality. 
 
Also pervasive through the Refuge debate was the sentiment that officials in Madison and Union Counties lacked the planning tools necessary to protect both the Big Darby and farmland from development.  It should be known, however, that Madison County continues to move forward on its Section 208 Water Plan, which would give the county the sole right to provide water and sewer service to the area; controlling the critical infrastructure of sewer and water is among the best means of managing development in a region.  Once the County’s 208 Plan is integrated with its farmland preservation plan, its countywide zoning, and its comprehensive land-use plan, Madison County is quite equipped to ward off irrational development while maintaining its sovereignty.  Similarly, the Union County Commissioners remain actively involved in the Darby Watershed Action planning group and are committed to identifying an effective, feasible community-based plan to maintain and enhance the socio-economic and ecological health of the Darby Creek Watershed. 
 
While the American Rivers report is certainly alarming, it represents an opportunity to come to the aid of Big Darby.  We are on the cusp of implementing a federal, state and local cooperative plan for the entire Scioto watershed known as the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP). 
 
CREP, which is administered jointly by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), may soon be available to farmers in the Scioto River watershed, an area that includes 29 counties in Ohio and both the Big and Little Darby Creeks, among other tributaries.  Under the CREP program, farmers remove land along the riparian corridor out of agricultural production, and employ various erosion and pollution mitigation devices in exchange for a yearly cash payment from USDA.  In doing so, degradation is mitigated, aquatic species and their habitats are protected, and farmers are justly compensated for their reduction in agricultural output.  I am tremendously excited about CREP’s potential impact on Ohio's water quality, and believe that this win-win program will significantly improve the long-term health of the Big Darby ecosystem. 
 
Development is unquestionably the greatest threat to Big Darby, and with the projected influx of 600,000 additional people in central Ohio over the next 25 years, there will be immense and unforeseen pressures placed upon Big Darby.  Officials at all levels of government, in cooperation with the many Big Darby stakeholders, need to work together to find sensible, enforceable solutions to best protect this resource.  While no one has a precise answer to the question of how to best protect a watershed, the climate may be ideal for the various groups to harness their collective concern for Big Darby, and work toward meaningful protections for this resource.  
 
But to suggest that agriculture or NIMBY, reactionary attitudes in Madison and Union Counties are a threat to Big Darby is erroneous and myopic.  For decades, farming has been the Darby’s generous benefactor, and Madison and Union Counties’ responsible, smart growth public policies will work to protect it in the future.
 
 
 
More 'tilting at windmills' thinking:
 
Ohio drinking water protected by USDA partnership: Veneman Highlights Bush Administration Environmental Record as part of Earth Day Activities

April 19, 2002

USDA News Release No. 0156.02

Alisa Harrison 202-720-4623 or Dann Stuart 202-690-0474

USDA Office of Communications

1400 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20250-1300

202-720-4623

oc.news@usda.gov

http://www.usda.gov

 

Columbus, Ohio - Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman and Governor Bob Taft today signed a $13.2 million Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) agreement to safeguard the Hoover Reservoir, the primary drinking water source for Columbus, Ohio.  U.S. Representatives Pat Tiberi and Deborah Pryce, as well as Columbus Mayor Michael B. Coleman, joined Veneman and Taft at the announcement.

“This project reaffirms the Bush Administration’s commitment to strong conservation programs and will help improve water quality in Ohio,” said Veneman.  “This is a win-win project that will enable farmers to restore lands near streams as well as provide savings of $1 million annually in water treatment costs.”

The Ohio CREP is a federal-state partnership that will pay farmers to remove land from agricultural production in the state’s Upper Big Walnut Creek Watershed that drains into the Hoover Reservoir.  The program will reimburse producers for planting 3,500 acres of filter strips, riparian buffers, hardwood trees, wetlands and wildlife habitats along tributary streams.  This will prevent pollution from entering the watershed.

The total cost of the program is expected to reach $13.2 million.  Of that amount, $8.4 million will come from USDA and $4.8 million from the state.  Ohio and the city of Columbus will offer additional incentives and USDA will provide technical assistance to ensure long-term protection of the area.

