water quality standards. We drink, swim, fish and play in our local waters. The work to repair them takes time and the recovery will likely take longer. As a community, we should commit to restoring our local waters to good health. StreamWatch will continue the necessary task of monitoring the quality of our streams and rivers. We hope community members will support us and our nine community partners in working toward a cleaner watershed.

The health of our streams is deter-mined using benthic macroinvertebrate sampling (see page 2 for explanation). Streams are rated from “very poor” to “very good” based on results from multiple samples. Streams rated as “fair” or worse fail the Virginia water quality standard for aquatic life. All data collect-ed by StreamWatch meets the highest standards of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. Our findings indicate that stream health has not substantially changed over time, as results are similar to those of years past. From 2012 to 2014, 64 percent of monitored sites failed to meet the Virginia standard for aquatic life and only 36 percent met the standard. The main stem of the Rivanna is faring a bit better than the watershed as a whole. Of the eight sites located on the Rivanna (including the North and South Forks), half pass the standard with “good” ratings and the other half fail with “fair” ratings. Several sampling sites have fluctuated between “good” and “fair” ratings during the past decade. As reported in earlier assessments, it is possible to restore some of these streams to consistently good health. Improving how we manage our resources, such as implementing stormwater best management practices and increasing riparian buffers, will hopefully lead us on a path to healthier streams. We all want healthy waterways and should not be content with 64% of sampled streams failing to meet state

e live in a modern age when things progress quickly and we see

results immediately. It is easy to forget how slow nature can be in response to improving or declining ecological conditions. Just as it can take up to a decade for the health of a forest to rebound after a fire, the health of a stream can take years to respond to development occuring in a watershed. When we monitor local water quality for an extended period of time, we have the opportunity to observe subtle chang-es. By watching our local streams cafeful-ly, we will know when and where water quality is improving or declining. StreamWatch has been monitoring stream and river health within the Rivanna River watershed since 2003. While the Rivanna watershed is in our backyard, it also plays a larger role as a tributary of the James River, which ultimately flows into the Chesapeake Bay. Not only do we need to concern ourselves with the creeks running by our homes and the water we drink here, but it is important to be aware that what happens in our watershed affects communities and ecosystms downstream in the Bay, which is an integral part of our region. With the commitment and hard work of nine community partners and more than 100 citizen-science volunteers, StreamWatch monitors 50 stream sites twice a year within the Rivanna River watershed. This report looks at stream health during the three year window from Spring 2012 through Fall 2014.

Rivanna River Watershed2012-2014 Stream Health Report

Stream Health

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

Streams below this line fail to meet the Virginia water quality standard for aquatic life

58%

26%

10%6%

W

(5 of 50)

(13 of 50)

(29 of 50)

(3 of 50)

ORANGE

ALBE

MAR

LELO

UISA

ORANG

E

GREEN

E

Keswick

ALBE

MAR

LE

FLUV

ANNA

Stanardsville

Crozet

Columbia

Cunningham

White Hall

Free Union

RuckersvilleNortonsville

Lake Monticello

Charlottesville

Palmyra

0 5Miles

VeryGood

Good

Fair

Poor

23

8

1

64

5

7

9

22

28

29

23

31

19

33

20

26

21

1612

38

13

18

37

15

36

48

35

27

40

47

49

42

32

44

17

14

34

45

41

39

1011

25 24

30

4643

Benthic macroinvertebrates (bottom-dwelling bugs) are

collected from the stream with a net by trained StreamWatch

citizen scientists.

Rating the health of streams

The insects are sorted and identified. All samples are

processed in accordance with a quality assurance project plan

approved by Virginia DEQ.

Each insect has a pollution tolerance rating from 0 to 10 used to score the sample. The types

and diversity of bugs also affect the score.

Three years of scores are analyzed and averaged to obtain an overall rating for

the site.

