The NCSU Water Quality Group Newsletter
Number 79 September 1996 ISSN 1062-9149
Elizabeth McEvoy, Diane Gould, Melissa Upton, and Dillon Scott
Massachusetts Bays Program
Like all coastal regions in the United States, the Massachusetts coast has long been a magnet for human settlement. The tremendous benefits offered by Massachusetts and Cape Cod Bays (referred to collectively as the Massachusetts Bays) have attracted millions of residents and visitors to their shores.
Massachusetts and Cape Cod Bays are bounded on the north by Cape Ann and on the south by Cape Cod. Covering an expanse of ocean that is 84 miles (100 km) long and 24 miles (40 km) wide, this complex ocean system is located in the western part of the larger Gulf of Maine. The varied shores of the bays are dominated by rocky outcroppings along the North Shore, giving way to sandy beaches and wide tidal flats along the South Shore and Cape Cod. Stellwagen Bank, a shallow underwater plateau rich in populations of marine fish and mammals, forms the easternmost boundary of the bays.
Sixteen major rivers and small streams make their way down to the bays and drain fresh water into the sea. The mixing of fresh and salt water in Massachusetts and Cape Cod Bays produces a biologically rich coastal estuary. Estuaries create ideal wildlife habitats and provide abundant food sources for thousands of plant and animal species.
Salt marshes, tidal flats, rocky shorelines, and barrier beaches are just a few of the coastal environments sustained by the Massachusetts Bays. These diverse areas provide homes for a host of living organisms, from eelgrass to populations of shorebirds and insects. In addition, salt marshes along the coast help to filter polluted water, minimize shoreline erosion, and reduce physical damage caused by coastal flooding.
The estuaries also provide rich commercial and recreational opportunities. Many species of fish and shellfish depend on estuarine environments as their breeding and feeding grounds, creating viable fishing industries, as well as sport for coastal residents and visitors. Lobster, winter flounder, soft shell clams, and oysters are just a few of the commercially important species found in the waters of Massachusetts and Cape Cod Bays.
Thirteen sewage treatment plants along the coast contribute approximately 565 million gallons of wastewater to the Massachusetts Bays every day. In older coastal towns, such as Boston and Gloucester, combined sewer overflows (CSOs) spill a mixture of untreated sewage and stormwater directly into bay waters when heavy rains overwhelm interconnected systems of storm and sewer pipes.
Another result of intensive population growth in the bays watershed is the large volume of nonpoint source pollution entering coastal waters. In urban areas, these nonpoint sources include polluted air and stormwater runoff that carries a host of toxic chemicals. In areas with less pavement and fewer traffic jams, nonpoint sources may include failing septic systems and runoff from yards and agricultural land.
Stormwater runoff follows many routes to the bays. Some stormwater is channeled into storm drains and discharged through pipes directly into local streams and coastal waters. Some flows overland to bay waters. No matter how it arrives, polluted stormwater degrades the marine environment. Pathogens carried by runoff cause beach closures and place shellfish beds off-limits. Toxic chemicals carried by stormwater build up in sediments, harm the health of marine organisms, and ultimately endanger human health.
Toxic materials have been released into the bays and the rivers that feed them since the outset of industrial development in Massachusetts. In high concentrations, these pollutants degrade the quality of bay waters and pose a serious threat to marine organisms and to people who eat bay seafood. Toxic materials include heavy metals, such as lead, copper, and mercury, and organic pollutants, including petroleum-based compounds such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) (now banned), and pesticides. High concentrations of toxic substances have been measured in both bay waters and sediments, where the chemicals can remain a threat to the health of the ecosystem for decades after they are deposited on the bay floor.
Recreational boating is very popular. Tens of thousands of people launch boats into coastal waters every year. Boats and marinas are a major source of nonpoint source pollutants, including untreated or inadequately treated sewage, toxic chemicals from boat building and repair, and oil and gas.
