This is the fourth annual status report to our Chapter which describes the state of our adoption and restoration progress on Big Spring Creek in Loudoun County. This year’s report differs from previous ones in that no work days were scheduled because the basic restoration work had been completed by the end of 2004. A complicating factor which overshadowed this entire year’s efforts regarding this project was the uncertainty surrounding the sale of one of the two streamside properties in the adopted area and of one of the properties at a downstream location which the Chapter would like to adopt. Our 3-year adoption agreement expired on December 31, 2005.
The agreements by which NoVATU adopted a portion of Big Spring Creek during the past 4 years stipulate that the arrangement is “non-transferable”. That is, any newly-arriving streamside landowner must decide whether or not he wishes to continue the program of working with TU to restore the stream in exchange for limited, managed fly fishing by TU members.
It was clear at the beginning of 2005 that one of the two original landowners who were parties to the agreement with our Chapter planned to sell his property. His land was subsequently placed on the market in May and was sold several months later. The new owner had not yet moved in as of mid-December. His position on whether to affiliate himself with TU in continuing to ensure that his portion of the stream will be maintained is not known. In the meantime, our 3-year agreement governing our adoption of the stream expired at the end of the calendar year. Actually, the agreement was effectively nullified upon the sale of the property.
On the other hand, the views of the other original landowner, on whose land the designated parking area for fishermen and stream workers is located, is quite clear. He has stated more than once how impressed he has been with TU’s professionalism and how appreciative he is of the extensive restoration work done on his portion of the stream. Without a doubt he would like his new neighbor across the stream to join with him in signing a new agreement with our Chapter.
In 2004 our Chapter advised the president of the Big Spring Homeowners Association (HOA) that we would like to adopt an additional stretch of stream about 1/2 mile in length downstream of Twin Maple Lane. This parcel consists of an 11-acre plot controlled by the HOA on one side of the stream and property owned by an absentee landowner on the other. The HOA met and voted to affiliate with TU in the restoration of the land under their control. The HOA president reported that he would determine whether the new owner desires to seek agreement with TU to restore that area under similar conditions to those in effect for the original adoption upstream. This writer has offered to discuss the restoration project with the two new owners and resolve any questions they might have, with an eye toward encouraging them to work with TU.
Significant future maintenance work has been identified in the adopted portion. Whether caused by the impact of major periodic flooding of the area resulting from two poorly designed bridges (Spring Creek Lane and Twin Maple Lane) or through hostile activity by the local muskrat community, several of the bio-logs which were installed during 2002-2004 to provide protection to various threatened banks are gone. These need to be replaced either by heavily anchored bio-logs or by an equivalent alternate treatment such as live fascines. Further, existing riparian protection provided by rip-rap or cedar revetments needs to be extended in a few locations.
If the Chapter is successful in adopting the reach downstream of Twin Maple Lane, considerable riparian restoration work similar to what was accomplished upstream will be needed, in order to stabilize banks, reduce erosion and limit sedimentation in that area. Planting is also called for at both locations.
A benthic macroinvertebrate survey was conducted in July 2005 at 2 sites in the adopted area and one site in the HOA-controlled area. There were few surprises. The monitoring results confirmed what was already evident: that the stream is moderately impaired, with pollutants entering via the tributary east of Route 15 either from home construction north of Leesburg or from cattle periodically having access to the stream on a farm near Ida Lee Park. Few specimens which are categorized as being intolerant of pollution were found. On the other hand, the stream is rich in food for the fish population.
A total of 27 fishing trips, or an average of 2.2 per month, were taken in 2005, which is an increase over previous years. Several anglers reported multi-fish days, with their larger catches in the 10”-11” range. In one unfortunate incident, a TU member who failed to request authorization to fish and did not wear the required TU logo on his clothing was sent off the property by one of the landowners. This was the first unpleasant incident of any kind since our involvement at the stream began.
In late 2005 we became aware that Loudoun County planned to build a new high school in 2009 along an upstream section of the stream west of Route 15. Our principal concern, and that of the Loudoun Watershed Watch, Loudoun Wildlife Conservancy, and the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, is to do all we can to ensure that the County acquires sufficient land to protect the floodplain and to establish a streamside buffer of adequate width along the stream. Clearly, carrying out this objective will require a major effort during 2006 and beyond.
There are solid grounds to be optimistic that the new landowners will appreciate the need to protect the unique resource which dwells in the stream on their property and the reputation which our Chapter has earned within the Big Spring community as an organization which delivers on its obligations. We remain hopeful that we will be able to complete arrangements successfully which will lead to new long-term agreements both in our adopted area and in the downstream section involving further riparian restoration efforts and continued fishing access.