2013-2014 Annual Report - South Big Horn Conservation District

Introduction
History of the District
Mission Statement
Supervisors & Staff
District Programs:
Education
Range & Wildlife Projects
District Activities
Special Projects
Water Quality
District Operations
Financial Summary
2014-2015 Budget
The intent of this Annual Report is to inform the public of District activities and accomplishments completed
through the past fiscal year within South Big Horn County and to thank you for your continued support of the
South Big Horn Conservation District (SBHCD) through mill levy funding. The South Big Horn
Conservation District is an equal opportunity employer and offers all programs, services, and assistance on a
nondiscriminatory basis.
The Greybull Valley Conservation District was formed in 1945 following the devastating days of the "Dust
Bowl." The South Big Horn and Shell Valley Conservation Districts were organized in 1947. The Greybull
Valley and Shell Valley Conservation Districts combined and became the Greybull-Shell Conservation
District in 1968. In 1977, the South Big Horn and the Greybull-Shell Districts decided to merge and at that
time became known as the South Big Horn Conservation District. Recognition must be given for the great
work of all those in the district's history. Who they were, what they stood for, and what was accomplished
should not be lost and forgotten.
The public elects five residents from within the district to serve as Conservation District Supervisors. They
serve without pay and work with citizens and government agencies in the District. South Big Horn
Conservation District (SBHCD) is responsible for setting local priorities for natural resource concerns. Once
priorities are established, the District develops the necessary programs or utilizes existing local, state and
federal programs to address resource concerns.
The issues Conservation Districts have been dealing with will continue to be a challenge and provide
opportunities to learn. Issues the District faces are becoming more complex, requiring more dedication and
work. Through the Conservation District, citizens have a chance to voice their concerns and give possible
solutions to problem areas. Board meetings are currently being held the first Tuesday evening of each month
and are open to the public.
Linda Hamilton, Chairman
Box 9, Hyattville, 82428
George Kelso, Treasurer
Box 68, Emblem, 82422
Walt Hibbert, Vice Chairman
Box 92, Otto, 82434
Nancy Joyce, Secretary
Box 25, Manderson, 82432
Ted Zier, Member
Box 286, Basin, 82410
Janet Hallsted, District Coordinator
Monte Bush, District Conservationist

Legislative Meeting: The South Big Horn Conservation District and the Shoshone Conservation District
hosted a joint legislative meeting December 11, 2013. There were several representatives from both
districts in attendance. As the meeting started, it was explained that the SBHCD hadn’t been doing too
many projects because they were continuing to work on the BLM Revision Plan and the TMDL projects.
With all the streams in the southern part of the county listed on the 303(d) report because of high levels of
E. Coli, work had been done on septic systems and feedlots. However, a problem still remained. EPA
informed the SBHCD that a TMDL would now have to be done. The source is unknown, and there is no
way to identify where the problem is coming from.
The Department of Environmental Quality hired RESPEC to write the TMDL, and the report states that the
cause is most likely grazing and run off from fields. After the report is complete the district will be able to
apply for grants to work on projects to try to clean up the source(s). Filter strips and berms have been used
in other areas to help with problems, and the use of sprinkler systems is also another way of addressing the
problem. However, with that option there is very little return flow, which could, in some instances, cause
the streams to begin to dry up from lack of return flow. DEQ has worked with the districts to try to keep
the EPA out of the districts’ work on water monitoring. However, after 13 years the EPA has said that a
TMDL will need to be done.
Small water projects have been applied for, but some are waiting for BLM, which could hold up the
projects for several years. The district has been working with landowners with the Russian Olive removal,
and several acres on the Greybull River have been cleaned up. There are still several more acres that need
work. NRCS has been helping with contracts for Russian Olive removal. Although funds are running out,
there are other funds available through WWNRT that have been a great help with the removal.
The users group on the Nowood River is in the process of developing a reservoir to help that area with
much needed water. There have been meetings that supervisors and staff have attended in regard to the
formation of an improvement districts for that watershed.
The Shoshone District stressed to attendees the importance of meeting with legislators to make them aware
of what districts are working on and how funds are being administered for projects. Russ Boardman went
to Washington D.C. to testify on the National Blueways, which helped to defer that program for the time
being.
With cost-share funds, the Shoshone District has completed 30 septic systems, and the district has been
working on the Yellowtail CRM Russian Olive removal and Save the Cottonwoods.
The Lovell Elementary School did a native species planting outdoor classroom for the school that the
district helped with, and the district recommended what grass should be planted on the Lovell Golf Course
greens so they don’t have to replant them every year. The district also co-hosted the Governor’s meeting
on water policy.
The National NRCS office has said there are too many sub-accounts that address resource concerns.
Ranking for projects will be done regionally, so funding could all go to one area instead of being allocated
throughout the counties. Sub-accounts were originally developed so small projects wouldn’t have to
compete with projects such as grazing and pivots.
Both the SBHCD and Shoshone districts are continuing to work on and help fund the Sage Grouse Project.
Participants listen and discuss SBHCD happenings and upcoming projects.

