here are some numbers and suggestions for the Court Creek plan based on the analysis from the limited data that I had available. Please, inlclude in the plan that the plan/goals will be revised within a year, as soon as the new data become available and I would also like to ask you for a help in pushing for the data to get processed as soon as possible through your contacts at IDNR and maybe also chceking with Don Luman at Illinois State Geological Survey which will be doing the processing.

I will start with Goal 3: I suggest to reduce the sheet/rill gully erosion in the Watershed by 25% within the first 1-3 years and 50% over the long term (10 years). The analysis from erosion modeling shows that 87% of eroded soil comes from only 16% area (~10,000 acres) - by reducing erosion in these areas the 25% reduction can be quite realistic, however, after the worst erosion is reduced, further reduction becomes more difficult because already relatively low erosion in large areas has to be further reduced.

Objective 3.5 If it is correct (based on the Illinois GIS land use data) that the total wetland area in the Court Creek watershed is 1.7% (1600 acres, this includes shallow marsh/wet meadow, deep marsh, forest wetland, shallow water wetlands) then, if there are resources available, it would be good to almost double the acreage to 3% area (3000 acres). A simplified analysis of water flow indicates that there is about 6% area which has good topographic conditions to keep some standing water (however not all of that would be in an area with suitable vegetation/land use etc.), and again, the data that I have are not very suitable for such analysis. It is interesting that the part of Middle creek watershed which showed high erosion risk had only 0.32 % wetland area, which is way below the percentage for the entire Court Creek.

For the Goal 1 Deva Borah can provide more, so I have just few comments. Reduction of sediment loading in the stream may be tricky as Don Rosenbaum can explain. There has been a recent study about a watershed in Wisconsin which has been monitored since the beginning of the century. The field measurements show that there was huge erosion but also a huge deposition at the beginning of the century which has gradually decreased after implementation of conservation practices and is now more than 100-times lower. Surprisingly, the sediment loads at the outlet of the watershed have not changed. So it may be useful to monitor sediment loads at several locations in the watershed and be cautious about the goal.

Objective1.1 For temporary storage practices the recomendation would be similar to 3.5 - to double the area, if the numbers that I have are really so low.

Objective 1.2 I will try to get some info about the riparian buffers from the ISIS and the GIS data, but I don't have enough information about the current status to suggest a reasonable number.

For the Goal #2 Don Rosenbaum will surely give you good estimates.

I hope that you have found the information on the website and that our results will be useful for the planning. I am looking forward to working with you and others on this project,

Everything best in the year 2000,

Helena

reduction in C reduced total soil loss by 20% (111,000 ton/year) and increased stable/low by 2% and reduced severe by 3% Focusing on high risk areas first seems to be more effective