Pollution released by many boats in small harbors and bays can seriously damage fragile near-shore environments. Sewage from boats carries pathogens that cause beach closures and make shellfish unsafe to eat. Excess nutrients from wastes can also disrupt delicate bay ecosystems by causing rampant growth of algae. Toxic chemicals applied to boat hulls can cause damage in bay waters. For example, antifouling paints used to prevent the growth of barnacles contain chemicals that are highly toxic to many forms of aquatic life. Small, but numerous, gas and oil spills occur at marinas. Runoff from boat yards transports paints, solvents, and debris from boat building and maintenance directly into shallow bay waters.
The Massachusetts Bays Program is a joint federal, state, and local collaboration designed to address the mounting pollution threat to the natural resources of Massachusetts and Cape Cod Bays. Initial funding for the program was provided by the Massachusetts Environmental Trust. In 1990, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) augmented both the scope and the duration of the program by adding Massachusetts and Cape Cod Bays to the National Estuary Program, an innovative effort to improve the environmental quality of America's most important and threatened estuaries.
The Massachusetts Bays Program aims to protect the ecological health and vitality of the bays while also enhancing their diverse uses. The program goals are to
In 1988, the Massachusetts Bays Program initiated a comprehensive research program to examine the sources, transport, fate, and effects of pollutants in the bays. To maximize results from limited research dollars, the program has been coordinated closely with research efforts of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (the agency responsible for cleaning up Boston Harbor), U.S. Geological Survey, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology Sea Grant Program. A list of reports and fact sheets is available upon request.
Educating the public about the scope and magnitude of pollution in the bays is a central aim of the Bays Program. In addition to endeavoring to raise public awareness, the staff have actively sought public participation in all aspects of the program. Along with scientists and policymakers, informed citizens have a critical role to play in the formation of strategies to improve bay water quality. Active public participation will also help forge the political will to translate management recommendations into concrete and cost-effective actions.
To achieve the dual goal of informing and involving the public, the Massachusetts Bays Program initiated a multifaceted public information and participation program. Committees composed of educators, business leaders, and environmental advocates have been assembled to provide a forum for ongoing citizen participation. The committees design environmental education activities and provide advice and guidance on program policies.
Since 1988, public outreach initiatives have been targeted at "opinion leaders," individuals in communities along the bays or in the watershed who can influence the opinions of others about the value of coastal resources. Such individuals include elected and appointed officials (local and state), business owners, environmental advocates, and educators.
In 1991, three coastal embayments were selected to participate in a five-year pilot project involving cooperative resource management. Working together, the communities around the embayments have studied pollution problems, developed and tested possible solutions, and drafted long-term management plans.
In the Weymouth Fore River Estuary Project, scientists have found high bacteria counts in much of the estuary and have identified sources of bacteria. Local communities are making efforts to remedy problem areas.
The Wellfleet Harbor Project has focused primarily on protection and enhancement of its nationally known oysters. Water quality monitoring is being conducted to assess nitrogen and bacteria sources outside the harbor. Because community leaders are also concerned about maintaining a viable town marina and harbor area, they have developed a Harbor Management Plan to address land use issues in the watershed, as well as coastal and marine resources.
The Plum Island Sound Minibay Project is a collaborative effort between a nonprofit organization, Massachusetts Audubon: North Shore, and the towns of Ipswich, Newbury, and Rowley. Extensive water quality testing in the Sound has resulted in identification of "hot spots" where bacteria counts are high and in the drafting of an Action Plan that outlines what the towns can do to address current pollution problems.
The culmination of a five-year planning process was the publication in 1996 of the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP) for Massachusetts and Cape Cod Bays. Principal elements and recommendations of the plan include 15 action plans which emphasize pollution prevention. The action recommendations in the CCMP represent coordinated planning within and among the participating agencies and communities. The final CCMP incorporates responses to comments received as part of the public review process, as well as comments on the final CCMP from USEPA and Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management.
