**South Fork of the Licking River**

**Rapid Watershed Assessment**

**Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUC) 05100102**

**October 2008**

**USDA-NRCS, Lexington, Kentucky**

![](media/image1.jpeg){width="5.5465277777777775in"
height="4.167361111111111in"}

***South Fork of the Licking River near Cynthiana, KY Photo: Tom Leith,
USDA***

![](media/image2.png){width="4.081944444444445in" height="1.26875in"}

**Table of Contents**

> **Introduction.....................................................................................3**
>
> **Geology and
> Soils..............................................................................5**
>
> **Threatened and Endangered
> Species......................................................6**
>
> **Land Use/Land
> Cover.........................................................................7**
>
> **County
> Data....................................................................................
> 9**
>
> **Stakeholder Participation and Conservation
> Needs................................... 10**
>
> **Prime Farmland
> Soils.....................................................................\...
> 13**
>
> **Highly Erodible
> Land........................................................................15**
>
> **Hay and
> Pasturelands.....................................................................\...
> 16**
>
> **Croplands....................................................................................\...
> 17**
>
> **Hydric
> Soils....................................................................................
> 19**
>
> **Wildlife Priority Conservation
> Areas..................................................... 21**
>
> **Water
> Resources..............................................................................
> 23**
>
> **List of Impaired
> Streams....................................................................
> 26**
>
> **Sinkholes........................................................................................28**
>
> **Demographics.................................................................................
> 29**
>
> **NRCS Conservation Program
> Data....................................................... 30**
>
> **References......................................................................................34**

**Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)**

**United State Department of Agriculture (USDA)**

**Suite 210, 771 Corporate Drive, Lexington, KY 40503**

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in
all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national
origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual
orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases
apply to all programs.) persons with disabilities who require
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille,
large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at
202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination,
write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326W, Whitten
Building, 14^th^ and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410
or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.

**Introduction**

The South Fork of the Licking River Watershed is located in
north-central Kentucky and encompasses all or part of eight counties.
Containing 593,802 acres or approximately 928 square miles, this
watershed is characterized by fertile pastureland, productive soils, and
livestock production. This watershed includes a portion of the
"bluegrass region", which is known worldwide for producing some of the
finest thoroughbred horses.

![](media/image3.jpeg){width="6.91875in" height="3.609722222222222in"}

***South Fork of the Licking Watersheds, Kentucky***

![](media/image4.jpeg){width="4.001388888888889in"
height="2.9965277777777777in"}***photo: KDOW***

**Strodes Creek Watershed, main headwater stream of the South Fork,
Licking River**

![](media/image5.jpeg){width="7.1715277777777775in" height="5.525in"}

***The eleven digit watershed that make up the South Fork, Licking River
Watershed, HUC 05100102***

The 11-digit hydrologic unit codes (HUCs) within HUC 05100102 vary in
size from 16,862 acres in Twin Creek Watershed to nearly 167,000 acres
in the Hinkston Creek Watershed.

  ------------------ ------------------------- -------------- ----------------
  **South Fork of                                             
  the Licking River                                           
  Sub-Watersheds**                                            

  **HUC 11**         **HUC Name**              **Acres**      **Square Miles**

  05100102040        South Fork Licking River  117651.8       183.8

  05100102090        Fork Lick Creek           33181.6        51.8

  05100102080        Raven Creek               30552.0        47.7

  05100102070        Twin Creek                16862.4        26.3

  05100102060        Mill Creek                21603.6        33.8

  05100102010        Hinkston Creek            166632.9       260.4

  05100102050        Townsend Creek            25757.4        40.2

  05100102020        Stoner Creek              128250.2       200.4

  05100102030        Strodes Creek             53301.8        83.3
  ------------------ ------------------------- -------------- ----------------

**Geology and Soils** Known as the "Blue Grass State", Kentucky is in
reality made up of multiple geologic and physiographic regions and the
actual Bluegrass physiographic region is limited to the central part of
the State which is characterized by limestones and shales from the
Ordovician Period (510 to 440 million years ago).

![](media/image6.jpeg){width="6.50625in" height="2.9854166666666666in"}

*Map source:* <http://www.uky.edu/KGS/geoky/>

HUC 05100102 is underlain by Ordovician limestone which has created
fertile soils due to weathering. The Ordovician limestone contains
phosphate minerals which serve as natural fertilizers to create highly
productive fields and stream naturally rich in nutrients. General soils
in the project area include Lowell, Faywood, Maury, McAfee, Cynthiana,
Eden, and surrounding creeks/river, the Nolin-Elk-Lindside complex.

The high level of fertility is both a blessing and challenge. Bourbon
County is known world-wide as a leader in producing thoroughbred horses,
which benefit from grazing on these fertile soils. The calcium and
phosphorus content of forage in this area imparts strength to growing
bones of young horses. However, the high fertility of the soils along
with the now high levels of anthropogenic nutrient inputs (farming,
residential, and urban influences) create an overabundance of nutrient
loading to streams throughout this region. Nutrient loading from
naturally occurring sources and nonpoint/point sources affect aquatic
species and humans in the project area.

Water treatment facilities in this watershed have a record of
nutrient-related problems. Disinfection byproducts in drinking water
supplies are formed when disinfectants used in water treatment plants
react with organic matter present in the source water. Disinfection
byproducts for which regulations have been established include
trihalomethanes, haloacetic acids, bromate, and chlorite. For example,
the City of Paris in Bourbon County and the Cynthiana Municipal Water
Works in Harrison County have had numerous problems with drinking water
violations of haloacetic acids (HAA5). HAA5 are a group of chemicals
that are formed along with other disinfection byproducts when chlorine
or other disinfectants used to control microbial contaminates in
drinking water react with natural occurring organic/inorganic matter in
the water. Reduction of nonpoint agricultural pollution in HUC05100102
would benefit these water treatment plants and the residents served.

**Threatened and Endangered Species**

Federally-listed mammal, plant and mussel species are found within the
RWA project area and are listed by county in the table below. Kentucky
state-listed species are not included but that information can be found
on the Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission (KSNPC) at webpage at:
<http://www.naturepreserves.ky.gov/>. KSNPC has also released a new
county by county report of all monitored species statewide which can be
access at:
<http://www.naturepreserves.ky.gov/inforesources/reports_pubs.htm>.

