Chapter 1 Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans Introduction to Restore and Protect our waters 1-8
Chapter 1 Introduction Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans to Restore and Protect Our Waters 1-8 Draft
Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans Chapter 2 to Restore and Protect Our waters Overview of watershed Planning Process Handbook Road Map 2. Overview of watershed ntroduction Overview of Watershed Planning Process Planning Process 4 Define Scope of Watershed Planning EFfort hapter Highlights 5 Gather Existing Data and Create an Inventory 6 Identify Data Gaps and Collect Additional Data Using a watershed approach Common features in watershed 7 Analyze Data to Characterize the Watershed planning Steps in the watershed planning 8 Estimate Pollutant Loads process Set Goals and Identify Load Reductions Watershed planning for impaired Common watershed impairments valuate Options and Select Final Summary of nine minimum elements to be included in a watershed plan for impaired waters 13 Implement Watershed Plan and Measure Read this chapter You are unfamiliar with watershed planning concepts You want to know more about water quality standards You don t know the most common water quality impairments in the United You want a list of the nine minimum elements to be included in section 319- funded watershed plans
Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans to Restore and Protect Our Waters Chapter 2 Overview of Watershed Planning Process Draft 2-1 2. Overview of Watershed Planning Process Read this chapter if... • You are unfamiliar with watershed planning concepts • You want to know more about water quality standards • You don’t know the most common water quality impairments in the United States • You want a list of the nine minimum elements to be included in section 319- funded watershed plans Handbook Road Map 1 Introduction 2 Overview of Watershed Planning Process 3 Build Partnerships 4 Define Scope of Watershed Planning Effort 5 Gather Existing Data and Create an Inventory 6 Identify Data Gaps and Collect Additional Data if Needed 7 Analyze Data to Characterize the Watershed and Pollutant Sources 8 Estimate Pollutant Loads 9 Set Goals and Identify Load Reductions 10 Identify Possible Management Strategies 11 Evaluate Options and Select Final Management Strategies 12 Design Implementation Program and Assemble Watershed Plan 13 Implement Watershed Plan and Measure Progress Chapter Highlights < Using a watershed approach < Common features in watershed planning < Steps in the watershed planning process < Watershed planning for impaired waters < Common watershed impairments < Summary of nine minimum elements to be included in a watershed plan for impaired waters
Chapter 2 Overview of watershed Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans Planning Process to Restore and Protect Our Waters 2.1 Why Use a Watershed Approach to Manage Water Resources? Since the late 1980s, watershed organizations, tribes, and federal and state agencies have moved toward managing water quality by using a watershed approach. A watershed approach is a flexible framework for managing water resource quality and quantity within specified drainage areas, or watersheds. This approach includes stakeholder involvement and management actions supported by sound science and appropriate technology. The watershed planning process works within this framework by using a series of cooperative, iterative steps to characterize existing conditions, identify and prioritize problems, define management objectives, develop protection or remediation strategies, and implement and adapt selected actions as ecessary. The outcomes of this process are documented or referenced in a watershed plan. A watershed plan is a strategy that provides assessment and management information for a That Is an Impaired waterbody? geographically defined watershed, including the analyses EPA defines an impaired waterbody as a waterbody actions, participants, and resources related to developing and that does not meet criteria that support its designated implementing the plan The criteria might be nu concentration duration and recurrence intervals for Using a watershed approach to restore impaired waterbodies is various parameters, or they might be narrative and beneficial because it addresses the problems in a holistic describe required conditions such as the absence of manner and the stakeholders in the watershed are actively scum, sludge, odors, or toxic substances involved in selecting the management strategies that will be If the waterbody is impaired, it is placed on the section implemented to solve the problems. Nonpoint source pollution 303(d)list. For each pollutant listed, the state or tribe poses the greatest threat to water quality and is the most must develop a restoration target called a Total significant source of water quality impairment in the nation Maximum Daily Load (TMDL Therefore, EPA is working with states, tribes, and watershed groups to realign its programs and strengthen support fo watershed-based environmental protection programs. Such programs feature local stakeholders joining forces to develop and implement watershed-based plans that make sense for the conditions found in local communities. Specific features of the watershed approach are explained below 2.2 Common Features of the Watershed Planning Process Although each watershed plan emphasizes different issues and reflects unique goals and management strategies, some common features are Watershed Planning ncluded in every watershed planning process. The watershed planning Appendix A includes a selected list of process is iterative, holistic, geographically defined, integrated, and watershed guides published by various state collaborative and federal agencies. These guides might elp you to fulfill state-specific requirements specific issues 2-2