Early in the five-year comprehensive planning efforts, Massachusetts Bays Program staff and participants recognized the need to identify sources of financial assistance and revenues to support implementation of the CCMP. A variety of fiscal options have been identified, including grants, revenue sources, and financing mechanisms. Successful implementation of the action plans is expected to lead to the restoration and protection of the water quality; living resources; and fish,shellfish, and wildlife habitat of the bays.
Diane M. Gould, Executive Director
Massachusetts Bays Program
100
Cambridge Street, Room 2006
Boston, MA 02202
Tel: 617-727-9530
Fax:
617-727-2754
Mark Ritchie and Jim Kleinschmit
Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy
Throughout the world, many farmers face the challenge of finding ways to farm profitably while protecting the environment. This is especially true in the Netherlands, one of the world's most agriculturally intensive and environmentally sensitive nations. Because the average altitude in the Netherlands is 50 feet below sea level, the issue of water is central to all aspects of Dutch life. The entire nation's drinking water supplies are at the surface or within a few yards of the surface, making water resources extremely vulnerable to contamination from run-off and leaching of fertilizers and manure.
The Dutch have come up with a number of measures to combat the problem of excessive nutrients in water resources, including regulations on herd sizes, strict manure management laws, and perhaps their most innovative approach, new farm management tools called "yardsticks". Created by the Center for Agriculture and the Environment (CLM) in Utrecht, the Netherlands, the yardsticks are designed to help Dutch farmers first measure and then reduce the negative impacts on drinking water from nutrient runoff and leaching from farms.
Farmers use simple forms to keep track of nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium) brought onto their farms in the form of feed, purchased fertilizer, nitrogen fixing crops, and livestock. At the end of the season, the farmers determine the quantity of nutrients that were removed by way of marketed crops, livestock, milk, and other farm products, with the difference being the amount of nutrients "lost" to the environment. This nutrient balance sheet gives farmers baseline information needed to evaluate how their current farming practices are affecting the environment. Once a baseline is determined, farmers can then make rational decisions about how to decrease fertilizer nutrient losses. Decisions about how much to reduce nutrient losses and how to accomplish their nutrient loss goals are made by the farmers.
At the end of the following season, farmers use the nutrient yardstick to measure their progress in reducing nutrient loss and to compare achievements with goals.
The yardstick system of nutrient bookkeeping has now been in place in the Netherlands for six years, with remarkable results. The yardstick has helped Dutch farmers to cut costs by identifying unnecessary inputs, while at the same time reducing nutrient losses to the environment. The farmers praise it for its simplicity and for the independence it gives them in making nutrient management decisions.
The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP) in Minneapolis, Minnesota,has begun adapting the nutrient management yardstick for use in the United States and is planning to introduce it in select areas in late 1996. Agencies or individuals who are interested in learning about pilot projects should contact IATP.
Mark Ritchie, Emily Green, or Jim Kleinschmit
Institute for Agriculture and Trade
Policy
1313 5th St. SE, Suite 303
Minneapolis, MN 55414
Tel: 612-
379-5980
Fax: 612-379-5982
email: water@mtn.org
Carlson, C.G., C.H. Ullery, and C. Snyder. 1996. Improving Water
Quality through the South Dakota Oakwood Lakes - Poinsett Rural Clean Water Program:
Project Summary. Oakwood Lakes - Poinsett RCWP Project and South Dakota
Cooperative Extension Service, Farm Services Agency - U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Huron, SD. 16p.
Goodman, J., D. German, J. Bischoff, and C.G. Kimball. 1996. Ground Water
Monitoring: A Guide to Monitoring for Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
Projects. Farm Services Agency - U.S. Department of Agriculture, Huron, SD.
212p.
Improving Water Quality through the South Dakota Oakwood Lakes - Poinsett Rural Clean Water Program: Project Summary is an attractive pamphlet describing the South Dakota Rural Clean Water Program project, one of 21 projects funded through the Rural Clean Water Program, a federally sponsored program initiated in 1980 and designed to reduce agricultural nonpoint source pollution and improve water quality in rural areas of the U.S.