  -------------------- ----------- ----------------------------- -------------------
  **Federally-Listed                                             
  Species Located in                                             
  RWA Project                                                    
  Counties**                                                     

  **County**           **Species   **Species Name**              **Federal**
                       Type**                                    

                                                                 **Status**

  Bourbon              Plant       Running Buffalo Clover        Endangered

                                   Short's Bladderpod            Candidate

  Clark                Plant       Running Buffalo Clover        Endangered

                                   Short's Bladderpod            Candidate

  Grant                \-          \-                            \-

   Harrison            Plant       Running Buffalo Clover        Endangered

  Montgomery           Mammal      Indiana Bat                   Endangered

  ** **                Plant       Running Buffalo Clover        Endangered
  -------------------- ----------- ----------------------------- -------------------

![](media/image7.jpeg){width="2.9006944444444445in" height="2.16875in"}
![](media/image8.png){width="2.607638888888889in"
height="2.446527777777778in"}

***Running buffalo clover, a federally listed species -- found in
Harrison and Montgomery Counties.
([www.ppdl.purdue.edu](http://www.ppdl.purdue.edu/))***

***The endangered Indiana bat is found hibernating in caves during the
winter and roosting in trees during the summer.***

***(photos: USFWS)***

**Indiana Bat Protection in Kentucky**

Human disturbance of caves where bats are hibernating continues to be a
major cause in the decline of most cave-dwelling bats, including the
Indiana bat. Indiana bats roost under loose bark of trees from spring to
fall, so removal of trees during these months may cause bat mortality.
US Fish and Wildlife Service recommends removal of trees during the
winter months, when bats are hibernating in caves. Disturbance during
hibernation also causes elevated mortality rates as premature arousal
from hibernation consumes critical stored energy reserves of the bats.
Through the Wildlife Habitat Improvement Program (WHIP), NRCS can assist
landowners with the purchase and installation of cave gates to protect
bats from disturbance. The WHIP provides technical and financial
assistance to landowners to develop upland, wetland, riparian and
aquatic habitat areas on their property.

**2001 Land Use / Land Cover**

The primary land use in this RWA project is pasture, hay, and grasslands
for livestock utilization. Forestlands are the secondary land use with
some sizable wooded tracts in Grant, Pendleton, and Harrison counties.
The majority of the developed acreages are clustered around small cities
including Winchester (Clark County), Paris (Bourbon County), and
Cynthiana (Harrison County).

![](media/image9.jpeg){width="6.39375in" height="7.830555555555556in"}

  ---------------------------------------------- ------------- -------------
  **Land Cover Class- HUC 05100102**             **Acres**     **Percent**

  Open Water                                     1,834         0.3

  Developed, Open Space                          34,491        5.8

  Developed, Low Intensity                       7,289         1.2

  Developed, Medium Intensity                    2,609         0.4

  Developed, High Intensity                      984           0.2

  Barren Land (Rock/Sand/Clay)                   632           0.1

  Deciduous Forest                               110,447       18.6

  Evergreen Forest                               10,937        1.8

  Mixed Forest                                   2,772         0.5

  Shrub/Scrub                                    11,274        1.9

  Grassland/Herbaceous                           4,866         0.8

  Pasture/Hay                                    383,690       64.6

  Cultivated Crops                               21,037        3.5

  Woody Wetlands                                 89            0.0

  Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands                   850           0.1

  **Totals:**                                    **593,802**   
  ---------------------------------------------- ------------- -------------

Agricultural lands (pasture, hay, grassland, and crops) are the primary
cover class totaling 409,952 acres. Forestlands (evergreen, deciduous,
and mixed) comprise 124,156 acres. Developed acreage (open space, low
intensity, medium intensity, and high intensity) totals 45,374 which is
less than 10% of the total watershed.

![](media/image10.wmf){width="6.756944444444445in"
height="3.845138888888889in"}

**County Data**

The 2008 Kentucky RWA project area spans all or part of eight counties
in central Kentucky. County data information on agricultural production
and farm demographics are listed below. A comparison of 1997 and 2002
data shows that government payments (all federal programs) has increased
substantially in all counties. Cropland during this time period has
declined overall in the watershed, but increased slightly in Nicholas
County.

  ------------ --------------- ----------- ----------- ------------------ ----------------- ------------ ------------- -------------
  **County**   **Land in       **No. of    **Average   **Gov. Payments    **Gov. Payments   **Percent    **Cattle/     **Forage,
               Farms, Acres**  Farm**      Size of     (1997)**           (2002)**          Change, Gov. Calves, no.** acres)**
                                           Farms**                                          Payments**                 

  Bath         107,574         692         155         \$131,000          \$362,000         Up 176%      24,505        22,949

  Bourbon      184,580         913         202         347,000            \$1,052,000       Up 203%      57,832        45,903

  Clark        143,171         861         166         188,000            \$473,000         Up 152%      48,214        34,515

  Grant        116,454         1,020       114         67,000             \$146,000         Up 118%      15,344        23,735

  Harrison     158,980         1,085       147         \$158,000          \$374,000         Up 137%      33,013        39,840

  Montgomery   90,951          676         135         \$168,000          \$259,000         Up 54%       27,540        21,459

  Nicholas     105,524         582         181         \$73,000           \$216,000         Up 196%      22,467        26,069

  Pendleton    132,402         964         137         \$105,000          \$219,000         Up 109%      15,879        28,089

               **1,039,636**   **6,793**               **\$1,237,000.**   **\$3,101,000**                **244,794**   **242,559**
  ------------ --------------- ----------- ----------- ------------------ ----------------- ------------ ------------- -------------

> ***NASS, 2002 and 1997 Data***

+---------+------+------+-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+
| **C     | **   | **   | *     | **2002  | **2   | **2   | **2002  |
| ounty** | 1997 | 2002 | *2002 | Corn    | 002** | 002** | Market  |
|         | T    | T    | Corn  | for     |       |       | Value   |
|         | otal | otal | for   | S       | **To  | **Soy | Prod    |
|         | Crop | Crop | Grain | ilage** | bacco | beans | uction, |
|         | land | land | (acr  |         | (acr  | (acr  | average |
|         | (    | (    | es)** | **(a    | es)** | es)** | /farm** |
|         | acre | acre |       | cres)** |       |       |         |
|         | s)** | s)** |       |         |       |       |         |
+---------+------+------+-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+
| Bath    | 81   | 67   | 2,006 | 524     | 1,548 | 1,506 | \$      |
|         | ,680 | ,380 |       |         |       |       | 107,129 |
+---------+------+------+-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+
| Bourbon | 141  | 126  | 2,710 | 1,132   | 2,831 | 2,737 | \$      |
|         | ,153 | ,937 |       |         |       |       | 107,129 |
+---------+------+------+-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+
| Clark   | 102  | 90   | 1,773 | 490     | 1,687 | 450   | \       |
|         | ,040 | ,068 |       |         |       |       | $29,367 |
+---------+------+------+-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+
| Grant   | 71   | 62   | 153   | 223     | 1,318 | No    | \       |
|         | ,380 | ,453 |       |         |       | r     | $12,940 |
|         |      |      |       |         |       | eport |         |
+---------+------+------+-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+
| H       | 115  | 102  | 2,350 | 869     | 2,285 | 2,371 | \       |
| arrison | ,561 | ,821 |       |         |       |       | $19,393 |
+---------+------+------+-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+
| Mon     | 77   | 56   | 779   | 430     | 1,407 | 93    | \       |
| tgomery | ,087 | ,354 |       |         |       |       | $23,146 |
+---------+------+------+-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+
| N       | 66   | 68   | 678   | 389     | 1,516 | n/a   | \       |
| icholas | ,734 | ,154 |       |         |       |       | $20,404 |
+---------+------+------+-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+
| Pe      | 70   | 69   | 376   | n/a     | 1,148 | 500   | \$9,130 |
| ndleton | ,219 | ,306 |       |         |       |       |         |
+---------+------+------+-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+
|         | **7  | **6  | **10, | **1,38  | **13, |       | **      |
|         | 25,8 | 43,4 | 825** | 0,152** | 740** |       | \$328,6 |
|         | 54** | 73** |       |         |       |       | 38.00** |
+---------+------+------+-------+---------+-------+-------+---------+

**Stakeholder Participation and Conservation Needs**

Numerous agencies and private organizations, as well as local landowners
and officials, provided input on this project during the development
process. On June 17, 2008 NRCS hosted a meeting for federal/state
agencies and conservation organizations to share information and obtain
input on resource issues and concerns throughout the Licking River
Basin. Stakeholder agencies participating in this meeting by attending
or filling out questionnaires include the Kentucky Division of Water
(KDOW), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Kentucky Department of
Fish and Wildlife Resources, Kentucky State Natures Preserves
Commission, Kentucky Division of Forestry, Licking River Valley
Resources Conservation and Development, Kentucky Waterways Alliance, The
Nature Conservancy, and Kentucky Department of Agriculture.

