- Email: [email protected]
The watershed protection approach
e
Pergamon
Copynghl
PH: S0273-1223(96)00208-9
Waf. Sci. Tech Vol. 33. No. 4-5. pp. 17-21.1996. @
1996 fA WQ. Published by Elsevier Science Lid. Pnmed In Oreal Bnlam. All nghlS reserved. 0273-1223/96 $15'00 + 0'00
THE WATERSHED PROTECTION APPROACH Donald J. Brady United States Environmental Protection Agency. Chicago, Illinois, USA 1
ABSTRACT The Water Protection Approach (WPA) by USEPA is outlined. The historical development of the approach is of an old date, starting since 1980. Definition of the approach and experience to date is summarized. It is not a new programm, but a new way of thinking about how environmental programs have to be managed. Copyright © 1996 IAWQ. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
KEYWORDS Water quality; water quality management.
INTRODUCTION The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is encouraging State water quality and other agencies to adopt a Watershed Protection Approach (WPA)2 to protect and maintain water quality and address related environmental problems. The WPA is not a new program. It is an evolutionary maturation of existing water quality efforts that builds upon the successes of programs implemented since the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (now commonly called the Clean Water Act (CW A». USEPA believes that WPA provides the framework necessary to evaluate multiple stressors and cumulative effects. The WPA also provides the financial, technical and social implementing mechanisms needed to address water quality impairment on a site specific, project level scale. Consistent with the basic structure and responsibilities of the CWA, implementation of WPA ultimately depends upon continuing cooperation among States, Tribes, local governments, land owners and a variety of Federal agencies. This paper briefly discusses: I) the recent evolution of WPA; 2) defines the concept; 3) summarizes experience to date; and 4) implementation issues.
I This paper represents the views and work of many in US EPA, notably USEPA staff and managers in the Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds. It also draws upon the author's interpretation of experience with other Federal and State agencies in the United States. 2 The Watershed Protection Approach advocated by the Office of Water is part of US EPA's agency wide effort to promote an ecosystem approach to deal with multiple stressors and Impacts from all sources in all media 17
D.J. BRADY
18
WPA: AN EVOLVING CONCEPT In 1890 the U.S. Inland Waterways Commission noted that "... each river system from its headwaters in the mountains to its mouth at the coast is an integrated system and must be treated as such." Other earlier examples related to protecting water quality on a watershed basis include the establishment of the Adirondacks Forest Reserve (1890); establishment of the first National Forests (1891); establishment of the Soil Conservation Service (now known as the Natural Resource Conservation Service), the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Rio Grande Commission, the Columbia River Commission (all established in the 1930's); the basin-wide water supply commission in Oregon (1965); and the Water Resources Planning Act (1965). The Watershed focus illustrated by these examples continues with the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (1954), the Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act (1960), the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act (1974) and the ongoing President's Forest Plan and Salmon Recovery efforts. Ongoing USEPA examples include the Chesapeake Bay Program, the Clean Lakes Program, the Gulf of Mexico Program, Comprehensive State Groundwater Protection Strategies and the National Estuary Program. The WPA is not a new idea but does represent a new synthesis of ideas and approaches and a new emphasis for water quality programs at USEPA. The CWA amendments in 1972 established strong direction for USEPA and the States. The amendments assigned priority to developing and implementing technology based standards for industrial dischargers, providing funding for municipalities to construct wastewater treatment works, promulgating numeric, chemical-specific criteria and adopting those, or more stringent criteria, in State water quality standards, establishing, administering and, in many cases, delegating authority for States to run effluent permit programs under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and providing an active and meaningful permit enforcement program. The 1987 amendments to the CWA contained additional requirements for State and USEPA identification and control of nonpoint source impacts. The CWA is not the only statute that requires State, Federal and local actions to restore, protect and maintain the environment. Some other principal statutes that contain environmentally related requirements administered by USEPA include the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and Superfund. Examples of environmentally related statutes administered by other agencies include requirements for forest planning, endangered species. mining and agriculture. Finally, allocation of water is governed by different legal doctrines in the western and eastern halves of the country and administered by a network of Federal, State and local agencies. Watersheds have not been a key focus of State and USEPA water quality programs in the past. 3 Why, then, is USEPA endorsing this approach? This endorsement springs from a number of factors: Reco~nition of past ~ains and losses - The influential internal USEPA report, Unfinished Business and Reducing Risk, identified major gaps in water quality management resulting from the effects of
nonpoint sources and the lack of EPA activities addressing degradation and loss of aquatic habitat. The site-specific/land-use nature of these problems make them difficult to solve. An ecological perspective that includes wetlands, nonpoint sources, biological criteria and ecological risk assessment is needed to build upon the successes of the past twenty years.