Chapter 2 Overview of Watershed Planning Process Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans to Restore and Protect Our Waters 2-2 Draft EPA defines an impaired waterbody as a waterbody that does not meet criteria that support its designated use. The criteria might be numeric and specify concentration, duration, and recurrence intervals for various parameters, or they might be narrative and describe required conditions such as the absence of scum, sludge, odors, or toxic substances. If the waterbody is impaired, it is placed on the section 303(d) list. For each pollutant listed, the state or tribe must develop a restoration target called a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). KAppendix A includes a selected list of watershed guides published by various state and federal agencies. These guides might help you to fulfill state-specific requirements or provide more in-depth information on specific issues. 2.1 Why Use a Watershed Approach to Manage Water Resources? Since the late 1980s, watershed organizations, tribes, and federal and state agencies have moved toward managing water quality by using a watershed approach. A watershed approach is a flexible framework for managing water resource quality and quantity within specified drainage areas, or watersheds. This approach includes stakeholder involvement and management actions supported by sound science and appropriate technology. The watershed planning process works within this framework by using a series of cooperative, iterative steps to characterize existing conditions, identify and prioritize problems, define management objectives, develop protection or remediation strategies, and implement and adapt selected actions as necessary. The outcomes of this process are documented or referenced in a watershed plan. A watershed plan is a strategy that provides assessment and management information for a geographically defined watershed, including the analyses, actions, participants, and resources related to developing and implementing the plan. Using a watershed approach to restore impaired waterbodies is beneficial because it addresses the problems in a holistic manner and the stakeholders in the watershed are actively involved in selecting the management strategies that will be implemented to solve the problems. Nonpoint source pollution poses the greatest threat to water quality and is the most significant source of water quality impairment in the nation. Therefore, EPA is working with states, tribes, and watershed groups to realign its programs and strengthen support for watershed-based environmental protection programs. Such programs feature local stakeholders joining forces to develop and implement watershed-based plans that make sense for the conditions found in local communities. Specific features of the watershed approach are explained below. 2.2 Common Features of the Watershed Planning Process Although each watershed plan emphasizes different issues and reflects unique goals and management strategies, some common features are included in every watershed planning process. The watershed planning process is iterative, holistic, geographically defined, integrated, and collaborative
Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans Chapter 2 to Restore and Protect our Waters Overview of watershed Planning Process 2.2.1 Watershed Planning ls an Iterative and Adaptive Process EPA recognizes that the processes involved in watershed assessment aK巴 planning, and management are iterative a Change Chan and that targeted actions might not result in complete success during the first or second cycle. It is expected, however, that through adjustments made during the management cycles, water quality improvements can be documented and continuous progress toward attaining 0 water quality standards can be achieved Watershed plans should address all the sources and causes of waterbody impairments and threats; that is, the plans should address not only the sources of the immediate water quality impairment but also any pollutants and sources of pollutants that need to be addressed to ensure the long-term health of the watershed EPA recognizes the difficulty in obtaining watershed-related information Remember with precision and acknowledges that a balanced approach is needed to d plans are ddress this concern. On one hand it is absolutely critical that watershed recommended to implement TMDLs, planners make a reasonable effort to identify significant pollutant source they should be developed holistically specify the management measures that will most effectively address those to consider other impairments and sources, and broadly estimate the expected load reductions that will result threats in the watershed. TmDls Without this analytic framework to provide focus and direction, it is much might focus on specific waterbody segments, sources, or pollutants less likely that projects implemented under the plan can efficiently and whereas the watershed plan should effectively address the nonpoint sources of water quality impairments ncorporate the pollutant-and site- specific TMDL into the larger context On the other hand, EPA recognizes that even if reasonable steps are taken to of the watershed, including obtain and analyze relevant data, the information available during the quallty threats planning stage(within reasonable time and cost constraints)might be limited Additional pollutants Preliminary information and loading estimates might need to be updated over time, accompanied by midcourse corrections in the watershed plan and the activities it promotes. In many cases, several years of implementation may be Threatened waterbodie needed for a project to achieve its goals. EPA fully intends that the watershed .Synergistic effects planning process described in this handbook be implemented in a dynamic and adaptive manner to ensure that implementation of the plan can proceed Development pressures even though some of the information in the watershed plan is imperfect and might need to be modified over time as better information becomes available..Habitat protection /etland restoration/creatio 2-3
Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans to Restore and Protect Our Waters Chapter 2 Overview of Watershed Planning Process Draft 2-3 Although watershed plans are recommended to implement TMDLs, they should be developed holistically to consider other impairments and threats in the watershed. TMDLs might focus on specific waterbody segments, sources, or pollutants, whereas the watershed plan should incorporate the pollutant- and sitespecific TMDL into the larger context of the watershed, including • Additional water quality threats • Additional pollutants • Additional sources • Threatened waterbodies • Synergistic effects • Water quantity issues • Development pressures • Habitat protection • Wetland restoration/creation • Source water protection 2.2.1 Watershed Planning Is an Iterative and Adaptive Process EPA recognizes that the processes involved in watershed assessment, planning, and management are iterative and that targeted actions might not result in complete success during the first or second cycle. It is expected, however, that through adjustments made during the management cycles, water quality improvements can be documented and continuous progress toward attaining water quality standards can be achieved. Watershed plans should address all the sources and causes of waterbody impairments and threats; that is, the plans should address not only the sources of the immediate water quality impairment but also any pollutants and sources of pollutants that need to be addressed to ensure the long-term health of the watershed. EPA recognizes the difficulty in obtaining watershed-related information with precision and acknowledges that a balanced approach is needed to address this concern. On one hand, it is absolutely critical that watershed planners make a reasonable effort to identify significant pollutant