The Oakwood Lakes-Poinsett RCWP project (see also NWQEP NOTES No. 55, September 1992) is located in the glacial lakes region of east-central South Dakota, an area characterized by a rolling topography with deep, rich soils. The majority of the project area is cropland and grassland. The project area contains numerous wetlands, shallow lakes, and aquifers. The lakes are hydraulically connected to the aquifers. The Big Sioux aquifer, the most important aquifer in the project area, is a source of drinking water for rural areas. Several lakes provide a major recreational resource.
In the early 1980s, fish kills, algae blooms, and excessive algae growth greatly restricted recreational use of the lakes and excessive nitrate levels in water from the Big Sioux aquifer violated drinking water standards. Monitoring showed elevated levels of nutrients being transported into the lakes via intermittent tributaries. Some pesticides were found in surface and ground water. All pollutants were believed to be related to agriculture.
The project objectives were to reduce nonpoint sources of nutrients, pesticides, water- and sediment-borne pollutants, and animal wastes. Land treatment goals were to implement conservation tillage, fertilizer management, and pesticide management and install animal waste management systems.
The South Dakota project was one of five RCWP projects that received additional funding to conduct comprehensive monitoring and evaluation. The purpose of the monitoring was to document water quality impacts of cost-shared land treatment practices implemented through the RCWP project.
The Project Summary presents, and effectively illustrates with color photographs, the water quality problem, land treatment, water quality monitoring, and project results.
Ground Water Monitoring: A Guide to Monitoring for Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution was produced by team members of the South Dakota RCWP project with the goal of providing a readable "how to" handbook for designing and operating a ground water monitoring network for nonpoint source pollution control projects. The information presented in the guide is based on lessons learned in the South Dakota RCWP project. While the document is geared primarily to the hydrologic systems and geologic regimes of the glaciated, upper Midwestern region of the United States, many of the lessons learned are applicable to projects in other parts of the country.
Ground Water Monitoring provides a detailed discussion of the essential elements of a nonpoint source pollution control project, including problem identification, project development, institutional arrangements, water quality monitoring, quality assurance/quality control, land use monitoring, project evaluation, reporting, and information dissemination. Ground water, vadose zone, and surface/ground water interaction monitoring are also described in detail.
Copies of the two publications (free) may be requested from the Farm Services Agency - USDA, Federal Bldg, 200 4th Street SW, Huron, SD 57350, Tel: 605-352-1177.
Line, D.E., D.L. Osmond, R.W. Gannon, S.W. Coffey, G.D. Jennings,
J.A. Gale, and J. Spooner. 1996. Nonpoint sources, Journal of Water Environment
Research 68(4):720-733.
The annual review of nonpoint source literature prepared by the NCSU Water Quality Group
has been published in the Journal of Water Environment Research (June 1996)
Copies of the literature review (WQ-97) (free) may be requested by contacting the
Publications Coordinator, NCSU Water Quality Group, 615 Oberlin Road, Suite 100,
Raleigh, NC 27605-1126, Fax: 919-515-7448, email: wq_puborder@ncsu.edu.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has published the National Water
Quality Inventory: 1994 Report to Congress. The report, prepared by the Research
Triangle Institute, is a synthesis of the Section 305(b) reports submitted to USEPA by 61
states and other jurisdictions. Some highlights of the report are presented below.
Rivers and Streams
Lakes, Reservoirs, and Ponds
The Great Lakes
Estuaries
Ground Water
Improving Nationwide Monitoring
The need for improved nationwide monitoring of water quality is discussed in the report.
Much of the existing water quality data cannot be aggregated or compared because the
various agencies that survey water quality use different monitoring strategies. In 1995, the
Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality (ITFM) issued its strategy for
improving water quality monitoring nationwide. A permanent successor to the ITFM, the
National Monitoring Council, will provide assistance to help public and private agencies
implement the national strategy, which includes institutional collaboration, environmental
indicators, monitoring design, comparable methods, quality assurance and quality control,
data management and sharing, and training. ITFM reports are available from the U.S.