definition of water Quality - Water quality must meet the physical. chemical and biological integrity mandate of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Great success has been achieved in point source control. Increasingly, however, evidence suggests that even as numeric chemical criteria are met, other sources of stress such as siltation. channelization, impoundments and loss of riparian vegetation are precluding the attainment of designated uses established by State water quality
Emer~in~
3 States are responsible for carrying out many of the requirements contained in the CWA. Thus USEPA and the States. (along with other governmental and non-governmental organizations) work together to manage and improve water quality.
The watershed protection approach
19
standards. Full implementation of this mandate serves as a springboard to the attainment of broader ecological goals encompassing land, air and water. Implementation focused on individual legal requirements - Water quality programs have concentrated on establishing solid, implementable laws over the past 30 years. This has sometimes led to specific goals and activities rather than integrated use of all available CW A tools. Opportunities to coordinate planning and permit programs, for example, were not fully pursued. Similarly, EPA and other Federal agencies have not always collaborated fully and effectively even where individual statutory mandates required similar activities or goals among different agencies. Multi-media problems/solutions/uses - Protection of public health, healthier ecosystems and pollution prevention may require different emphases and activities. These often go beyond the controls reSUlting from national criteria and uniform levels of industrial and municipal point source treatment. Solving multi-media problems and balancing competing uses must occur on a watershed level considering the specific mix of causal sources and conditions. Increased need for coordination - Finally, remaining water quality problems require specific solutions in specific geographic areas. They cannot be solved by blanket implementation of national criteria or regulations. The WPA is holistic. It integrates surface and ground water quality, water quantity and aquatic and human health issues. WPA also recognizes that greater environmental success will be achieved if goals and objectives are formulated in ecological rather than programmatic or administrative terms. Acres of wetlands protected, miles of aquatic habitat restored, ample potable water are more effective goals than numbers of permits or grants issued. It is USEPA's answer to the charge that by "concentrating on sources and pollutants, USEPA is loosing sight of the resource." WATERSHED PROTECTION APPROACH DEFINED Water quality and other agencies have different ways of implementing water quality programs. WPA is not a regulatory approach and USEPA's definition reflects an understanding of the diversity and robustness of implementation ofWPA. USEPA defines WPA by four key principles. Principle I: Sound. integrated science focused on a specific geographic area. Hydrological dermition of the area to be worked in is a major distinguishing characteristic of the WPA. Watersheds can vary in scale and reflect different geographical features such as ridgelines, coastlines, aquifer, physiographic provinces or eco• regions. The scale of the watershed can be adjusted appropriate to the problem. This focus on a landscape unit ensures that scientific and technical assessments and solutions will be brought to bear efficiently and effectively. Moreover, through working with on a landscape scale it becomes easier to integrate social, economic and cultural factors into planning and implementation. Principle 2: Stakeholder involvement. This principle is based on the premise that people protect what they love. Stakeholders are all those with any interest in the watershed including individuals, environmental groups, industries discharging in the watershed, municipal waste treatment plants, public and private water suppliers, agricultural producers and others operating in the watershed and all Federal. State and local governmental agencies with interests or responsibilities in the watershed. Extensive involvement of stakeholders as problems are identified and solutions developed results in a synergistic combination of resources, energies and expertise. Solutions have credibility with stakeholders who participated in their development. Principle 3: Intel:rated actions. Integrated actions combine the expertise, knowledge, authority and resources of stakeholders. Integrated actions mean that each stakeholder uses its individual authorities and expertise in combination with the authorities and expertise of other stakeholders to implement needed controls and other actions such as restoration, public education and monitoring. Local governments, might for example,
20
0.1. BRADY
institute zoning requirements, which in conjunction with actions by a Federal agency, will have the desired effect. Alone, neither the local nor Federal action would have brought about the desired result. Principle 4: Evaluation. Understanding the effects of actions taken is the key to eventual success in water quality management. WP A demands that evaluation measures be designed into the process from the formation of goals to the definition of success. Experience with a number of States indicates other important conditions including the importance of monitoring, assignment of priorities and targeting of resources and the need for effective action plans and implementation. The significance of monitoring cannot be overemphasized. A good understanding of stressors and sources is crucial. The data provided by effective monitoring programs are the basis for all future actions. Experience indicates that a comprehensive study of the watershed may reveal unexpected information and change the scope of the project. Similarly, it is important that WPA help to set priorities and target resources to