The priority concern identified during the June meeting was water
quality issues including non-point pollution, stream sedimentation, and
bank erosion. Associated with water quality was the need to protect
mussel beds in the lower Licking River. The number one need identified
was additional program funding and increased incentives for farmer to
exclude cattle from streams, provide proper cattle crossings and install
stream buffers. The stakeholders would also like to see the expanded use
of NRCS' Wetland Reserve Program, especially targeting watersheds in
tributaries upriver from known mussel beds.

In May -July 2008, local conservation districts were provided a
questionnaire asking their opinions on current resource concerns and
farmer/landowner needs in the Licking Basin. The following table shows
the resource concern and the percentage of respondents that had those
concerns.

+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| **Licking Basin Identified Resource Concerns**   | Percent           |
|                                                  |                   |
| RC&D 2008 survey of Conservation District        |                   |
| Members                                          |                   |
+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| Uncontrolled runoff/ erosion                     | 72%               |
+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| Streambank erosion /sedimentation of streams     | 68%               |
+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| Noxious weeds                                    | 48%               |
+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| Poor water quality                               | 43%               |
+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| Inadequate water quantity                        | 33%               |
+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| Poor pasture conditions/ inadequate forage       | 31%               |
+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| Management of animal waste                       | 27%               |
+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| Flooding                                         | 10%               |
+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------+
| Lack of adequate septic systems                  | 8%                |
+--------------------------------------------------+-------------------+

Bourbon and Clark Counties have the largest population of cattle within
HUC 05100102. A comparison of 1992, 1997 and 2002 NASS data shows that
milk cow populations in HUC 05100102 have declined while beef cow
populations have increased steadily. Stream exclusion fencing, stream
crossing, watering facilities, and buffer strips are conservation
practices that are critically needed throughout the watershed.

Multiple stream segments in Bourbon County were identified by the KDOW
in their 2006 305(b) report to Congress as exceeding primary contact
recreation (PCR) standards for contaminants (bacteria). Stream segments
in Clark, Montgomery, and Harrison counties also were not supporting for
PCR. Not coincidently, the majority of stream segment identified are in
the counties with the high recorded cow populations. This highlights the
need for additional funding of agricultural conservation programs for
this watershed such as installing stream buffers, fencing to exclude
cattle from streams, livestock watering facilities, and livestock stream
crossings. Installation of these practices in the targeted
sub-watersheds would reap water quality benefits in this RWA project
area and also in the main stem of the Licking River Watershed.

![](media/image11.jpeg){width="6.86875in" height="4.948611111111111in"}

***Map: Kentucky Division of Water, 305(b) Report, 2006***

![](media/image12.jpeg){width="5.386111111111111in"
height="4.018055555555556in"}

***Upper*** ***tributary to the South Fork in Bourbon County Photo:
Mason Howell, NRCS***

***This site would benefit from installation of a stream crossing and
exclusion fencing for the cattle.***

![](media/image13.jpeg){width="5.002777777777778in"
height="4.747916666666667in"}

> ***Map: Kentucky Division of Water***

![](media/image14.jpeg){width="4.750694444444444in"
height="3.566666666666667in"}***Photo: Tom Leith, USDA***

> ***Livestock with open access to stream is the norm throughout the
> watershed resulting in streambank erosion and water quality
> impacts.***

![](media/image15.jpeg){width="6.497916666666667in" height="4.8625in"}

***Photo: Mason Howell, NRCS***

***This photo shows successful conservation practices in place. The
exclusion fencing and resulting buffer strip protects soil, improves
water quality, and provides habitat for wildlife. The cattle have access
to clean water via a installed watering system. The site is located on a
tributary to the South Fork, Licking River in Bourbon County.***

**Prime Farmland Soils**

Prime farmland soils are defined by NRCS as, ..."land that has the best
combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing food,
feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops and that is available for these
uses. It has the combination of soil properties, growing season, and
moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields of crops in an
economic manner if it is treated and managed according to acceptable
farming methods." Nearly 60% of this project area is prime farmland or
farmland of statewide importance.

  ------------------------------------------------ -------------- -------------
  **Farmland Classification HUC 05100102**         **Sum Acres**  **Percent**

  All areas are prime farmland                     150,514        25.3

  Prime farmland if drained                        1,657          0.3

  Prime farmland if drained and either protected   5,432          0.9
  from flooding or not frequently flooded during                  
  the growing season                                              

  Prime farmland if protected from flooding or not 24,572         4.1
  frequently flooded during the growing season                    

  Subtotal (Prime):                                **182,175**    **30.7**

  Farmland of statewide importance                 166,737        28.1

  Subtotal: (Prime or Statewide):                  **348,912**    **58.8**

  Not prime farmland                               244,890        41.2
  ------------------------------------------------ -------------- -------------

Clark, Bourbon and Harrison have the majority of the prime farmland/
farmland of statewide importance within the project area.

![](media/image16.jpeg){width="6.795833333333333in" height="8.4625in"}

**Highly Erodible Land or HEL**

Eighty-four percent of this RWA project area is highly erodible soils.
The erodibility index (EI) for a soil is determined by dividing the
potential erodibility by the soil loss tolerance (T) value. A soil map
unit with an EI of 8 or greater is considered to be Highly Erodible Land
(HEL). Potential erodibility is based on default values for rainfall
amount and intensity, percent and length of slope, surface texture and
organic matter, permeability, and plant cover.

> ![](media/image17.jpeg){width="5.179861111111111in"
> height="6.214583333333334in"}

  ---------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------
  **HEL Classification- HUC 05100102**                        

  **Class**                                **Acres**          **Percent**

  Highly erodible land                     496,216            83.6

  Not highly erodible land                 91,587             15.4

  Not rated (primarily water)              5,999              1.0

  **Totals:**                              **593,802**        100.0
  ---------------------------------------- ------------------ -------------

**Hay and Pasturelands**

Livestock and hay production is the primary agricultural use within this
watershed. The combination of geology, soils, rainfall, and climate
provide highly productive pastures when well managed, and grasslands
total 383,690 acres or approximately 65% of the project area.

![](media/image18.jpeg){width="6.308333333333334in"
height="7.472222222222222in"}

**Cropland**

Cultivated Cropland is 21,037 acres or less than 4% of the project area;
however the majority of cropland in Harrison and Pendleton counties is
along the South Fork, which makes these acres a target area for
conservation practices. According to 2002 NASS data, cropland acres are
a mix of different grains and tobacco. For example, the Bourbon County
data for that year was: 2,831 acres in tobacco, 3,842 acres in corn,
2,737 acres in soybeans and 1,906 acres in wheat.