Geological Survey, 417 National Center, Reston, VA 22092, Tel: 703-648-5023.
The following publications may be accessed on the World Wide Web
(http://www.epa.gov/OW/305b) or ordered by email
(OWOW-PUBS-NCEPI@epamail.epa.gov) or U.S. mail (NCEPI, 11029 Kenwood Road,
Building 5, Cincinnati, OH 45242):
Olohan, M.T. 1996. Executive Summary and Recommendations: USDA
Great Swamp Hydrologic Unit Area Project Final Report. U.S. Department of
Agriculture Great Swamp HUA Project, Rutgers Cooperative Extension, New Brunswick,
NJ. 12p.
Westfall, G.J. 1996. USDA Great Swamp Hydrologic Unit Area Project Final
Report. U.S. Department of Agriculture Great Swamp HUA Project, Rutgers
Cooperative Extension, New Brunswick, NJ. 129p + appendices.
In 1991, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) initiated a five-year hydrologic unit
area (HUA) project in an effort to understand better how increased quantities of stormwater
from ten watershed towns are affecting the 55-square-mile Great Swamp watershed (New
Jersey) and its largest natural resource, the Great Swamp National Wildlife Refuge (NWR).
The overall project goal was to provide local decisionmakers with the tools to evaluate,
recommend, and implement strategies for reducing impacts of existing and proposed
development on water quantity and quality as it impacts the Great Swamp NWR.
The two reports listed above present project findings, products, and impacts, as well as 26
technical, institutional, and social recommendations. Copies of the executive summary and
limited copies of the final report are available (free). Contact Michael T. Olohan, Project
Public Information Officer, USDA Great Swamp HUA Project, Rutgers Cooperative
Extension, DNR, ENRS Bldg., P.O. Box 231, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, Tel:
908-932-9634 or 8264, Fax: 908-932-8746, email: olohan@aesop.rutgers.edu.
Wierl, J.A., K.F. Rappold, and F.U. Amerson. 1996. Summary of the
Land-Use Inventory for the Nonpoint Source Evaluation Monitoring Watersheds in
Wisconsin. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 96-123. 23p.
In 1992, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), in cooperation with the
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), initiated a land-use inventory to identify sources of
pollutants and track the land-management changes for eight evaluation monitoring watersheds
established as part of the WDNR's Nonpoint Source Program. The USGS is responsible for
collection of water quality data in the watersheds. The land-use inventory described in this
report expands upon an initial inventory by including nonpoint pollution sources not
previously identified and by updating changes in land-use and land-management practices.
The inventory will facilitate interpretation of future land-use and water quality data.
The report describes land-use inventory methods, presents results of the inventory, and lists
proposed future activities.
Copies may be ordered from USGS Information Services - Open Files, Box 25286 (MS 517),
Denver, CO 80225-0286, Tel: 303-202-4210. The price per copy is $4.25 plus $3.50
postage.
Schultz, R.C., P.H. Wray, J.P. Colletti, T.M. Isenhart, C.A. Rodrigues,
and A. Keuhl. 1996. Stewards of Our Streams: Buffer Strip Design, Establishment, and
Maintenance. Iowa State University Extension, Ames, IA. 6p.
One of several recent publications on Midwestern riparian zone management systems
produced by Iowa State University Extension and the Leopold Center for Sustainable
Agriculture, this fact sheet describes how to design, plant, and maintain a multi-species
buffer strip.
Requests for copies of the fact sheet may be sent to Paul Wray, 251 Bessey Hall, Iowa State
University, Ames, IA 50011, Fax: 515-294-2995, email: phw@iastate.edu. Single copies are
free.