Tree Program: As in previous years, the conservation district held its annual seedling tree sale from
October to mid-April. Order forms are always available in the office, the Cooperative Extension Service
Office, as well as on the district website. The nursery where the trees are purchased decided to try selling
trees and shrubs in small bundles, as landowners are often able to use smaller amounts of trees, either for
replacement or because there is less land needing new trees. This past year, the district sold 1,245 trees.
To help landowners establish windbreaks, the SBHCD offers help with designing windbreaks and
assistance with species selection and watering requirements. The district also owns a tree planter that is
loaned out to landowners, and there are several books and pamphlets available to the public.
Russian Olive Removal: The SBHCD had a grant through the Wyoming Wildlife and Natural Resource
Trust for the removal of Russian Olives and Sale Cedars on the Greybull River and Dry Creek. In
previous years, the district also had grants through the Wyoming Wildlife and Natural Resource Trust for
removal of these trees on the Nowood River and Shell Creek. WWNRT is a fund set up by the legislature
in 2005, and the project was also funded in part tby NRCS. The district does the bookkeeping for the
grants and retains a copy of all work done on these projects. The district worked on removal projects in
cooperation with six landowners for a total of 312 acres treated for Russian Olive and Salt Cedar control
on the Greybull River Watershed. The amount of funding used for the project totaled $192,053.00.

Two District Supervisors attended the WACD Convention in Jackson in November 2013. A very
informative presentation was attended the first afternoon on Soil Health. We were able to take away ideas
to help with programs the District has been pursuing to encourage water quality improvement
implementation projects. Discussions on the role of Districts as cooperating agencies in federal actions
and the importance of having District policies and natural resource plans also furthered our understanding
of working with federal agencies in developing management plans for public lands and other federal
actions. With attendees from all over the state, NRCS, and the State of Wyoming, it was an excellent
opportunity to share activities, ideas, and concerns.

World Water Monitoring Day was celebrated in September 2014 with students from Cloud Peak
Middle School building public awareness for the need to protect water resources around the world. It
encourages people to engage in basic monitoring of their local water bodies. The Water Monitoring Day
took place along the Nowood River in Manderson with approximately 20 students participating along
with teachers and volunteers. There were four groups with five students in each group. One group
collected water samples that were put in trays and then put them in the incubator to see if there was a
presence of E.coli and if there was what the levels were. The second group used the data logger to find
out what the water temperature was along with the electrical conductivity, dissolved oxygen, pH and
salinity. The third group took turbidity readings to find out how turbid the water was. Turbidity
interferes with sunlight penetration, which reduces photosynthesis (primary production) by bacteria, algae
and periphyton. High turbidity levels adversely affect feeding and growth of trout by interfering with
vision and the capture of food organisms. The fourth group spent time learning how to put flies on
fishing poles and how to fish.
After each group finished with the activity they were working on they rotated so everyone had
the opportunity to try each of the areas of water monitoring. It was a beautiful day with the
temperatures being just right for the kids to go wading in the water and just have a fun day and they
all came away with a better understanding of what it takes to do water monitoring and how important it
is to work together to try to clean up the water ways if possible.
Cloud Peak Middle School students and SBHCD members were showcased in the local
paper for their participation in World Water Monitoring Day.