priority areas. Prioritization is usually necessary between watersheds and within watersheds. Priority setting and targeting methods depend on the scope of the project. Finally, WPA is not simply a planning or monitoring exercise. Implicit in the concept is implementation. Controls and remediation activities that are developed on a watershed basis and draw upon a myriad of authorities generally have a better chance of solving the problem and being implemented. EXPERIENCE TO DATE WPA is being implemented by a variety of Federal agencies, private sector organizations like the Nature Conservancy and in a number of States. USEPA has assisted more than fifteen States to examine their existing water quality programs and adopt WPA approaches. Additional States are also adopting WPA approaches. The WPA approaches adopted by States vary. Some States are setting up comprehensive approaches that reorganize all of their existing water quality activities and cover the entire State. In this case, for example, State agencies delineate watersheds and establish activities in each of the watersheds. In some cases, States adopt a rotating schedule for monitoring, plan development, implementation and evaluation in different basins over a period of years. Other States have implemented a number of watershed projects that do not cover the entire area of the State. In this case, a State agency determines that a particular problem in a watershed is amenable to a cooperative solution and a limited number of projects are initiated. While the latter approach may be appropriate for State given political and administrative realities USEPA believes that the full benefit of WPA will be realized when States adopt WPAs for all program activities for the entire area of the State. These benefits are already being realized by States that have pursued the more comprehensive approach. There are over 1000 watershed projects currently underway.4 EPA involvement in these projects varies. In some projects, USEPA is playing a leading role in organizing stakeholders and providing technical assistance, information or funding. In others, it is participating but not leading the project. Finally, in others, other agencies and organizations are playing more significant roles than USEPA. USEPA would like for this approach to occur everyWhere, but recognizes that it does not have the resources to be directly engaged in projects in even a small fraction of the nation's watersheds. Therefore USEPA is devoting its resources to creating a framework for WPA in States, tribes and territories. Direct involvement by USEPA will occur in local watershed projects as needed, particularly when national interests or resources are at stake.
4 EPA is currently assembling summaries of these projects in electronic form. Printed summaries of some of these projects are listed in the references to this anicle.
The watershed protectIOn approach
21
It is too early to categorize results of these projects. It is fair to say, however, that many projects have been initiated with much greater cooperation from more stakeholders than previously. Many projects have adopted explicit ecological goals and identified solutions that comport with those goals. Now however, actual water quality results and improvements must be documented.
ISSUES Earlier in this paper it was noted that WPA is not a new program. It is however, a new way of thinking about how environmental programs are managed. As such, there are a number of implementation issues. These include: WPA is not a panacea - WPA offers many advantages to improve management of environmental programs. It is versatile and adaptable to different institutional, legal and technical conditions. It is not appropriate in all places at all times. The challenge for environmental managers will be to apply the concept in appropriate scale, time and financial situations. WPA does not automatically replace any and all existinl: program approaches - Some ongoing activities should and must continue. Enforcement and response to emergencies cannot be tied entirely to WPA. Certain resource management challenges are regional or even continental, in scale. The challenge to managers here is similar to the one noted immediately above. Technical tools are essential - New methods of assessment and remediation are needed. They must be comprehensive, able to identify and measure cumulative and additive effects and be applicable on
varying scales. Ecological models linked to geographic information system technology hold great promise and must be developed and applied with increased urgency. Measures of success - Success must be demonstrated ecologically by new environmentally based measures. Biological indicators are key to this way of demonstrating success. Resources - While there is anecdotal evidence that WPA delivers additional environmental protection for the same or lesser costs additional data are needed. CONCLUSION WPA holds great promise for integrating all of our activities in watersheds and achieving real progress in water quality and aquatic resource protection. Stakeholders must embrace the idea and cooperatively implement the concept. USEPA and others must evaluate the results in terms of real improvement in environmental quality and be prepared to adjust ideas and approaches as results over time indicate. USEPA believes that the full benefit of WPA will be realized when States adopt WPAs for all program activities for the entire area of the State. These benefits are already being realized by States that have pursued the more comprehensive approach. REFERENCES USEPA. 1995 [in press) Watershed Protection: A Project Focus. EPA 841-R-95-004. Washington. D.C: Office of Wetlands. Oceans and Watersheds USEPA. 1995 [in press) Watershed Protection: A Statewide Focus. USEPA. 1995. The Watershed Protection Approach: /993/94 Activity Report. EPA 840-S-94-OO1 USEPA. 1990. Reducing Risk: Setting Priorities and Strategies for Environmental Protection. EPA SAB-EC-90-021. Washington. D.C: Science Advisory Board.