The following information was submitted by Don Meals, School of Natural Resources,
Aiken Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405, Tel: 802-656-4057, Fax:
802-656-8683, email: dmeals@clover.uvm.edu.
Be aware that if the water level in your stream, stilling well, or flume exceeds the maximum
stage that you have entered in the programming sequence, your level-to-flow conversions will
be incorrect.
We discovered this when our data showed a suspiciously identical maximum flow rate of
128.3 cfs for six weeks of the year. I had assumed that if the plotter showed an over-range
of full scale, then the flow meter would also calculate an over-ranged flow rate -- not so.
Even though water level exceeded the maximum head I had specified, the flow meter
reported only flow at maximum head. The manual does not explain this situation clearly.
Because we are using the flow meter to pace a sampler in flow-proportional mode, increasing
the maximum head by at least two-fold led to another problem: I could not select a low
enough flow pulse interval for running the sampler. The display shows an allowable range
for flow interval per pulse, which is based on the setting for maximum head. With too large
a maximum head set into the meter, it may not be possible to set a small enough flow
increment to collect samples during baseflow conditions.
In summary, select your maximum head setting carefully, as this will determine the flow
meter's resolution, hence accuracy. If you over-range this value, you will need to recalculate
flow conversions through flowlink (not a trivial task!). Do not accept what is printed in the
plotter's report. For better resolution on your plotter, you may set that full scale to a
different level from the maximum head you enter into the flow meter's program.
Gannon, R.W., D.L. Osmond, F.J. Humenik, D.E. Line, J.A. Gale, and J.
Spooner. 1996. Goal-oriented agricultural water quality legislation, Water Resources
Bulletin 32(3):437-450.
Members of the NCSU Water Quality Group have published a position paper on
re-authorization of the Clean Water Act in Water Resources Bulletin. Copies of
the paper (WQ-96) (free) may be requested from the Publications Coordinator, NCSU Water
Quality Group, 615 Oberlin Road, Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27605-1126, Fax: 919-515-7448,
email: wq_puborder@ncsu.edu.
Karst-Water Envir Symp & Workshop: Oct 30-31, 1997, Roanoke, VA. Abstracts due by
Dec 1, 1996, to T.M. Younos, VA Water Resources Res Cntr, 10 Sandy Hall, VA
Polytechnic & State Univ, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0444, Tel: 540-231-8039, Fax:
540-231-6673, email: tyounos@vt.edu
New Approaches to Rural Nonpoint Source Pollution: Sept 16-18, LaCross, WI. Linda
Schroeder, 282 77th Street SE, Delano, MN 55328, Tel: 612-972-3908, Fax: 612-972-30904,
email: schroecomm@aol.com
Water Environment Federation - 69th Annual Conf: Oct 5-9, Dallas, TX. WEF, 601
Wythe St, Alexandria, VA 22314-1994, Tel: 1-800-666-0206
Agriculture and Water Quality in the Pacific Northwest: Oct 22-23, Yakima, WA.
Agriculture and Water Quality Committee, P.O. Box 1462, Spokane, WA 99210, Tel:
509-838-6653, Fax: 509-838-6685, email: ag_wq_conf_box@maildwatcm.wr.usgs.gov,
Web site: http://wwwdwatcm.wr.usgs.gov/ccpt_ag_wq_conf.html
National Nonpoint Source Pollution Info/Education Conf: Oct 22-24, Chicago, IL.
Christy Trutter, Illinois EPA, Bureau of Water, 2200 Churchill Rd, P.O. Box 19276,
Springfield, IL 62794-9276, Tel: 217-782-3362, Fax: 217-785-1225
Eco-Informa '96 - Global Networks for Env Info: Nov 4-7, Lake Buena Vista, FL.