The SBHCD office houses videos and slides on xeriscaping, trees, windbreaks and landscaping,
revitalizing rangelands, weed control, residue management, and prescribed burns. “Hands-on-Agronomy,”
“Creating a Sustainable Civilization” and “The Man Who Planted Trees” videos are also available for use
in schools. The Backyards to Barnyards Magazine was also available to small acreage land users. Reports
and information concerning District issues have been distributed when requested.

The South Big Horn Conservation District hosted a watershed planning educational meeting on
January 16, 2014 to explain the TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) process, the local Big Horn Basin
TMDL, and watershed planning efforts being implemented by the Washakie County Conservation
District.
According to Nathan Oster of the Greybull Standard newspaper, the message to producers was to focus on
water improvements, not numbers. He gave a detailed account of the meeting:
Called by the South Big Horn Conservation District and held at the Weed and Pest Building off U.S.
Highway 310, the meeting featured a presentation on watershed planning by Cathy Rosenthal, the
watershed coordinator for the Wyoming Association of Conservation Districts. The meeting also included
an explanation of what improvements have already occurred within the South Big Horn Conservation
District.
But because they have been there and done that, Tori Dietz, director of the Washakie County Conservation
District, and two members of their district’s steering committee, Vance Lungren Jr. and Doug Hamilton,
were given top billing. The focus of their efforts were Slick Creek and Sage Creek, two of the six streams
identified as being impaired in Washakie County. Dietz noted that because those two creeks had both
agricultural and urban/rural interaction, the decision was made to “throw their money” into improving
those two. Septic systems were replaced, feedlots cleaned up and relocated.
The original intent was to prove the DEQ wrong — that they weren’t impaired. But that didn’t happen.
“We proved them right,” said Dietz. They then tried to get the two creeks delisted for bacteria, but
“horrific spring rains” one year derailed that process and made monitoring and drawing conclusions from
the water testing next to impossible.
“The moral is, we forgot about the stupid numbers,” said Dietz. “You can’t use bacteria as an indicator
because you don’t know where it lives, why it lives or how long it lives.” Instead, they focused on
improving the water through focused improvements, and they believe that they’ve made positive strides
in that area.
Hamilton added, “We wanted to figure out what the numbers meant, why specific areas were listed
When others weren’t. But we couldn’t come to a conclusion. We thought we could narrow it down,
prove where the problem was. But we came to realize it wasn’t going to be fun to point fingers.
We needed producers who wanted to do it. So we decided the money was best spent being put on
the ground, getting things done we knew would help.”
Linda Hamilton of the South Big Horn Conservation District said the Wyoming Department of
Environmental Quality gave conservation districts 13 years to do projects to attempt to get the E.coli
figures down.
The DEQ hired a consultant, RESPEC from South Dakota, to develop the TMDL for the Big Horn
River watershed. According to the draft report from RESPEC, “Section 303(d) of the Clean Water
Act and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Quality Planning and Management
Regulations (40 CFR 130) require states to develop otal Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for
waterbodies not meeting applicable water-quality standards or guidelines for the protection of
designated uses under technology-based controls. TMDLs specify the maximum pollutant amount a
waterbody can receive and still meet water quality standards. Based on a calculation of the total
allowable load, TMDLs allocate pollutant loads to sources to incorporate a margin of safety. TMDL
pollutant load reduction goals for significant sources provide a scientific basis for restoring surface
water quality by linking the development and implementation of control actions to the attainment
and maintenance of water-quality standards and designated uses.
Monte Bush of the USDA-NRCS office in Greybull said the district used grant money to address
Problem septic systems and livestock facilities. Twenty septic systems were replaced and 18
Different livestock facilities were relocated or redesigned to address concerns about runoff into the
water supply.
Bush said that while the improvements didn’t appear to have a big impact on numbers, the grant
program still did a lot of good. When projects were being selected, not a lot of consideration was
given to their location. “Whoever came in, we tried to fund,” said Bush, adding that it was something
of a “postage stamp” approach.
“What we’d like to see moving forward,” he said, “is to focus the funding on a watershed basis on a
smaller area — and really get after that specific area to see if the numbers will come down.”
Linda Hamilton said some of the efforts in the Kirby Creek watershed have paid off. On that stream,
the required load reductions needed to meet the TMDL is 30 percent, the lowest percentage of any
county stream. Most of the rest are in the 70s, 80s and 90s.
“The tremendous amount of work down there has started to show a benefit,” said Hamilton.
George Kelso of the SBHCD said that while the work done by the SBH district didn’t impact numbers, it
oftentimes fixed septic systems that were illegal, thereby removing the liability of the landowner. Those
who had feedlots moved got “tremendously useful” corrals out of the deal.
The important thing, all of the presenters agreed, is to at least make an attempt to improve the watersheds.
Doing nothing could result in greater involvement and possibly even fines from the federal
Environmental Protection Agency, according to Rosenthal.
Hamilton and Kelso emphasized that money is available for producers who wish to participate, and that
the watershed improvement program is voluntary. “We’re here to help you,” said Hamilton. “That’s our
mission as a conservation district board; we aren’t here to make you do anything.” Kelso said funding is
available to producers — they just need to come forward and express interest in doing what they can to
improve water quality.
“What we’re hoping,” he said, “Is that we can find a group of people in an area who would like to work
on some things so we can focus our efforts and go after funding. There are a lot of potential sources.
Not as much money as a few years ago, but for our area, there’s still quite a bit.” He added that there
was an important takeaway from the Washakie County presentation.
Attendees take notes at the watershed planning meeting hosted by SBHCD in January.
“What they basically said was, ‘for years, we’ve been studying water quality issues, monitoring, doing all
these types of things,’ and they all cost a lot of money, but didn’t really clean up the water,’” said Kelso.
“Well they got to a point where they could go after money to help producers.
“We’re at a place now where we can start doing the same. We’ve got a lot of septic systems out there that
could use some improvement. And our past efforts have cleaned up the worst of the feedlots, but there are
still others out there.”

