the watershed management process - ub erie summer workshop/week 4/frothingham 20… · the...

The watershed management

process

The process & tools to work through the

process

Watershed management


Numerous uses for streams and rivers

But…

>1/3 rivers in US are impaired or polluted

Freshwater extinction rates are five times higher than

terrestrial rates

But…

Improvements in the last 30-40 years

More improvements are possible with river

restoration

Bernhardt et al., 2005


Most common goals Enhance water quality

Manage riparian zones

Improve in-stream habitat

Fish passage

Bank stabilization

More NRRSS results…

Bernhardt et al., 2005

Other goals Channel reconfiguration

Dam removal/retrofit

Floodplain reconnection

Project documentation is poor

Post-project monitoring and assessment is even worse and it‘s important for a variety of reasons

Setting project goals and objectives at the beginning of the watershed management process is critical

A watershed management plan can inform specific project design and implementation

Experts have advocated for a standardized method for watershed management

Watershed management More NRRSS results…

Bernhardt et al., 2005 & 2007

Watershed management is continuous and needs a

multidisciplinary approach.

A strong watershed framework:

uses sound science

facilitates communication and partnerships

fosters actions that are well-planned and cost effective

stimulates actions and tracks results

from the US EPA Principles of Watershed Management available on-line at:

http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/wacademy/acad2000/watershedmgt/index.html

Watershed management: the process

http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/wacademy/acad2000/watershedmgt/index.html

USACE—Watershed planning in civil works projects

(http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/elpubs/pdf/sr34.pdf and http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/emrrp/pdf/sr03.pdf)

USEPA—Watershed Academy (http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/wacademy/)

Federal Interagency Stream Corridor Restoration Working Group (EPA, Dept. of the Interior, HUD, USDA, DOD, TVA)

(http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/stream_restoration/)

Various State Agencies


http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/elpubs/pdf/sr34.pdf

http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/emrrp/pdf/sr03.pdf

http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/wacademy/

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/stream_restoration/

http://www.epa.gov/

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/stream_restoration/newgra.html


Phase 1 getting organized

Phase 2 problem & opportunity identification

Phase 3 developing goals, objectives, &

restoration alternatives

Phase 4 implementing, monitoring,

evaluating, & adapting

from the Stream Corridor Restoration handbook (FISRWG, 1998)

FISRWG, 1998


Phase 1 getting organized

Setting boundaries

Forming an advisory group

Establishing technical teams

Identifying funding sources

Establishing point of contact & a decision structure

Facilitating involvement & information sharing among

participants

Documenting the process

Phase 2 problem & opportunity

identification (data collection & analysis) Definition of existing stream corridor conditions (structure

& function)

Analysis of the cause (disturbances) of altered or impaired

stream corridor conditions

Determination of how management practices might affect

stream corridor structure & function


FISRWG, 1998

Phase 3 developing goals, objectives, &

restoration alternatives Define the desired future condition for everyone on the team

Identify scale considerations

Identify restoration constraints and issues

Define goals and objectives

Restoration alternative selection & design


FISRWG, 1998

Phase 4 implementing, monitoring, evaluating, & adapting Installing restoration measures

Monitoring

Evaluation

Adaptive management


FISRWG, 1998


If it‘s so important, how do we keep track of

the process and progress?

FISRWG watershed planning tool

FISRWG Stream Corridor Restoration

handbook Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group

(FISRWG). 1998. Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles,

Processes, and Practices. By the Federal Interagency Stream

Restoration Working Group. GPO Item No. 0120-A; SuDocs No.

A 57.6/2:EN 3/PT.653. ISBN-0-934213-59-3.

Overview of stream corridors, including physical, chemical and biological

characteristics; Disturbances and developing a watershed management plan;

Applying restoration principles—analysis of corridor condition; restoration

design; restoration installation, monitoring, and adaptive management

Access the handbook here:

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Technical/str

eam_restoration/

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Technical/stream_restoration/

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Technical/stream_restoration/

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/stream_restoration/newgra.html

FISRWG watershed planning tool

FISRWG, 1998

USEPA watershed planning tool

USEPA Watershed Plan Builder USEPA. 2008. Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans to

Restore our Waters. By the US Environmental Protection Agency,

Office of Water Nonpoint Source Control Branch. EPA 841-B-08-

002. Available on-line:

http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/handbook_index.cfm

Focused on threatened and impaired waterbodies, the Clean Water

Act, and TMDLs

Access the Plan Builder here:

http://iaspub.epa.gov/watershedplan/pl

anBuilder.do?pageId=51&navId=39

http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/handbook_index.cfm

http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/handbook_cover

http://iaspub.epa.gov/watershedplan/planBuilder.do?pageId=51&navId=39


Plan name

Email

State where your watershed is located

Primary contact info

Select location

on a map and/or

enter HUC or zip

code

Reason for plan (pick

from drop down

menu)*

Indicate if plan is to

meet regulatory

requirements*

Enhance coastal zone

Enhance park/recreational area

Enhance water security

Improve water quality

Manage future planning/development

Satisfy regulatory requirements

Prevent degradation

Protect drinking/source water

Protect endangered species

Restore/protect habitat

Other

*multiple reasons can be selected

Can be linked to

other plans here

Activities from a drop

down menu*

Activities include:

Coastal wetland estuaries

Commercial Fishing

Dams

Mining

Parks

Low & high density residential

Row crop land

Ultra urban

*multiple activities can be selected

Issues from drop

down menus*

Menus address:

Water quality

Air quality

Land & habitat

Other concerns (e.g., exotic species,

dredging, endangered species

*multiple issues can be selected from

each menu

Pollutants of concern

picked from a drop

down menu*

Including:

