2007 Upper Thames River Watershed Report Cards

• 1.1 Introduction & 1.2 The Process

• 1.3 Water Quality

• 1.4 Forest Conditions

• 1.5 Watershed Features, Action Plan and Highlights of Progress (this page)

• 1.6 References

Back to the 2007 Report Card homepage.

1.5 Watershed Features, Action Plan and Highlights of Progress

1.5.1 Watershed Features

In addition to the data used to calculate grades, a great deal of additional information was compiled for each watershed in the “Watershed Features” section of each report card. The 2007 report cards have new and expanded information in this section compared with the 2001 version, including population, stream flow, precipitation, air temperature, tileage and drainage, watercourse length, vegetation cover types, wetland cover, and riparian cover. All of the watershed features data is summarized in Section 2.

The watershed features give an indication as to why the watersheds experience good or poor health or why there have been changes in conditions in recent years. For example, human population has changed significantly in the past 10 years in some watersheds. Oxbow, River Bend, Stoney, and Waubuno have increased in population by 27%, 28%, 38%, and 33% respectively. Flat, Komoka, and Mud have decreased in population by 14%, 17%, and 26% respectively.

Another example is spills. Map 7 shows the number of reported spills in each watershed between 2001-2005. Generally, spills have increased, as virtually the same number of spills (386) was reported in the last five years (2001-2005) as was reported in the previous 12 year period (1988-2000).

1.5.2 Great Lakes Connections

“Great Lakes Connections” is a new section included in each report card, highlighting the connection between the watersheds and Lake Erie. The Canada-United States Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan has identified land use activities as the key to improving the health of Lake Erie. The Thames River watershed is the second largest contributor of nutrients to Lake Erie, after Ohio’s Maumee River. Reducing pollution in the Thames watersheds ultimately helps to protect the Great Lakes.

Satellite photo by SeaWiFS Project, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, and ORBIMAGE.

Photo taken May 15, 2002, Jacques Descloitres, NASA.

1.5.3 Local Actions for Improvement

The user survey regarding the 2001 report cards found the “action plan” section was useful to many groups working in the watersheds. Using the most recent information and the expertise of the technical review team and partners, a list of local actions for improvement is provided in each report card for surface water and groundwater, drinking water, and forests. Some actions listed are specific to the individual watershed while others are beneficial practices that are applicable to all watersheds.

These actions are presented merely as a list of options to help improve watershed health. It is recognized that there are many issues (e.g. economic, cultural) that factor into the existing land uses and local environmental decision-making. These issues clearly influence the extent to which actions can be taken. The list of actions should be viewed as a starting point for community groups, landowners, and agencies working to improve water and forest health.

1.5.4 Highlights of Progress since 2001

The 2007 report cards are intended to track change in watershed conditions since the 2001 report cards. “Highlights of Progress since 2001” is a new section that gives some examples of the positive contributions being made by individuals, groups, agencies and municipalities in each watershed since 2001. For example, hundreds of projects have been completed through the Clean Water Program (CWP) since 2001. Map 8 shows the number of CWP projects completed per watershed.

• 1.1 Introduction & 1.2 The Process

• 1.3 Water Quality

• 1.4 Forest Conditions

• 1.5 Watershed Features, Action Plan and Highlights of Progress (this page)

• 1.6 References

Back to the 2007 Report Card homepage.

TOP