1 2

3 4

Mechums River @ 692 - B

Stockton Creek upper @ 683

Powells Creek ~80 meters above Lickinghole

Lickinghole Creek south of Fairwinds Lane

Ivy Creek in Rosemont

Little Ivy Creek trib @ Kingston Road

Ivy Creek @ 601

Morey Creek south of Bellair

Doyles River @ 674

Doyles River upper @ National Park Boundary

Albemarle County reference stream #2

Moormans River @ 601

Mechums River @ 601

Buck Mountain Creek @ 665 - A

Fishing Creek west of Willwood Dr

Naked Creek @ 844

Buck Mountain Creek upper west of 666 - A

Lynch River @ 603

Roach/Buffalo River north of 648

Quarter Creek in Twin Lakes

Parker Branch @ 633

Stanardsville Run upstream of N. Ridge Way

Swift Run @ 605

Marsh Run upstream of 641

North Fork @ Advance Mills

Preddy Creek west of Rosewood Drive

Burnley Branch @ Burnley Station Road

Moores Creek near Woolen Mills

Meadow Creek west of Locust Lane Ct

Rivanna @ Darden Towe

South Fork @ Forks of Rivanna

North Fork @ Forks of Rivanna

Rivanna @ Milton

Buck Island Creek @ 729

Carroll Creek in Glenmore

Cunningham Creek Middle Fork upstream of Bell Farms Lane

Lake Monticello trib #1 emptying to Jackson Cove

Mechunk Creek @ 759

Mechunk Creek upper @ 600

Beaverdam Creek East Prongupstream of 600

Turkeysag Creek @ 22

Rivanna @ Crofton - A

Raccoon Creek @ 15

Cunningham Creek @ 15

Ballinger Creek downstream of 625

Long Island Creek @ 601

Rivanna 5.2 km downstream of Palmyra

Carys Creek @ 15

Rivanna @ Rivanna Mills

Cedar Branch near Crofton (not shown)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

GOOD

Map courtesy of Chris Bruce, The Nature Conservancy

More than half the bugs collected in spring 2014

were not sensitive to pollution. The absence of bugs that are sensitive to pollu-tion indicates that the

stream experiences significant amounts of

pollution.

The health of streams in our watershed ranges from unhealthy to near pristine. We rate these streams from “very poor” to “very good” using the Virginia Stream Condition Index, which has been developed by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. But what do those ratings mean? What does a “good” stream look like compared with a “poor” stream? Let’s take a look.

Buck Mountain Creek has been rated “good” consistently. The upper tributaries of Buck Mountain Creek are in the Shenandoah National Park, located in northwest Albemarle County. The creek largely is surrounded by forest and experiences only moderate runoff from agricultural fields. Meadow Creek is one of two major urban creeks within the City of Charlottesville, and over the past 10 years it has consis-tently received a “poor” rating. Meadow Creek receives urban runoff from lawns and parking lots which scours stream banks and delivers pollution that degrades stream habitat and water quality.

Comparing a healthy and unhealthy stream

Buck Mountain Creek at Route 666 Meadow Creek west of Locust Lane Court

More than half of the bugs collected in spring

2014 were sensitive or somewhat sensi-tive to pollution. Their presence indicates that the

stream is healthy and experiences only

moderate amounts of pollution.

39%Sensitive

41%Not

Sensitive

20%Somewhat Sensitive

3%Sensitive

63%Not

Sensitive

34%Somewhat Sensitive

20 total types of insects 11 total types of insects

Land use in Buck Mountain Creek Watershed Land use in Meadow Creek Watershed

Watershed land use data are from 2009 - more information is available in our 2011 report “Stream Health Follows Land Use”