BLM Revision: The SBHCD, along with other conservation districts in the Basin and the county
commissioners, have taken part in the Bighorn Basin Resource Management Plan (RMP) Revision. As
local governments with special expertise in resource issues, conservation districts may obtain cooperating
agency status with the BLM, allowing them to sit with the BLM during the drafting of the plan, contribute
data, and provide local input to the planning process. The planning process began in 2008 and was
expected to wrap up in 2012. After completion of the main plan, the BLM was required to do a
supplemental EIS and plan revision focusing on sage hens due to their potential listing as an endangered
species. During this period, the conservation district continued to provide input, along with reviewing and
updating data regarding development on BLM lands which was missing from data the BLM presented. The
BLM held public meetings to discuss the supplemental EIS and plan alternatives in June, 2013. District
efforts during the public comment period focused on highlighting the severity of the socio-economic
impacts the BLM alternatives would have in an effort to get the BLM to mitigate the negative
consequences of their proposals, along with helping to update reviews of proposed Lands with Wilderness
Characteristics to get an accurate picture of the development on these lands and present it to the BLM in an
attempt to limit increased restrictions on access and multiple use of these public lands.
According to BLM officials, the Bighorn Basin Resource Management Plan (RMP)/Final Environmental
Impact Statement (FEIS) is currently waiting on data and reports related to the ongoing sage-grouse
efforts. Incorporation of these reports is critical to aid the US Fish and Wildlife Service in its listing
decision in determining if the management prescriptions proposed in all planning efforts that address sagegrouse habitats offer the regulatory certainty for ongoing population/habitat protection. It is currently
unknown when the Bighorn Basin RMP/FEIS will be released for the 30-day protest period and 60-day
Governor's consistency review. It is expected that the FEIS will be published in late fall and the Record of
Decision (ROD) subsequently would be signed in late winter/early spring 2015.

Subdivision Reviews: With the conservation districts being given the task of reviewing subdivision
applications that are submitted to the County Land Use Planning Office, the district reviews applications
and provides recommendations that district members feel are important. In the past few years, the district
has looked at some larger proposals than in the past that are likely to become building sites, which
includes evaluating water quality, soil suitability, erosion control, weeds, sediment flood problems, and
natural resource concerns in the proposed areas. The process is not as detailed for a smaller subdivision
with an existing structure. The district often evaluates instances that involve breaking houses away from
larger parcels. In the past year the district had four subdivision reviews to write and give a summary on.