sources, specify the management measures that will most effectively address those sources, and broadly estimate the expected load reductions that will result. Without this analytic framework to provide focus and direction, it is much less likely that projects implemented under the plan can efficiently and effectively address the nonpoint sources of water quality impairments. On the other hand, EPA recognizes that even if reasonable steps are taken to obtain and analyze relevant data, the information available during the planning stage (within reasonable time and cost constraints) might be limited. Preliminary information and loading estimates might need to be updated over time, accompanied by midcourse corrections in the watershed plan and the activities it promotes. In many cases, several years of implementation may be needed for a project to achieve its goals. EPA fully intends that the watershed planning process described in this handbook be implemented in a dynamic and adaptive manner to ensure that implementation of the plan can proceed even though some of the information in the watershed plan is imperfect and might need to be modified over time as better information becomes available
Chapter 2 Overview of watershed Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans Planning Process to Restore and Protect Our Waters 2.2.2 Watershed Planning is a holistic Process EPA supports the implementation of holistic watershed plans because this approach usually provides the most technically sound and economically efficient means of addressing water quality problems and is strengthened through the involvement of stakeholders that might have broader concerns than solely attainment of water quality standards(e.g, water supply, aesthetics). This approach will help to expedite cooperative, integrated water resource planning and successful implementation of needed management, thereby facilitating the restoration of water quality. It will also help to ensure that watersheds are addressed in a holistic manner that accounts for the broad variety of stressors and resource protection concerns in the watershed 2.2.3 Watershed Planning Is Geographically Defined By definition, watershed planning focuses on a watershed, a geographic area that is defined by a drainage basin. A Why Watershed Plans Fall watershed plan should address a geographic area large enough to ensure that implementing the plan will address assessment of the value of planning documens n road The Center for Watershed Protection conducted a bre all the major sources and causes of impairments and threats protecting water resources and identified a number of to the waterbody under review. Although there is no reasons why some plans had failed rigorous definition or delineation of this concept, the general intent is to avoid a focus on single waterbody Planning activities were conducted at too great a scale. segments or other narrowly defined areas that do not The plan was a one-time study rather than a long-term provide an opportunity for addressing watershed stressors management process in a rational. efficient and economical manner. At the same Stakeholder involvement and local ownershi time, the scale should not be so large that it hampers the bility to conduct detailed analyses or minimizes the The plan skirted land use/management issues in the probability of involvement by key stakeholders and successful implementation. If you select a scale that is too The document was too long or complex broad, you might be able only to conduct cursory The recommendations were too general assessments and will not be able to accurately link the impacts back to the sources and causes Plans that bundle subwatersheds with similar sets of problems or address a common stressor(e.g, sediment, nutrients)across multiple related watersheds can be particularly useful in terms of planning and implementation efficiency and the strategic use of administrative resources. c Chapters 4 and 7 provide more specific guidance on defining the geographic extent of your planning effort
Chapter 2 Overview of Watershed Planning Process Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans to Restore and Protect Our Waters 2-4 Draft The Center for Watershed Protection conducted a broad assessment of the value of planning documents in protecting water resources and identified a number of reasons why some plans had failed: • Planning activities were conducted at too great a scale. • The plan was a one-time study rather than a long-term management process. • Stakeholder involvement and local ownership were lacking. • The plan skirted land use/management issues in the watershed. • The document was too long or complex. • The recommendations were too general. 2.2.2 Watershed Planning Is a Holistic Process EPA supports the implementation of holistic watershed plans because this approach usually provides the most technically sound and economically efficient means of addressing water quality problems and is strengthened through the involvement of stakeholders that might have broader concerns than solely attainment of water quality standards (e.g., water supply, aesthetics). This approach will help to expedite cooperative, integrated water resource planning and successful implementation of needed management, thereby facilitating the restoration of water quality. It will also help to ensure that watersheds are addressed in a holistic manner that accounts for the broad variety of stressors and resource protection concerns in the watershed. 2.2.3 Watershed Planning Is Geographically Defined By definition, watershed planning focuses on a watershed, a geographic area that is defined by a drainage basin. A watershed plan should address a geographic area large enough to ensure that implementing the plan will address all the major sources and causes of impairments and threats to the waterbody under review. Although there is no rigorous definition or delineation of this concept, the general intent is to avoid a focus on single waterbody segments or other narrowly defined areas that do not provide an opportunity for addressing watershed stressors in a rational, efficient, and economical manner. At the same time, the scale should not be so large that it hampers the ability to conduct detailed analyses or minimizes the probability of involvement by key stakeholders and successful implementation. If you select a scale that is too broad, you might be able only to conduct cursory assessments and will not be able to accurately link the impacts back to the sources and causes. Plans that bundle subwatersheds with similar sets of problems or address a common stressor (e.g., sediment, nutrients) across multiple related watersheds can be particularly useful in terms of planning and implementation efficiency and the strategic use of administrative resources. KChapters 4 and 7 provide more specific guidance on defining the geographic extent of your planning effort