![](media/image19.jpeg){width="6.936805555555556in" height="7.70625in"}

**Croplands on highly erodible lands (HEL)**

Croplands on HEL compose less than 2% of the project area; however, many
of these fields are adjacent or near the South Fork of the Licking or an
upper unnamed tributary.

![](media/image20.jpeg){width="7.367361111111111in"
height="8.32013888888889in"}

**Hydric and Partially Hydric Soils**

There are 5,134 acres of hydric or partially hydric soils in the
watershed. Hydric soils are as "soils that formed under conditions of
saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season
to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part" (Federal Register
1994). These soils, under natural conditions, are either saturated or
inundated long enough during the growing season to support the growth
and reproduction of hydrophytic vegetation.

  ------------------------------------------ ---------------- -------------
  **Soils - Hydric Classification- HUC                        
  05100102**                                                  

  **Hydric Classification**                  **Sum Acres**    **Percent**

  All hydric                                 3,412            0.6

  Partially hydric                           1,731            0.3

  **Subtotal (Hydric or P. Hydric):**        **5,143**        **0.9**

  Not hydric                                 585,215          98.6

  Not rated                                  3,444            0.6
  ------------------------------------------ ---------------- -------------

![](media/image21.jpeg){width="6.0472222222222225in"
height="6.460416666666666in"}

![](media/image22.jpeg){width="4.022916666666666in"
height="3.0055555555555555in"}![](media/image23.jpeg){width="3.0243055555555554in"
height="2.5618055555555554in"}

The Wetlands Reserve Program or "WRP" is a voluntary program offering
landowners the opportunity to protect, restore, and enhance wetlands on
their property.  The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
provides technical and financial support to help landowners with their
wetland restoration efforts.  The NRCS goal is to achieve the greatest
wetland functions and values, along with optimum wildlife habitat, on
every acre enrolled in the program.  This program offers landowners an
opportunity to establish long-term conservation, wildlife habitat and
wetland protection.

Landowners who choose to participate in WRP may sell a conservation
easement or enter into a cost-share restoration agreement with USDA to
restore and protect wetlands. The landowner voluntarily limits future
use of the land, yet retains private ownership. With landowner input,
NRCS develops a plan for the restoration and maintenance of the wetland.
The program offers landowners three options: permanent easements,
30-year easements, and restoration cost-share agreements of minimum
10-year duration. A landowner continues to control access to the
land\--and may lease the land\--for hunting, fishing, and other
undeveloped recreational activities. There is currently one WRP site in
this RWA project area -- a 37.5 acre site in Pendleton County.

WRP program staff hope to increase landowner awareness of WRP and
enrollments in 2009.

![](media/image24.jpeg){width="3.102777777777778in"
height="2.326388888888889in"}
![](media/image25.jpeg){width="3.122916666666667in"
height="2.3652777777777776in"}

***Planting of native vegetation on the WRP site in Pendleton County,
KY***

**Grassland Bird Priority Areas**

In a 2005 report, the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources
(KDFWR) identified geographic areas for the purpose of focusing
conservation efforts that would benefit the largest number of species
with greatest conservation need. These areas represent priority
conservation areas (PCA's), and the KDFWR has included portions of the
RWA project area as a grassland bird PCA.

![](media/image26.jpeg){width="7.5875in" height="6.232638888888889in"}

According to the Wilson Journal of Ornithology, grassland birds have
experienced greater population declines nationwide than any other group
of birds monitored by the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Grassland
bird species monitored by the Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission
and found in this watershed include bobolink, savannah sparrow, vesper
sparrow, upland sandpiper, meadowlark, and Henslow's sparrow.
Conservation practices such as buffer strips, +waterways, and
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) acres provide critical habitat for
these species.

**Freshwater Mussel Priority Areas**

The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources has identified
areas in the Licking River Basin as Bivalve Priority Conservation Areas.
The Licking River Basin provides a unique and fragile habitat for
multiple species of freshwater mussels including multiple state and
federally listed species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has
documented that the Licking River is one of the last and best
populations of federally listed Fanshell mussels (*Cyprogenia
stegaria*). The USFWS is one of many agencies working to improve water
quality and aquatic species in the Licking Basin. Although the
designated mussel conservation areas are on the main stem of the Licking
River (HUC 05100101) the South Fork of the Licking joins the mainstem of
the River exactly at a freshwater mussel priority conservation site.
Targeted efforts of implementing conservation in this RWA project area
will improve water quality in the South Fork of the Licking and also
protect endangered mussels in the Licking River.

![](media/image27.jpeg){width="7.420833333333333in"
height="6.264583333333333in"}

**Water Resources**

**Licking River Watershed Watch Group**

The Licking River Watershed Watch (LRWW) is a non-profit organization
that tracks water quality throughout the Licking River Watershed
multiples times per year. Sampling includes testing for *E. coli*
bacteria. *E. coli* is short for *Escherichia coli*, a bacterium that
normally resides in the colon of humans and animals. Because *E. coli*
are always present in human and animal feces, they are used as an
indicator of fecal pollution in the microbiological surveillance of
water quality. Several strains of this bacterium are known to produce
toxins in humans that can cause moderate to severe diarrhea. One strain
of E. coli called "O157" can cause severe diarrhea and kidney damage in
humans. Sources of bacteria in the Licking RWA project area include
livestock (run off from pastures or direct access to streams), failing
septic systems, straight-pipes, and discharges from municipal sewage
plants. Exceedences ranged from 240 colonies per milliliter to over
31,000 colonies per ml.

Additional LRWW water quality information can be found at:
**<http://www.lickingriver.org/>.**

+-----------+-------+--------------------------+-----------------------+
| **Licking |       |                          |                       |
| River     |       |                          |                       |
| Watershed |       |                          |                       |
| Watch**   |       |                          |                       |
|           |       |                          |                       |
| ***E.     |       |                          |                       |
| coli*     |       |                          |                       |
| Sampling  |       |                          |                       |
| Results   |       |                          |                       |
| for       |       |                          |                       |
| Counties  |       |                          |                       |
| in the    |       |                          |                       |
| RWA       |       |                          |                       |
| Project   |       |                          |                       |
| Area**    |       |                          |                       |
+-----------+-------+--------------------------+-----------------------+
| *         |       |                          |                       |
| *Sampling |       |                          |                       |
| Dates:    |       |                          |                       |
| May 2006  |       |                          |                       |
| & 2007,   |       |                          |                       |
| July 2006 |       |                          |                       |
| & 2007,   |       |                          |                       |
| Sept.     |       |                          |                       |
| 2006 &    |       |                          |                       |
| 2007**    |       |                          |                       |
+-----------+-------+--------------------------+-----------------------+
| *         | **No. | **Number of Samples      | **Percent             |
| *County** | Samp  | Showing Exceedences of   | Exceedences**         |
|           | les** | E. coli bacteria**       |                       |
+-----------+-------+--------------------------+-----------------------+
| **Bath**  | *     | **2**                    | **12.50%**            |
|           | *16** |                          |                       |
+-----------+-------+--------------------------+-----------------------+
| **        | *     | **16**                   | **34.04%**            |
| Bourbon** | *47** |                          |                       |
+-----------+-------+--------------------------+-----------------------+
| **Clark** | *     | **16**                   | **72.73%**            |
|           | *22** |                          |                       |
+-----------+-------+--------------------------+-----------------------+
| **H       | *     | **3**                    | **20.00%**            |
| arrison** | *15** |                          |                       |
+-----------+-------+--------------------------+-----------------------+
| **Mon     | *     | **11**                   | **100.00%**           |
| tgomery** | *11** |                          |                       |
+-----------+-------+--------------------------+-----------------------+
| **N       | *     | **6**                    | **18.75%**            |
| icholas** | *32** |                          |                       |
+-----------+-------+--------------------------+-----------------------+
| **Pe      | *     | **5**                    | **15.15%**            |
| ndleton** | *33** |                          |                       |
+-----------+-------+--------------------------+-----------------------+