Small Water Projects: The Wyoming State Legislature set aside funding to be allocated through the
Wyoming Water Development Commission (WWDC) to help conservation districts with small water
projects. The District acts as a pass-through, receiving applications from cooperators, then establishing
contracts with WWDC to complete the projects. The SBHCD applied and was approved for four different
projects; two stock water/pipeline projects in the Hyattville/Manderson area, which both include water for
domestic livestock and wildlife use; one ditch rehabilitation project in the Hyattville area; and one well
project for a stock water well/distribution line in the Shell area.
One of the Hyattville water distribution pipeline projects was withdrawn because clearance could not be
obtained from the BLM. The proposed pipeline was going to cross through areas of paleontology and
cultural concerns. The other Hyattville/Manderson project has moved forward with the addition of a new
partner, a local bentonite company that needs water for future dust control in the pipeline area. The three
remaining projects received an extension completion deadline of December 2014.
In 2012 the district also submitted an application for a stock pipeline/spring rehabilitation project on the
slopes of the Bighorn Mountains. The project was approved by Wyoming Water Development
Commission, and the landowners are currently moving forward with installing a pipeline to distribute
stock water to stock tanks, rehabilitating a spring, and installing a solar pump.
During this reporting year, SBHCD has had inquiries about using the Small Water Project Program
(SWPP) for various projects. SBHCD is currently working with the individuals and entities to determine if
an application to the WWDC is warranted.
The purpose of the WWDC Small Water Project Program (SWPP) is to participate with land management
agencies and sponsoring entities in providing incentives for improving watershed condition and function.
Projects eligible for SWPP grant funding assistance include the construction or rehabilitation of small
reservoirs, wells, pipelines and conveyance facilities, springs, solar platforms, irrigation works, windmills
and wetland developments.
Planning for small water projects will be generated by a WWDC watershed study or equivalent as
determined by the Wyoming Water Development Office. A watershed study will incorporate, at a
minimum, available technical information describing conditions and assessments of the watershed
including hydrology, geology, geomorphology, geography, soils, vegetation, water conveyance
infrastructure, and stream system data.
A management and rehabilitation plan outlining site specific projects that may remediate existing
watershed impairments or address opportunities beneficial to the watershed is required for access to the
SWPP. Activities should improve watershed condition and function and provide benefits for wildlife,
livestock and the environment. Projects may provide improved water quality, riparian habitat, habitat for
fish and wildlife and address environmental concerns by providing water supplies to support plant and
animal species or serve to improve natural resource conditions.

Big Horn Basin Sage Grouse Project: Wildlife Services personnel monitored marked hens from their
breeding season location to their wintering location during the fall and winter of 2013. In March 2014,
leks were monitored 1-2 times per week to observe hen attendance. In April 2014, two seasonal
technicians were hired to assist with data collection. Additionally during this period a fifth study site was
added to the project. The new area is south of Worland and Ten Sleep and serves as a second control site
where Wildlife Services is not contracted to implement predator control.
From May – July, 70 marked hens were known to have nested and 14 of those had second nest attempts
after first attempt failures; 1 hen attempted and successfully fledged a third nest for a total of 85 nests. In
all, 52 nests failed while 33 nests were successful. Trap camera observations at nest sites confirmed that
common ravens and coyotes were the major nest predators.
The analyses of the existing 4-year dataset allowed fitness of marked sage grouse in the Big Horn Basin,
including seasonal and annual survival, nest survival and chick survival to be assessed.
Levels of predator control by study area will be used as covariates in analyses. The nesting season and
over-winter survival of marked birds, nest survival, and chick survival will be able to be estimated. These
fitness metrics will be used to generate a population viability model including elasticity analysis to
determine which life stage is limiting the sage grouse population in the Big Horn Basin and help provide
information for future management decisions.
Water Quality:

TMDL for the Big Horn River: Since the Clean Water Act of 1972 thousands of the Nation’s rivers and
streams have been restored to the desired “fishable and swimmable” condition through EPA mandates and
regulations. To combat pollutants that impact a stream’s natural characteristics, those which can no longer
support their designated uses are placed on a list of impaired streams. Reasons for impairment can vary,
from concentrations of nutrients and bacteria to metals and salts.
Wyoming currently has 125 bodies of water on the list, commonly known as Section 303(d). Once a body
of water has been added to the list, EPA mandates that a TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) must be
developed for that specific area, and they must be restored to their natural condition within 13 years in
order to be removed from the Section 303(d) list. In short, a TMDL is a compilation of sources which
impair the water, be it a sewage plant or land runoff. A plan for restoration and lowering pollutants is then
done using the information.
Wyoming has a history of positive and effective collaborations between land owners, state and federal
agencies and the WACD (Wyoming Association of Conservation Districts). However, not enough
progress has been made and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), through the DEQ is now
requiring TMDL’s on Wyoming’s listedwater bodies. DEQ is doing the TMDL’s to be done on a
watershed basis, rather than doing one stream at a time in the interest of speeding up the process and
reducing duplication.
The TMDL is virtually finished, awaiting the completion of public comment on the draft and any revisions
that result, along with final adoption. The District has had a difficult time accepting the relative levels of E.
coli contamination from the sources identified in the draft TMDL. However having the TMDL will allow
us to better set priorities for working with landowners to implement best management practices (BMPs)
and qualify for grants to help with the costs of this implementation. Grants to help share the cost of BMP
implementation are important due to the expense of the practices for the individual landowner and the
relatively low benefit to the landowner. Most of the benefits accrue to the general population through
improved water quality.
For specifics on SBHCD involvement with the TMDL, please refer to the above section under District
Activities that highlights the meeting the district hosted in January 2014.

Water Quality Monitoring: SBHCD continues to monitor streams within the District for quality. Samples
were collected and examined for the presences of E. coli, and while water samples were collected water
temperatures were taken as well as data for pH, electrical conductivity, dissolved oxygen and turbidity.
Flow and depth readings were also done when it was possible to get to the sites. Depth and flow
measurements were not always possible when the run off created high water levels and the fast flow of the
water prevented safe water crossings. While doing the water quality monitoring, protocol set by
Wyoming’s Credible Data Legislation is always followed. The District’s goal is to accumulate enough
credible data to determine whether the implemented BMP’s (best management practices) have had any
affect on the water quality in the county.
SBHCD continued to do water quality and quantity monitoring in 2013 as well as collect water samples for
E.coli testing. Samples were collected from sites previously established by the district. At the request of
SBHCD, WWC Engineering analyzed and interpreted the data. WWC said the district should be
commended for doing an excellent job on sampling and preservation techniques. Overall, the data
collected on the streams was found to be very good quality and credible. A review of the data found that
all E. coli geometric means met the WDEQ requirement of 5 samples collected within 30 days and
separated by 24 hours. Additionally, all samples met the 6-hour holding time requirements and the cooler
temperature was maintained below 4°C for all monitoring. The field measurement values were within the
acceptable range and generally met the WDEQ water quality standards. A total of 194 water samples,
including 22 duplicates and 22 field blanks were collected. The goal of 10 percent was met for both field
blanks and duplicate samples. Relative percent difference statistics for the duplicate samples were
calculated to assess precision. The results indicated that 10 turbidity RPDs statistics exceeded the district’s
data quality objective (DQO) of 10 percent, as outlined in the South Big Horn Conservation Sampling and
Analysis Plan. In addition, two E. coli RPDs exceeded the DQO of 50 percent. Analysis techniques
including trend, temporal, regression and comparison were used for the data collected by the district. A
summary of relationship and observations are presented for each sub-watershed.