Inorganic & organic pollutants

Metals

Nitrogen

Nutrients

Temperature

Pathogens

Pesticides

Sediment

Other

*multiple pollutants can be selected

from each menu

Numerous

stakeholders can be

added


1. Build partnerships

2. Characterize the

watershed

Uses the stakeholder

info you put into the

Watershed Plan

Builder

Based on Watershed Plan

Builder responses to, e.g.,

Activities and Pollutants, the

customized outline

recommends characterizing

only certain aspects of the

watershed

(―grayed‖ out sections are not

relevant to your watershed)

USEPA watershed management framework



2. Characterize the

watershed

3. Set goals/identify

solutions

Uses info collected from

stakeholders and results

from the watershed

characterization, plus

the Reasons for the

Plan from the

Watershed Plan Builder

(again, ―grayed‖ out

sections are not

relevant to your

watershed)




2. Characterize the

watershed

3. Set goals/identify solutions

4. Design implementation

program

Incorporates all of the information from

previous sections and outlines a road

map for how to implement

your program.

The Watershed Plan Builder outline is

used to identify what components should

be included and to what level of detail.


The implementation program includes several features such as the following: 1) A list of the management strategies to be implemented and milestones to track their

implementation

2) A schedule for implementation

3) A list of technical and financial resources needed for implementation

4) A monitoring component to measure the indicators you developed

5) An information/education component, and

6) An evaluation framework for measuring progress and adapting your plan over time.


Links provided

throughout the

outline that

pertain to your

Watershed

Plan Builder

responses,

but many links

are broken

More examples here: http://iaspub.epa.gov/watershedplan/examples.do?pageId=52&navId=40

http://iaspub.epa.gov/watershedplan/examples.do?pageId=52&navId=40

RiverRAT

River Restoration Analysis Tool

NOAA Fisheries and USFWS collaboratively

developed a suite of resources and tools for

evaluating stream restoration and

management project proposals In response to NOAA‘s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service (USFWS), given Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Essential

Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation authorities, and review authority under the Fish and

Wildlife Coordination Act FWCA)

Access the RiverRAT here:

http://iaspub.epa.gov/watershedplan/pl

anBuilder.do?pageId=51&navId=39



RiverRAT

What the RiverRat team recognized: Stream management activities, including some restoration efforts, have

degraded aquatic ecosystems

Site- and reach-scale habitat improvement projects (i.e., piecemeal

projects) have become the default solution to many habitat deficiencies

and the projects are often planned and implemented without proper

consideration of their landscape context, process drivers, or geomorphic

fitness

Failure to recognize these broader scale concerns may lead to poor

project selection and increased potential for project failure

The RiverRAT provides a tool for more efficient, consistent, and

comprehensive reviews of stream management and restoration proposals

All organizations that fund stream projects have an inherent responsibility

to evaluate projects and measure their success relative to stated goals

and objectives

http://www.restorationreview.com/downloads/RiverRAT_Overview_FISC_2010v2.pdf

http://www.restorationreview.com/downloads/RiverRAT_Overview_FISC_2010v2.pdf

Three Tools:

Screening Tool

Checklist

Web-based evaluation Tool

RiverRAT

Skidmore, P. B., C. R. Thorne, B. Cluer, G. R. Pess, J. Castro, T. J. Beechie, and C.C. Shea.

2010. Science base and tools for evaluating stream engineering, management, and restoration

proposals. U.S. Dept. Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC.

All linked to a Science Base for Evaluating Stream Project Proposals

http://restorationreview.com/

http://restorationreview.com/

Science Base Document

Synthesizes the large body of watershed and

fluvial geomorphic science

Widely vetted

Fosters critical thinking

Not a ‗how to manual‘, but a guide to thinking

about ‗why‘ or ‗what are the alternatives‘

Makes the science available and accessible

to project team members

Glossary of terms

Science Base Document

Section 1 covers the tools

Section 2 fluvial geomorphology & stream

habitat

Flow & sediment regimes; stream processes &

the channel boundary; disturbance; channel

classification & incision; stream ecology

Section 3 project development

Problem identification; setting goals &

objectives; project design, implementation,

evaluation

Project screening matrix

The Risk Matrix is intended to assist reviewers

in making an initial assessment of the level of

risk to habitat resources associated with a

proposed project. The matrix will enable

reviewers to assess the risk posed by the

project should it be permitted and, in

particular, to decide whether the risk is

sufficiently high to merit technical assistance

from specialists in other disciplines.

http://www.restorationreview.com/downloads/Science_and_Tools_for_Stream_Projects_2010.pdf


Project screening matrix

x-axis—stream response potential – the inherent potential for the stream

to express morphologic response to disturbance

y-a

xis

—pro

ject

impact pote

ntial –

assess the

overa

ll im

pact pote

ntial of

the p

roje

ct

Project information checklist

The Project Information Checklist is used to

determine whether the project proposal

contains sufficient information to conduct a

comprehensive review. The checklist identifies

the exact information needed for review to

proceed, enabling the review process to be

faster and more efficient.




Use of the checklist, by both project reviewers

& project sponsors, is intended to: clarify reporting expectations

streamline the review process

facilitate consistency among project proposals and their

review

promote thorough reporting that enables review



RiverRat evaluation tool

The River Restoration Assessment Tool

(RiverRAT) provides a framework that guides

reviewers in evaluating a project proposal. The framework encompasses the entire project development

process

It‘s geared toward answering the question ―What are the

potential impacts and risks to resource?‖

It enables a review of project and design integrity with

respect to species or ecosystem recovery.

Project sponsors, stakeholders, and specialists all have

access to RiverRAT



RiverRat evaluation tool

the watershed management process - ub erie summer workshop/week 4/frothingham 20… · the...

Documents