***Data: Licking River Watershed Watch***

**Kentucky Division of Water 319 Program**

State and federal agencies are working together to focus conservation
efforts within the Licking Basin, and Kentucky Division of Water has
taken a lead in implementing projects to improve water quality. KDOW has
supported multiple projects using the Clean Water Act, Section 319
funding. In 1987, Congress amended the Clean Water Act (CWA) to include
the Section 319 Nonpoint Source Management Program. Under this program,
states receive grant money to measure the success of non-point pollution
projects. Activities include technical assistance, financial assistance,
education, training, technology transfer, demonstration projects, and
monitoring.

Eleven-digit hydrologic units with 319 projects in this project area
include: **Strodes, Hinkston, and Townsend Creeks.** Projects include
watershed based planning and BMP implementation as well as agricultural
BMP demonstrations. Under a 60% federal/ 40% non-federal match, the 319
projects in this RWA project area have a total budget in excess of \$ 4
million.

  ------------------- ------------ ------------- -------------- ------------ ------------
  **Project Name**    **Status**   **Total       **11-digit     **HUC**      **County**
                                   Project**     HUC**                       

  Townsend Creek      Ongoing      \$1,500,000   5100102050     Townsend     Bourbon
  Watershed                                                     Creek        
  Restoration                                                                

  Watershed           Ongoing      \$590,564     05100101130,   Triplett,    Rowan,
  Implementation                                 05100101200,   Fleming, and Fleming, and
  Plans; Salt and                                05100102030    Strodes      Clark
  Licking River                                                 Creeks       Counties
  Basins                                                                     

  Strodes Creek       Ongoing      \$1,139,755   5100102030     Strodes      Clark
  Conservancy:                                                  Creek        
  Watershed                                                                  
  Improvement                                                                
  Initiative                                                                 

  Hinkston Creek      Project has  \$807,340     5100102010     Upper        Montgomery &
  Watershed Based     not begun                                 Hinkston     small
  Planning & BMP                                                Creek        portion of
  Implementation                                                             Bath
  Project                                                                    
  ------------------- ------------ ------------- -------------- ------------ ------------

![](media/image28.jpeg){width="7.3694444444444445in"
height="5.7034722222222225in"}

***Project locations provided by KDOW, 20008***

![](media/image29.jpeg){width="6.291666666666667in"
height="4.719444444444444in"}

> *Photo: Mason Howell, NRCS*

***Buffer strips are a key conservation practice to improve water
quality and reduce non-point pollution of streams. This photos shows a
conservation buffer strip adjacent to an unnamed tributary of the South
Fork, Licking River in Bourbon County***

**Kentucky Impaired Waters List - 72% of the identified impaired
waterbody segments in this RWA project area have agriculture as the
suspected source.**

Agricultural impairments to water quality are well documented and
widespread in this watershed and the following tables highlight the need
for conservation funding in this watershed. Section 303(d) of the Clean
Water Act states that water bodies with impaired uses must be placed on
a state impaired waters list. The 303(d) portion of the Kentucky
Division of Water's bi-annual report is lists assessed waters including
all waters not supporting one or more designated uses and requiring the
future development of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). The following
pages list stream segments within the RWA project area that are impaired
and the suspected causes of impairment. KDOW has compiled a huge amount
of water quality data for not only the Licking Basin but also
state-wide. This information includes 303d reports and can be accessed
at: <http://www.water.ky.gov/sw/tmdl/303d.htm>. The following 2 pages of
tables were taken from the Kentucky Division of Waters draft 2008
Section 303(d) list of impaired waters, and the abbreviations for the
designated uses column ("Uses") are: WAH - Warm Water Aquatic Habitat;
CAH - Aquatic Habitat; PCR - Primary Contact Recreation; SCR - Secondary
Contact Recreation; FC - Fish Consumption; and DWS -Domestic Water
Supply.

  -------------- ------- ------------- ------------ ----- ------------------- -----------------
  **HUC 05100102                                                              
  Impairments,                                                                
  Kentucky                                                                    
  Division of                                                                 
  Water, 2008**                                                               

  Waterbody &    Total   Waterbody ID  County       Use   Impairment          Suspected
  Segment        Size                                                         Source(s)

  Blacks Creek   3.4     KY487421_00   Bourbon      WAH   Nutrient/           Livestock
  0.0 to 3.4     miles                                    Eutrophication      (Grazing or
                                                          Biological          Feeding
                                                          Indicators          Operations)

  Blacks Creek   3.4     KY487421_00   Bourbon      WAH   Sedimentation/      Livestock
  0.0 to 3.4     miles                                    Siltation           (Grazing or
                                                                              Feeding
                                                                              Operations)

  Boone Creek    5 miles KY487686_00   Bourbon      WAH   Nutrient/           Livestock
  0.0 to 5.0                                              Eutrophication      (Grazing or
                                                          Biological          Feeding
                                                          Indicators          Operations)

  Boone Creek    5 miles KY487686_00   Bourbon      WAH   Sedimentation/      Livestock
  0.0 to 5.0                                              Siltation           (Grazing or
                                                                              Feeding
                                                                              Operations)

  Cooper Run 0.0 10.1    KY490062_00   Bourbon      WAH   Nutrient/           Livestock
  to 10.1        miles                                    Eutrophication      (Grazing or
                                                          Biological          Feeding
                                                          Indicators          Operations)

  Flat Run 0.0   2.2     KY492217_00   Bourbon      WAH   Nutrient/           Livestock
  to 2.2         miles                                    Eutrophication      (Grazing or
                                                          Biological          Feeding
                                                          Indicators          Operations)

  Flat Run 0.0   2.2     KY492217_00   Bourbon      WAH   Sedimentation/      Livestock
  to 2.2         miles                                    Siltation           (Grazing or
                                                                              Feeding
                                                                              Operations)

  Hinkston Creek 12.6    KY494298_01   Bourbon      PCR   Fecal Coliform      Source Unknown
  0.0 to 12.6    miles                                                        

  Hinkston Creek 10.2    KY494298_03   Bourbon      PCR   Fecal Coliform      Livestock
  20.8 to 31.0   miles                                                        (Grazing or
                                                                              Feeding
                                                                              Operations)

  Hinkston Creek 7.3     KY494298_05   Bourbon      PCR   Fecal Coliform      Agriculture
  41.8 to 49.1   miles                                                        

  Hinkston Creek 7.3     KY494298_05   Bourbon      WAH   Sedimentation/      Agriculture
  41.8 to 49.1   miles                                    Siltation           