SHELL CREEK AND BEAVER CREEK
 The E. coli geometric mean standard of 126 col./100 mL was exceeded once in Shell Creek at monitoring
site SC-8 in the spring (135.1 col./100 mL).
 On Shell Creek the WDEQ E. coli single sample criteria (410 col./100 mL) was exceeded twice in the
spring. The exceedances were measured at sites SC-2 and SC-8.
 The Spearman Rho correlations showed a moderate positive correlation between E. coli and turbidity
(r=0.47) and E. coli and stream flow (r= 0.46).
 Overall, E. coli concentrations in spring 2013 were lower than those measured in spring 2012, while
the fall E. coli concentrations were similar between the two years.
 Stream flow during the spring season ranged from 46.1 to 72.0 cfs. Discharge rates during the fall
Were between 34.6 and 88.6 cfs. The lowest flows were measured at the upstream SC-7 site during both
monitoring seasons.
 Inorganic chemistry samples were collected from the three Shell Creek sites during the spring and
Fall monitoring periods. The results indicate that the stream is dominated by calcium cations and bicarbonate
and sulfate anions. In addition, the results show that concentrations increase from upstream to downstream.
 In 2013 E. coli concentrations in Beaver Creek were below the geometric mean in the spring and
exceeded the geometric mean standard at both sites in the fall. During the spring bacteria geometric means at sites
BC-4 and BC-5 were 3.7 and 37.1 col./100 mL, respectively. While in the fall site BC-4 had an E. coli
geometric mean of 284.4 col./100 mL and site BC-5 had an E. coli geometric mean of 193.9 col./100 mL.
 Beaver creek had three single sample E. coli concentrations exceeding the 410 col./100 mL single
sample maximum concentration. All exceedances occurred during the fall.
 Discharge measurements in the spring were between 1.7 and 2.7 cfs. During the fall the discharge
at the two monitoring sites ranged from 6.1 to 7.9 cfs.Stream flow and turbidity demonstrated strong
positive correlations with E. coli (r=0.76 and r=0.82, respectively).
 The District collected one sample during each season from each site on Beaver Creek for inorganic
chemistry analysis. Similar to previous years, the results indicate that water chemistry at the two sites is similar.

GREYBULL RIVER
 In 2013, the downstream site, GR-1, exceeded the E. coli geometric mean standard of 126 col./100 mL
during the fall (371.4 col./100 mL) monitoring season.
 E. coli concentrations at site GR-3 ranged from 2 to 71.2 col/100 mL during both monitoring seasons.
Of the 20 E. coli samples collected in 2013 only one sample exceeded the single sample standard of 410 col./100 mL.
 Flow and turbidity demonstrated a moderate positive correlation with E. coli
(r=0.78 and r=0.69, respectively).
 Flow measurements were obtained eight times in the spring with flows ranging from 4.3 to 48.7 cfs
(the water was moving too fast the other two times). Discharge rates in the fall varied from 33.2 to 93.3 cfs,
while the water was too deep for measurements on October 24 and 25 at both monitoring sites.
 The District collected inorganic samples from each site during the spring and fall monitoring periods.
The results show that the water continues to be dominated by calcium and sodium cations and bicarbonate and
sulfate anions.

DRY CREEK
 The E. coli geometric mean standard was exceeded at the downstream sites (DC-3 and DC-1)
during the fall monitoring season in 2013. The highest E. coli geometric mean of 2,008.1 col./100 mL
was measured at site DC-1. This was the highest E. coli geometric mean measured on Dry Creek since
sampling commenced in 2006.
 The single sample E. coli standard of 410 col./100 mL was exceeded in 8 of the 30 samples collected
from Dry Creek. The highest bacteria concentration (>2,419.6 col./100 mL) was measured at site DC-1 on
October 25, 2013.
 A comparison of field measurements to E. coli concentrations indicated that both flow and turbidity
had a moderate positive correlation (r=0.67 and r=0.54, respectively).
 During the spring, discharge rates on Dry Creek ranged from 1.8 to 14.1 cfs. Stream flows during the
fall ranged from 5.3 to 34.1 cfs. During the spring the highest flow rates were generally observed at site DC-3,
while flows increased from upstream to downstream during the fall.
 Inorganic chemistry samples were collected from each site on Dry Creek once each during the spring
and fall monitoring period. The upstream site, DC-4, measured increased ions and chloride compared to the
other two sites. During the spring the chloride concentration at site DC-4 again exceeded the WDEQ standard
of 230 mg/L (350 mg/L).