CREP uses state and federal resources to help solve conservation problems.  The program combines an existing USDA program, the Conservation Reserve Program, with state programs to meet specific state and national environmental objectives.  CREP provides for voluntary agreements with farmers to convert cropland and/or pastureland to native grasses, trees and other vegetation in return for rental payments and other incentives. More than 300,000 acres are currently enrolled in CREP in about 20 states.

As part of Earth Day activities, Secretary Veneman is traveling to West Virginia and Ohio on April 19 and Wisconsin on April 22 to highlight Bush Administration efforts to improve the environment through innovative agricultural programs. 

For questions and answers on the Ohio CREP, go to:

http://www.fsa.usda.gov/pas/FullStory.asp?StoryID=688

 
 
 
 
Darby Creek Advocate, Volume 9, Issue 3: News from the Watershed
 
November 2001
 
By John Tetzloff
 
Darby Watershed Project Underway; DCA Elected to Steering Committee

The Darby Creek Watershed Project -- described in the March Advocate -- is now well underway.
 
The project is an effort to coordinate a broad-based watershed protection plan, and is being sponsored by the six county Soil and Water Conservation Districts in the Darby watershed (Franklin, Pickaway, Madison, Union, Champaign, and Logan counties).

The project will tap the energies of local citizens and organizations to develop strategies to preserve and enhance water quality in the Darby watershed.
 
At a recent organizational meeting DCA was nominated by the Franklin SWCD to sit on the project’s Steering Committee.
 
The Steering Committee consists of 20-30 members who will devise and promote the watershed plan using the support of numerous stakeholders, which have also met and separated into workgroups.
 
DCA is also sitting on an information subcommittee.

The Darby Watershed Project has several motivations.
 
First, the counties involved recognize “that the quality of watershed resources is high, but at-risk.”
 
Second, the project seeks to offer local control in protection efforts.
 
Third, there was a recognition that meeting new EPA water quality goals will require greater coordination and should involve local stakeholder input.
The project’s mission statement is as follows:
 
“The purpose of the Darby Creek Watershed Planning Group is to develop an implementable community-based plan to maintain and enhance the socio-economic and ecological health of the Darby Creek Watershed.”

In addition to the information group, other committees include Fundraising, Logistics, Outreach, Publicity, Volunteer Resources, and Clean Water Act (dealing with EPA policies).
 
All interested citizens are encouraged to join a committee and participate.

Workgroups are currently preparing for a series of public meetings to be held early next year.
 
Input from these meetings, along with information gathered by the workgroups, will supply the foundation for the watershed plan, to be developed by the Steering Committee later in the year.
 
The plan will then be circulated for public comment, reviewed and revised, and finally adopted, perhaps by early 2003.

The Watershed Project will then help to encourage or coordinate the implementation of the plan by local jurisdictions throughout the watershed.
 
Though the plan will have no force of law, local participation in its development should encourage its adoption by Darby communities.

DCA Meets with Ohio EPA

In response to a DCA inquiry, officials with the Ohio EPA recently organized a meeting to explore ways to enhance the agency’s current study of Darby Creek.

As detailed in the last issue of the Advocate, the EPA is currently in the midst of a watershed-wide assessment of the biological health of the Big Darby system in preparation for a “TMDL” plan for Darby.

A TMDL, which stands for Total Maximum Daily Load, is a process that seeks to identify existing pollution sources and set limits for pollutants based on a stream’s ability to meet water quality standards.
 
The EPA’s Darby assessment will identify problems in the watershed and lay the foundation for plans to maintain or improve water quality.
 
DCA expressed a concern that existing EPA assessment tools do not specifically measure the status of special species (either endangered, threatened, or special interest); nor does it monitor freshwater mussels.

Because Darby has so many rare and endangered mussels, DCA feels this element of the Darby ecosystem should be considered in any assessment of the watershed’s health.
 
It is generally accepted that many mussel species in the watershed have declined over the last few decades.

At the meeting, which included more than a dozen EPA, ODNR, and OSU specialists, a plan was discussed to include mussel and other data in the TMDL process.
 