82% 10% 7% 1%Forest cover

Grazing Impervious surface

Open land~50

People per square mile

48% 32% 20%Forest cover

Impervious surface

Open land~3000

People per square mile

» Large riparian zone with minimal human impact

» Minimal stream channel alteration

» Stream banks are very stable and not significantly eroded

» Good habitat on stream bottom with lots of rocks and slight sedimentation

» Medium riparian zone with noticeable human impact

» Some stream channel alteration

» Stream banks are moder-ately stable and partially eroded

» Poor habitat on stream bottom with minimal rocks and moderate sedimentation

Doni AhearnJoy AndrewsVirginia AshbyMelba AtkinsonCameron BeersCalvin BieseckerAlex BijakLisa BittnerKatey BlumenthalMisty BoosKsenia BrazhnikLuke BrazhnikAshley BrillRose BrownJennifer BucherJillian BurganPatricia BurkettMecca BurnsNora ByrdPatrick CampbellJohn CampbellBevin CettaGus ColomTina ColomCristina CornellZack DelGrosso

Lavinia deVillierJohn EdelenMiranda Elliot RaderSharon EllisonMatt EstesCarol EvansNancy FordNed FossNancy FriendMatt GallupRepp GlaettliSean GrzegorczykShane GrzegorczykDeb HackettElise HackettRay HackettShirley HalladayMark HeltTana HerndonErika HowsareJohn InceFrancoise JohnsonLeah JungMarilyn KoleszarChris KoppJane Kopp

Karen KostyalClai LangeVera LeoneMary LoftonKeggie MallettWilliam (Bill) MarleyNed MartinPeter MatthewsNeil MeansVicki MetcalfJill MeyerSusan MeyerLeslie MiddletonBrit Minor Becky MinorMaggie MorrisConnor MulveyNancy-Elizabeth NimmichCindy O’ConnellKillian O’ConnellLisa PankowskiWoody ParrishArt PettyShaina PhillipsGene Potter

Marilyn PotterDot PreisJennifer PricePatrick PunchBrigitte RauKristina Reid BlackAmi RiscassiSarah RobinsonDeana SackettEvie SackettJohn SavidesPat SchnatterlySteve SchnatterlyClare SevcikMarjorie SiegelSusan SleightDavid SmithMarilyn SmithShawn StrubbeJim SurdukowskiLeigh SurdukowskiIda SwensonRoger TemplesMario TestaniRob TilghmanLarry TropeaLaura TroyMichael van den BosscheJohn WalshBill WardlawMary WardlawCaroline WattsBill WeaverNancy WeissFrank WilczekPat WilczekJohn WilkinsonLaurel WilliamsonChristina WoodsonJill Zimmerman

Thank You

2012-2014 volunteer monitors

» Albemarle County» Charlottesville Area Community Foundation» City of Charlottesville» Dominion Foundation» Elmo Foundation» Exxon/Mobil Foundation» Fluvanna County» Framestone Solutions» J & E Berkley Foundation

» Norcross Wildlife Foundation» Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority » Sam’s Club Store of Charlottesville» The Nature Conservancy » Virginia Environmental Endowment» Whole Foods

» Albemarle County» City of Charlottesville» Fluvanna County» The Nature Conservancy» Rivanna Conservation Society» Rivanna River Basin Com-mission

» Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority» Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission» Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District

Community Partners

PO BOX 681Charlottesville, VA 22902

phone: 434-244-7879www.streamwatch.org

Foundations and organizations that provided funding to StreamWatch in 2014:

Are our urban streams improving in health?

Moores Creek and Meadow Creek are the most urbanized

creeks in the Rivanna River water-shed. As a result of all the different pressures the urban environment puts on them, they continually rank as the unhealthiest streams in our watershed. But is this changing? The most recent assessment shows a slight upswing in the benthic

sample score at both monitoring sites. While these new results reveal statistically significant positive trends (p<0.05), we are not sure at this time if this will be continuous. Persistent monitoring and reassess-ment in the coming years will help to determine if our urban creeks continue to improve in health.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014Year

Bent

hic

Sam

ple

Scor

e

Meadow Creek ( )

Moores Creek ( )

To all those who help protect stream health in the Rivanna River Watershed - the many dedicated volunteers who make this work possible, private landowners who support our field work and the many individuals who support us financially.

28

29