  Hinkston Creek 14.4    KY494298_06   Montgomery   WAH   Nutrient/           Grazing in
  51.5 to 65.9   miles                                    Eutrophication      Riparian or
                                                          Biological          Shoreline Zones
                                                          Indicators          

  Hinkston Creek 14.4    KY494298_06   Montgomery   WAH   Sedimentation/      Grazing in
  51.5 to 65.9   miles                                    Siltation           Riparian or
                                                                              Shoreline Zones
  -------------- ------- ------------- ------------ ----- ------------------- -----------------

  -------------- ------- ------------- ---------- ----- ---------------- ---------------------------
  **HUC 05100102                                                         
  Impairments,                                                           
  Kentucky                                                               
  Division of                                                            
  Water, 2008**                                                          

  Waterbody &    Total   Waterbody ID  County     Use   Impairment       Suspected Source(s)
  Segment        Size                                                    

  Houston Creek  9 miles KY494646_01   Bourbon    PCR   Fecal Coliform   Source Unknown
  0.0 to 9.0                                                             

  Houston Creek  3.7     KY494646_02   Bourbon    WAH   Nutrient/        Golf Courses
  9.0 to 12.7    miles                                  Eutrophication   
                                                        Biological       
                                                        Indicators       

  Little Stoner  5 miles KY496870_00   Clark      PCR   Fecal Coliform   Source Unknown
  Creek 0.0 to                                                           
  5.0                                                                    

  Mill Creek 0.0 21.6    KY498263_01   Harrison   WAH   Nutrient/        Crop Production (Crop Land
  to 21.6        miles                                  Eutrophication   or Dry Land), Livestock
                                                        Biological       (Grazing or Feeding
                                                        Indicators       Operations)

  Mill Creek 0.0 21.6    KY498263_01   Harrison   WAH   Sedimentation/   Crop Production, Livestock
  to 21.6        miles                                  Siltation        (Grazing or Feeding
                                                                         Operations), Land
                                                                         Development or
                                                                         Redevelopment

  Stoner Creek   5.5     KY504482_01   Bourbon    PCR   Fecal Coliform   Source Unknown
  0.0 to 5.5     miles                                                   

  Stoner Creek   9.5     KY504482_02   Bourbon    PCR   Fecal Coliform   Source Unknown
  5.5 to 15.0    miles                                                   

  Strodes Creek  16.6    KY504593_00   Bourbon    PCR   Fecal Coliform   Agriculture, Unspecified
  2.7 to 19.3    miles                                                   Urban Stormwater, Municipal
                                                                         Point Source Discharges

  Strodes Creek  16.6    KY504593_00   Bourbon    WAH   Nutrient/        Agriculture, Unspecified
  2.7 to 19.3    miles                                  Eutrophication   Urban Stormwater, Municipal
                                                        Biological       Point Source Discharges
                                                        Indicators       

  Strodes Creek  16.6    KY504593_00   Bourbon    WAH   Organic          Agriculture, Unspecified
  2.7 to 19.3    miles                                  Enrichment       Urban Stormwater, Municipal
                                                        (Sewage)         Point Source Discharges
                                                        Biological       
                                                        Indicators       

  Strodes Creek  16.6    KY504593_00   Bourbon    WAH   Sedimentation/   Agriculture, Unspecified
  2.7 to 19.3    miles                                  Siltation        Urban Stormwater, Highways,
                                                                         Roads, Bridges, New
                                                                         Construction, Habitat
                                                                         Modification

  Townsend Creek 4.9     KY505401_01   Bourbon    PCR   Fecal Coliform   Source Unknown
  0.0 to 4.9     miles                                                   
  -------------- ------- ------------- ---------- ----- ---------------- ---------------------------

### 

###  ![](media/image30.jpeg){width="5.490972222222222in" height="7.116666666666666in"}

### 

### Occurrence of Sinkholes

The South Fork of the Licking River Watershed is underlain with karst, a
terrain characterized by subsurface limestone and sinkholes. Karst
regions are especially susceptible to rapid groundwater pollution due to
the direct connection between surface and subsurface waters. Karst
landscapes are also characterized by sinking streams, closed
depressions, shallow subterranean drainage, large springs, and caves.
There are an estimated 725 sinkholes in HUC 05100101 encompassing 757
acres. These areas provide a critical opportunity to apply ground water
protection through the application of NRCS conservation practices.

### 

### 

### Demographics The demographic data within this project area is fairly uniform. Population rates are increasing with Montgomery and Grant Counties growing by over 10% in seven years. Household incomes by county are similar, generally within the \$30,000-\$40,000 range. Poverty rates are rates are above the U.S average in all but two counties.

  ------------ -------------- -------------- -------------- ------------- ----------
  **County**   **Population   **Population   **Population   **Change      **Change
               1990**         2000**         2007**         1990- 2000**  2000 -
                                                                          2007**

  Bourbon      19,236         19,360         19,756         0.60%         2.00%

  Clark        29,496         33,144         35,550         12.40%        7.30%

  Grant        15,737         22,384         25,161         42.20%        12.40%

  Harrison     16,248         17,983         18,552         10.70%        3.20%

  Montgomery   19,561         22,554         25,228         15.30%        11.90%

  Nicholas     6,725          6,813          6,889          1.30%         1.10%

  Pendleton    12,062         14,390         15,058         19.30%        4.60%
  ------------ -------------- -------------- -------------- ------------- ----------

### 

### *Data: USDA -- Economics Research Service, National Agriculture Statistics Service, ThinkKentucky.gov*

### 

  ------------------- ------------------ ---------------- -----------------
  **County**          **Median household **Median Home    **Individuals
                      income (1999)**    Price (2000)**   below poverty
                                                          level**

  Bourbon             \$35,038           \$84,500         14%

  Clark               \$39,946           \$93,700         12.5%

  Grant               \$38,438           \$93,100         11%

  Harrison            \$36,210           \$83,000         12%

  Montgomery          \$36,939           \$96,000         15%

  Nicholas            \$35,491           \$62,000         13%

  Pendleton           \$42,589           \$77,700         11.5%
  ------------------- ------------------ ---------------- -----------------

**Climate**

Central Kentucky has a moderate climate, characterized by warm, moist
summer conditions and cold winters. Kentucky\'s weather patterns are
influenced by the Gulf of Mexico, especially during summer months.
Statistical data shows that precipitation decreases on a statewide level
from south to north. Southern Kentucky receives the highest average
precipitation, over 50 inches a year, while the northern portions of the
state average only 40 inches.