OSU museum curator Dr. G. Thomas Watters noted that Darby may be the best studied stream in the world in terms of freshwater mussels.
 
EPA project director Marc Smith stated that this winter a mussel task force would meet to decide how best to incorporate this wealth of data into the overall Darby assessment.
The EPA also agreed to include data from Dr. Ted Cavender, a fish specialist from the OSU museum who has been studying Darby for decades.
 
At the October Darby Partners meeting, Cavender outlined results of a recently completed study of Ohio’s “prairie fishes,” which included surveys of about 50 sites in former prairie regions of the Darby watershed.
 
Cavender has found a distinct decline in these fishes in many parts of the watershed, apparently due to habitat reduction and increases in waterborne sediments.
Results from the EPA’s surveys should be available early next year.

Franklin County to Build Sewage Plant in Darbydale

Under pressure from the Ohio EPA, Franklin County has approved a plan to construct a new sewage treatment plant for the unincorporated village of Darbydale.

For years the EPA has documented pollution from malfunctioning septic systems in this small town along the banks of Big Darby. Leakage from leach beds currently intermingles with storm water runoff, creating a health hazard and degrading Big Darby Creek in the vicinity of the town.

Some residents have complained that they will be forced to pay a connection fee, estimated at up to $2,500 per household.
 
The county will seek grants to lower this figure.

The plant will result in a new discharge into Darby, which is generally not allowed in Ohio’s highest quality streams.
 
But in this case the EPA believes a regulated discharge will be better than the unregulated pollution from existing septics.

Another concern DCA had was that the new plant might be designed with excess capacity that would spur development in this sensitive area.
 
However, officials have assured us that the plant will only serve existing structures, plus expected tie-ins with several trailer parks in the area.


Orient Sewage Plant Improving

In November 1998, a Columbus Dispatch headline screamed the bad news: “Prison Sewage Fouls Darby.” Partially treated “solids” from a sewage plant serving the Orient Prison complex in northern Pickaway County had covered a stretch of Big Darby in sludge.

Research by reporter Randall Edwards revealed that the prison had been a chronic offender, mostly because the prison population had long ago exceeded the capacity of the small plant.

Just three years later the plant is now consistently meeting federal and state water quality standards, according to a press release from the EPA. The plant has even received two U.S. EPA awards: one in the federal agency’s “most improved” category, and the other a Regional Operation and Maintenance Award. Further upgrades are planned.


Conservation Program Pushed as Refuge Alternative

Madison County officials are promoting a conservation program run by the U.S. Department of Agriculture as an alternative to the controversial Little Darby Wildlife Refuge proposed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, according to the Madison Press.
The program, called the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, or CREP, is designed to target the impacts of agricultural practices on resources of “state and national significance.”
 
Chris Kauffman of ODNR outlined the program at the October Darby Partners meeting.

CREP is set up like the more commonly used Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), except that:
 
it targets a watershed or other sensitive area,
 
it offers a greater variety of conservation measures, and
 
it is developed and administered with local input in cooperation with state and federal agencies.

Funding has been approved for 100,000 CREP acres in Ohio.
 
So far, the state Ohio has two CREP projects totaling 70,000 acres: one in the western Lake Erie drainage (67,000 acres), and a soon-to-be-approved project in the upper Big Walnut Creek watershed (3,000 acres).
 
Thus 30,000 acres remain to be distributed.

A Darby CREP program is supported by U.S. Rep. Deborah Pryce and U.S. Senator Mike DeWine.

One potential roadblock is that the program requires a portion of funds to come from local sources (at least 20 percent). The Lake Erie CREP has state funding from ODNR, while the Big Walnut effort has funding from the city of Columbus (which hopes to protect its drinking water). In the face of a shrinking state budget, ODNR funding will not be available for a Darby program, and other sources have not been identified.

The CREP program has the potential to pump much needed federal funds into the Darby preservation effort.
 
However, it should be noted that CREP, like CRP, generally offers only temporary protections through 10-30 year contracts. For this reason the programs are considered expensive ways to protect a watershed.