ERIM/Eco-Informa, P.O.Box 134001, Ann Arbor, MI, 48113-4001, Tel: 313-994-1200 ext
3234, Fax: 313-994-5123, email: rrogers@erim.org, Web site:
http://www.erim.org/CONF/conf.html
29th Annual Water Resources Conf: Nov 12, St. Paul, MN. Bev Ringsak, 206 Nolte
Center, Univ MN, 315 Pillsbury Dr SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, Tel: 612-625-6689, Fax:
612-626-1632, email: bringsak@mail.cee.umn.edu
North American Lake Management Society 16th Annual International Symposium: Nov
13-16, Minneapolis, MN. NALMS, P.O. Box 101294, Denver, CO 80250, Tel:
303-781-8287, Fax: 303-781-6538
3rd Marine and Estuarine Shallow Water Conf: Dec 2-5, Atlantic City, NJ. Ralph
Spagnolo, USEPA, 841 Chestnut St, Philadelphia, PA 19107, Tel: 215-597-3642, Fax:
215-597-1850, email: spagnolo.ralph@epamail.epa.gov
Southeast Animal Waste Management Conference: Feb 11-12, Tifton, GA. Mark Risse,
Univ Georgia, 307 Hoke Smith Building, Athens, GA 30602, Tel: 706-542-2154, email:
mrisse@bae.uga.edu
1997 Georgia Water Resources Conference: March 20-22, Athens, GA. Kathryn Hatcher,
Institute of Ecology, Univ. of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602-2202, Fax: 706-542-6040, email:
khatcher@ecology.uga.edu
2nd International Symposium on Environmental Software Systems: Apr 28 - May 2,
Whistler, British Columbia. David Swayne, Dept. Computing and Information Science,
Univ of Guelph, Ontario, CAN N1G 2W1, email: dswayne@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca
4th International Conference - WATER POLLUTION 97- Modeling, Measuring
Prediction: June 18-20, Bled, Slovenia. Liz Kerr, Wessex Inst Technol, Ashurst Lodge,
Ashurst, Southampton SO4O 7AA, UK, Fax: 44-1703-292-853, email:
wit@wessex.witcmi.ac.uk
American Soc Agric Eng Internat'l Annual Mtg: Aug 10-14, Minneapolis, MN. ASAE
Society Services Group, 2950 Niles Road, St. Joseph, MI 49085-9659, Tel: 616-429-0300,
Fax: 616-429-3852, email: hq@asae.org
North Carolina Lake Management Society Workshop
Lake Lure is a 15,000-acre reservoir located in the southwestern part of North Carolina in
Rutherford County. The surrounding watershed is hilly and consists of forest with some
agricultural and urban areas. Owned by the Town of Lake Lure, the mountain lake is suitable
for swimming and trout.
Workshop sessions will cover the limnology of Lake Lure; characteristics and assessment of
the lake's watershed; and management strategies for the lake, the lake shoreline and the
watershed. Participants will have an opportunity to tour the lake.
For further information, contact Steve Coffey, Tel: 919-515-8242, email:
steve_coffey@ncsu.edu
NWQEP NOTES is issued bimonthly. Subscriptions are free (contact:
Publications Coordinator at the address below or via email: wq_puborder@ncsu.edu). A
publications order form listing all publications on nonpoint source pollution distributed by the
NCSU Water Quality Group is included in each hardcopy issue of the newsletter.
I welcome your views, findings, information, and suggestions for articles. Please feel free to
contact me.
Judith A. Gale, Editor
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Production of NWQEP NOTES is funded through U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Grant No. X818397. Project Officer: Steven A. Dressing, Nonpoint Source
Pollution Control Program, Office of Water, USEPA (4503F), 499 South Capitol St. SE,
Washington, DC 20460, Tel: 202-260-7110, Fax: 202-260-1977, email:
dressing.steven@epamail.epa.gov, Web Site: http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1994 Report to
Congress
Monitoring Watersheds in Wisconsin
September 27 & 28, 1996
Water Quality Extension Specialist
North Carolina State University Water Quality Group
Campus Box 7637
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695
Tel: 919-515-3723
Fax: 919-515-7448
email: notes_editor@ncsu.edu