+-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
| **Climate Data Overview for Kentucky      |                          |
| Counties in RWA**                         |                          |
|                                           |                          |
| **Averaged data from 5 RWA counties       |                          |
| (www.thinkkentucky.gov)**                 |                          |
+-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
| Normal Temperature (30 year record)       | 55 degrees F             |
+-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
| Average Annual, 2006                      | 56 degrees F             |
+-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
| Record Highest                            | 103 degrees F            |
+-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
| Record Lowest                             | -20 degrees F            |
+-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
| Normal Precipitation (30 year average)    | 46 inches                |
+-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
| Mean Annual Snowfall (30 year average)    | 17 inches                |
+-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
| Total precipitation, 2006                 | 54 inches                |
+-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
| Mean number of days precipitation         | 131                      |
+-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
| Mean number of days thunderstorms         | 43                       |
+-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
| Prevailing Winds                          | South                    |
+-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+

![](media/image31.jpeg){width="4.479166666666667in" height="3.28125in"}

> ***Photo: Tom Leith Flooding in the city of Cynthiana, 1997***

**Licking River Flooding**

Although the City of Cynthiana in Harrison County has a long record of
reoccurring flooding, the spring of 1997 was one of the worst floods
recorded along the Licking River and South Fork of the Licking. The
event was described by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) as a "powerful storm that had 200% of the normal
moisture for that time of year". Throughout the Licking River Basin,
flooding was severe with towns such as Cynthiana (adjacent to the South
Fork) and Falmouth hit especially hard. According to the US Army Corps
of Engineers, flood damages for the 1997 event was approximately \$45
million and the peak stage recorded at the gage in Cynthiana was 5 feet
higher than any recorded level in the last 60 year --this is considered
a 500-year flood event. Local governments in the area have been working
with the US Army Corps of Engineers to develop solutions to Cynthiana's
flooding problems, but the proposed projects are costly and the lack of
local cost-share funds have so far stopped project implementation. The
Corps has given the City a plan which proposes construction of large
dams on tributaries of the South Fork. Some local landowners have
discussed building numerous farm ponds with storage capacity throughout
the watershed instead of large "dry" dams. There is also opportunity for
some wetland restoration and reforestation projects.

**NRCS Conservation Program Data**

NRCS tracks implementation of programs in a system called Performance
Results System (PRS). This database provides trend data on conservation
measures implemented by year. Results by eight-digit HUC for the RWA
project area from 2004-2007 are shown in the tables below.

+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| **NRCS  |                        |    |    |    |    |    |     |
| Perf    |                        |    |    |    |    |    |     |
| ormance |                        |    |    |    |    |    |     |
| Results |                        |    |    |    |    |    |     |
| System  |                        |    |    |    |    |    |     |
| Summary |                        |    |    |    |    |    |     |
| by      |                        |    |    |    |    |    |     |
| Year**  |                        |    |    |    |    |    |     |
|         |                        |    |    |    |    |    |     |
| **HUC   |                        |    |    |    |    |    |     |
| 051     |                        |    |    |    |    |    |     |
| 00102** |                        |    |    |    |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| *       | **Practice**           | *  | ** | ** | ** | ** | *   |
| *Code** |                        | *U | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | *To |
|         |                        | ni | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | tal |
|         |                        | ts | ** | ** | ** | ** | s** |
|         |                        | ** |    |    |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 313     | Waste Storage Facility | no | 2  |    | 1  | 2  | 5   |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 313,    | Total Waste Storage    | no | 2  |    |    | 2  | 4   |
| 317,359 |                        |    |    |    |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 327     | Conservation Cover     | ac | 10 | 1  | 60 | 57 | 276 |
|         |                        |    |    | 49 |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 328     | Conservation Crop      | ac | 9  | 18 | 13 | 2  | 4   |
|         | Rotation               |    | 18 | 52 | 10 | 76 | 356 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 329     | Residue and Tillage    | ac |    |    |    |    | 0   |
|         | Management             |    |    |    |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 329A    | Residue Management,    | ac | 83 | 16 | 7  |    | 2   |
|         | No-Till/Strip Till     |    |    | 85 | 11 |    | 479 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 329B    | Residue Management,    | ac |    |    |    |    | 0   |
|         | Mulch Till             |    |    |    |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 329A-C  | Residue Management     | ac | 83 | 16 | 7  |    | 2   |
|         |                        |    |    | 85 | 11 |    | 479 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 330     | Contour Farming        | ac | 6  | 21 | 20 | 16 | 6   |
|         |                        |    | 93 | 09 | 06 | 60 | 468 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 338     | Prescribed Burning     | ac |    |    | 5  |    | 5   |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 340     | Cover Crop             | ac | 6  | 1  | 2  | 9  | 1   |
|         |                        |    | 69 | 31 | 52 | 31 | 983 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 342     | Critical Area Planting | ac | 2  | 8  | 10 | 2  | 22  |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 344     | Residue Management,    | ac |    | 3  | 6  |    | 974 |
|         | Seasonal               |    |    | 72 | 02 |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 362     | Diversion              | ft |    |    |    |    | 0   |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 378     | Pond                   | no | 6  |    | 2  | 1  | 9   |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 382     | Fence                  | ft | 7  | 2  | 7  | 5  | 230 |
|         |                        |    | 88 | 62 | 07 | 51 | 993 |
|         |                        |    | 84 | 03 | 90 | 16 |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 383     | Filter Strip           | ac |    |    |    |    | 0   |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 386     | Field Border           | ft |    |    |    | 1  | 15  |
|         |                        |    |    |    |    | 55 | 500 |
|         |                        |    |    |    |    | 00 |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 391     | Riparian Forest Buffer | ac | 1  | 3  | 57 | 36 | 576 |
|         |                        |    | 01 | 82 |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 393     | Filter Strip           | ac |    | 2  |    |    | 262 |
|         |                        |    |    | 62 |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 395,    | Total Wildlife Habitat | ac |    |    | 2  | 7  | 1   |
| 644,645 | Mgmt                   |    |    |    | 51 | 97 | 048 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 410     | Grade Stabilization    | no |    | 1  | 1  |    | 2   |
|         | Structure              |    |    |    |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 412     | Grassed Waterway       | ac | 51 | 1  | 8  |    | 174 |
|         |                        |    |    | 15 |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 472     | Use Exclusion          | ac |    |    |    | 73 | 73  |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 490     | Tree/Shrub Site        | ac |    |    |    |    | 0   |
|         | Preparation            |    |    |    |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 511     | Forage Harvest         | ac | 1  | 1  | 6  | 5  | 1   |
|         | Management             |    | 48 | 43 | 56 | 57 | 504 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 512     | Pasture and Hay        | ac | 87 | 2  | 1  | 73 | 525 |
|         | Planting               |    |    | 15 | 50 |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 516     | Pipeline               | ft | 2  | 3  | 3  | 5  | 152 |
|         |                        |    | 84 | 47 | 38 | 53 | 459 |
|         |                        |    | 62 | 29 | 88 | 80 |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 528     | Prescribed Grazing     | ac |    | 4  | 29 | 8  | 4   |
|         |                        |    |    | 40 | 75 | 72 | 287 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 528A    | Prescribed Grazing     | ac | 29 | 14 | 23 | 21 | 9   |
|         |                        |    | 78 | 62 | 91 | 69 | 000 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 558     | Roof Runoff Structure  | no |    |    |    |    | 0   |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 560     | Access Road            | ft |    |    |    |    | 0   |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 562     | Recreation Area        | ac |    |    |    |    | 0   |
|         | Improvement            |    |    |    |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 561     | Heavy Use Area         | ac | 3  | 1  | 4  |    | 177 |
|         | Protection             |    |    | 70 |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 570     | Runoff Management      | ac |    |    |    |    | 0   |
|         | System                 |    |    |    |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 574     | Spring Development     | no |    | 2  | 3  | 1  | 6   |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 575     | Animal Trails and      | ft |    |    | 3  | 5  | 879 |
|         | Walkways               |    |    |    | 05 | 74 |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 580     | Streambank and         | ft |    | 36 |    |    | 3   |
|         | Shoreline Protection   |    |    | 50 |    |    | 650 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 590     | Nutrient Management    | ac | 21 | 30 | 38 | 18 | 10  |
|         |                        |    | 60 | 16 | 67 | 51 | 894 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 595     | Pest Management        | ac | 51 | 26 | 25 | 23 | 12  |
|         |                        |    | 90 | 82 | 98 | 87 | 857 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 606     | Subsurface Drain       | ft |    |    |    |    | 0   |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 612     | Tree/Shrub             | ac |    | 14 |    | 20 | 34  |
|         | Establishment          |    |    |    |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 614     | Watering Facility      | no | 44 | 41 | 67 | 85 | 237 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 633     | Waste Utilization      | ac | 87 |    |    | 30 | 117 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 634     | Manure Transfer        | no |    |    |    |    | 0   |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 642     | Water Well             | no |    |    |    |    | 0   |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 644,645 | Total Wildlife Habitat | ac | 1  | 1  |    |    | 323 |
|         |                        |    | 43 | 80 |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 645     | Upland Wildlife        | ac | 1  | 1  | 2  | 7  | 1   |
|         | Habitat Management     |    | 43 | 80 | 51 | 97 | 371 |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 648     | Wildlife Watering      | no |    |    |    |    | 0   |
|         | Facility               |    |    |    |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 655     | Heavy Use Area         | ac |    |    | 4  |    | 4   |
|         | Protection             |    |    |    |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+
| 666,612 | Forest Re-established  | ac |    | 2  |    | 20 | 231 |
|         | or improved            |    |    | 11 |    |    |     |
+---------+------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+-----+