Big Horn River, Nowood River, and Paint Rock Creek
 During 2013 the District collected 50 bacteria samples and field measurements from sites on
the Big Horn River, Nowood River, and Paintrock Creek.
 The E. coli geometric means calculated from samples collected from the Big Horn River,
Nowood River, and Paintrock Creek . The E. coli geometric means calculated from samples collected from
the Big Horn River were similar to previous years. During the spring season the E. coli geometric mean
exceeded the standard. In the fall the bacteria concentrations were similar to 2011 (43.4 col./100 mL in 2013
and 65.1 col./100 mL in 2011).
 Two of the Big Horn River E. coli samples collected in the spring exceeded the WDEQ standard of
410 col./100 mL. The highest recorded concentration of 920.8 col./100 mL was collected on April 26, 2013.
 During the fall E. coli concentrations in the Big Horn River ranged from 33.6 to 67.7 col/100 mL.
 Turbidity indicated strong positive association with E. coli (r=0.96).
 The District collected an inorganic sample from the Big Horn River in both the spring and fall.
The results indicate that the water chemistry was similar during both sampling seasons, with the exception
of turbidity and TSS which were higher in the spring.
 The geometric mean standard at the downstream monitoring site (NW-2) on the Nowood River
was exceeded in the spring.
 Only one sample from the Nowood River exceeded the single sample E. coli standard of 410 col./100 mL
(site NW-2 measured 488.4 col./100 mL on April 26, 2013).
 Turbidity (r=0.72) indicated a moderate positive correlation to E. coli in the Nowood River.
 Inorganic water quality samples were collected from both sites on the Nowood River in the spring
and fall. The water type of the Nowood River is calcium bicarbonate-sulfate with low TDS (496 – 648 mg/L).
 None of the sites on Paint Rock Creek exceeded the geometric mean standard in 2013. The highest
geometric mean (125.6 col./100 mL) was calculated in the spring at upstream site PR-3.
 One sample exceeded the single sample E. coli standard for bacteria (site PR-3 on April 26, 2013
measured an E. coli of 1046.2 col./100 mL).
 In the spring, the District was able to measure flow nine times (flows averaged 3.4 cfs at site PR-2
and 66.0 cfs at site PR-3). In the fall discharge was only measured at site PR-3. Flow at site PR-2 could not
be measured since boulders put in the creek to try to keep the water from washing away the fill around the
bridge pillars made the water too deep. During the fall discharge rates at site PR-3 ranged from 23.4 to 26.8 cfs.
 Water temperature and E. coli concentrations demonstrated a moderate positive
correlation (r=0.46) on Paint Rock Creek
 The inorganic chemistry of Paint Rock Creek is typical of mountain streams with dominating ions

OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
 Following review of the data, WWC would like to again commend the District for their sampling
techniques. The following summarizes the observations and provides recommendations for future monitoring.
 In 2013, the District collected a total of 150 bacteria samples from the impaired streams. Overall,
8 of the 30 geometric means exceeded the standard of 126 col./100 mL. In addition, 12 percent of the E. coli
concentrations were higher than the single sample standard of 410 col./100 mL. Dry Creek had the most
single sample exceedances of all the streams (8 of the 18). In addition,
 In the spring 2013 the majority of E. coli geometric means (94 percent) were lower than spring 2012.
While in the fall, approximately 30 and 80 percent of the E. coli geometric means were higher than calculated
in 2012 and 2011, respectively.
 Associations between field parameters and E. coli indicated moderate to strong correlations.
The Spearman’s Rho for turbidity and E. coli at sites on Beaver Creek, Big Horn River, Dry Creek,
Greybull River, Nowood River, and Shell Creek ranged from 0.54 to 0.96. WWC contacted the WDEQ
to discuss paths forward for the District since the TMDL has been completed on the watershed and
submitted to EPA for approval. The WDEQ indicated that since the problem has been defined the
District should evaluate different types of monitoring, such as effectiveness of BMPs. WWC recommends
the District contact WDEQ for recommendations on future monitoring, including sites and frequencies.
 Supervisors and staff attend monthly board meetings. Supervisors and staff are encouraged to attend
state meetings, conventions and other training opportunities.
 The District Board of Supervisors will continue to appropriate mill levy funds for District programs.
 SBHCD continues to be a member of the Wyoming Association of Conservation Districts (WACD),
Wyoming Conservation Districts Employees’ Association (WCDEA), and the National Association
of Conservation Districts (NACD).
 Provided soils, general information and maps to the public.
 Supported the NACD.
 Conducted the District’s Public Budget Hearing for fiscal year 2012-2013
 Published and distributed the South Big Horn Conservation District 2012-2013 Annual Report and
2013-2014 Annual Plan of Work.
District Area 1,498,423 acres
Federal Lands 1,236,822 acres
State Lands 60,984 acres
Private Lands 196,917 acres
County Lands 1,860 acres
Town Lands 1,840 acres