![](media/image32.jpeg){width="7.5in" height="9.697916666666666in"}

**A Bluegrass Conservation Success Story**

![](media/image33.jpeg){width="3.2270833333333333in" height="3.475in"}

> ***Rows of compost material, Claiborne Farm, Bourbon County***
>
> ***Photo: Tom Leith, USDA***

The overall goal of this project was to reduce the disposal of horse
stable muck that was being deposited in sink holes and adjacent to
streams. This disposal method is commonplace on many horse farms and is
a potentially major source of water quality impairment. A secondary goal
of the project was to transform the muck into a beneficial soil
amendment that could be returned to the land. As a result of these
efforts many bluegrass horse farms are now composting their waste and
spreading the material to improve soil organic content on their
property.

> ![](media/image34.jpeg){width="5.075in" height="2.8041666666666667in"}

***Turning rows of muck, Claiborne Farms, Bourbon County photo: Tom
Leith, USDA***

This watershed offers an array of additional opportunities for NRCS to
work with landowners, state agencies, private organizations, and local
officials to improve water and soil resources. Through partnerships and
cooperation with other stakeholders, USDA will continue to provide
technical and financial assistance to implement on-the-ground
conservation.

**Information Sources**

***[Web Sites]{.underline}***

**Geology**

U.S. Geological Survey at [www.usgs.gov](http://www.usgs.gov/)

Kentucky Geological Survey at http://www.uky.edu/KGS/geoky/

**Kentucky Division of Water TMDL data, Impaired Streams, Exceptional
and High Quality Streams, Exceptional Value and Special Use Waters**

http://www.water.ky.gov

www.watersheds.ky.gov/basins/licking/

**Water quality, monitoring, and treatment information**

http://www.lickingriver.org

http://www.watersheds.ky.gov/basins/licking/

http://www.kwalliance.org

http://www.watersheds.ky.gov/basins/licking/

http://www.epa.gov

http://www.scorecard.org/env-releases/water

**Land Use / Land Cover 2001 information**

http://landcover.usgs.gov/

**National Elevation Dataset (NED) information**

http://ned.usgs.gov/

**Wildlife, Federally Threatened and Endangered Species, Species
Recovery Information, National Wetlands Inventory, Conservation Priority
Areas**

http://www.fws.gov

http://www.kdfwr.state.**ky**.us

State Threatened and Endangered Species, Kentucky State Nature Preserves
Commission- http://www.naturepreserves.ky.gov/

**The Nature Conservancy**

http://www.nature.org/,
http://www.nature.org/wherewework/northamerica/states/kentucky/preserves/art10920.html

**Social and Census Data**

<http://www.nass.usda.gov/Census_of_Agriculture/index.asp>

http://www.census.gov

http://thinkkentucky.com

[www.city-data.com](http://www.city-data.com/)

[www.epodunk.com/](http://www.epodunk.com/)

**Soil Survey spatial and tabular data**

http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/

http://www.nrcs.gov

http://www.nrcs.gov/Kentucky,

**Area background, history, flooding, and general information on the
watershed**

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licking_River

www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/339733/Licking-River

www.encyclopedia.com

www.gopaddling.com/

www.answers.com/topic/licking-river-kentucky

www.nkyviews.com/campbell/newport_licking_scenes.htm

www.trails.com

www.answers.com/topic/licking-river

www.newweb.erh.noaa.gov/

www.nku.edu

www.trailsrus.com/wildlife/licking_river.html

www.placenames.com

www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/10468

www.lickingriveroutfitters.com

www.kentuckycrosswords.com/Learn/Rivers.htm

www.watersheds.ky.gov/homepage_repository/

www.fs.fed.us/r8/boone/resources/water/watershed.shtml

www.uky.edu/WaterResources/Watershed

www.kyppa.org/Features.htm

www.kwalliance.org

www.kyhometown.com

www.city-data.com

www.falmouthkentucky.com

www.falmouthoutlook.com

www.cynthianaky.com

www.epodunk.com/

www.kywebcams.com

**NRCS Performance Results System**

http://ias.sc.egov.usda.gov/prshome/

www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs

www.nrcs.usda.gov/Kentucky/programs

**Climate and weather information**

www.weather.gov

www.noaa.gov

www.wundergrount.gov

www.weatherchannel.gov

www.thinkkentucky.gov

www.kentucky.gov

***[Reports:]{.underline}***

The Licking River Region in Kentucky, Status and Trends, Kentucky
Division of Water, 1998

303(d) List of Waters, Kentucky Division of Water, 1998

303(d) List of Waters, Kentucky Division of Water, 2002

303(d) List of Waters, Kentucky Division of Water, 2004

2006 Integrated Report to Congress on the Condition of Water Resources
in Kentucky Volume II, 303(d) List of Surface Waters, Kentucky Division
of Water, 2006

2008 Integrated Report to Congress on the Condition of Water Resources
in Kentucky Volume II, 303(d) List of Surface Waters, Kentucky Division
of Water, 2008

B.E. Daniels and G.A. Schuster.  2000.  Assessment of a freshwater
mussel (Millusca: Bivalvia) community in the Licking River, at Butler,
Pendleton County, Kentucky.  Kentucky. Kentucky Division of Water

Giocomo, James J.; Moss, E. Daniel; Buehler, David A.; Minser, William
G. 2008. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology

S. E. McMurray and G.A. Schuster. 1996. Reproduction in a freshwater
unionid (Mollusca: Bivalvia) community downstream of Cave Run Reservoir
in the Licking River at Moores Ferry, Kentucky