MY 33:4/5-8
Pergamon
Copynghl
PH: S0273-1223(96)00208-9
Waf. Sci. Tech Vol. 33. No. 4-5. pp. 17-21.1996. @
1996 fA WQ. Published by Elsevier Science Lid. Pnmed In Oreal Bnlam. All nghlS reserved. 0273-1223/96 $15'00 + 0'00
THE WATERSHED PROTECTION APPROACH Donald J. Brady United States Environmental Protection Agency. Chicago, Illinois, USA 1
ABSTRACT The Water Protection Approach (WPA) by USEPA is outlined. The historical development of the approach is of an old date, starting since 1980. Definition of the approach and experience to date is summarized. It is not a new programm, but a new way of thinking about how environmental programs have to be managed. Copyright © 1996 IAWQ. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
KEYWORDS Water quality; water quality management.
INTRODUCTION The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is encouraging State water quality and other agencies to adopt a Watershed Protection Approach (WPA)2 to protect and maintain water quality and address related environmental problems. The WPA is not a new program. It is an evolutionary maturation of existing water quality efforts that builds upon the successes of programs implemented since the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (now commonly called the Clean Water Act (CW A». USEPA believes that WPA provides the framework necessary to evaluate multiple stressors and cumulative effects. The WPA also provides the financial, technical and social implementing mechanisms needed to address water quality impairment on a site specific, project level scale. Consistent with the basic structure and responsibilities of the CWA, implementation of WPA ultimately depends upon continuing cooperation among States, Tribes, local governments, land owners and a variety of Federal agencies. This paper briefly discusses: I) the recent evolution of WPA; 2) defines the concept; 3) summarizes experience to date; and 4) implementation issues.
I This paper represents the views and work of many in US EPA, notably USEPA staff and managers in the Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds. It also draws upon the author's interpretation of experience with other Federal and State agencies in the United States. 2 The Watershed Protection Approach advocated by the Office of Water is part of US EPA's agency wide effort to promote an ecosystem approach to deal with multiple stressors and Impacts from all sources in all media 17
D.J. BRADY
18
WPA: AN EVOLVING CONCEPT In 1890 the U.S. Inland Waterways Commission noted that "... each river system from its headwaters in the mountains to its mouth at the coast is an integrated system and must be treated as such." Other earlier examples related to protecting water quality on a watershed basis include the establishment of the Adirondacks Forest Reserve (1890); establishment of the first National Forests (1891); establishment of the Soil Conservation Service (now known as the Natural Resource Conservation Service), the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Rio Grande Commission, the Columbia River Commission (all established in the 1930's); the basin-wide water supply commission in Oregon (1965); and the Water Resources Planning Act (1965). The Watershed focus illustrated by these examples continues with the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (1954), the Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act (1960), the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act (1974) and the ongoing President's Forest Plan and Salmon Recovery efforts. Ongoing USEPA examples include the Chesapeake Bay Program, the Clean Lakes Program, the Gulf of Mexico Program, Comprehensive State Groundwater Protection Strategies and the National Estuary Program. The WPA is not a new idea but does represent a new synthesis of ideas and approaches and a new emphasis for water quality programs at USEPA. The CWA amendments in 1972 established strong direction for USEPA and the States. The amendments assigned priority to developing and implementing technology based standards for industrial dischargers, providing funding for municipalities to construct wastewater treatment works, promulgating numeric, chemical-specific criteria and adopting those, or more stringent criteria, in State water quality standards, establishing, administering and, in many cases, delegating authority for States to run effluent permit programs under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and providing an active and meaningful permit enforcement program. The 1987 amendments to the CWA contained additional requirements for State and USEPA identification and control of nonpoint source impacts. The CWA is not the only statute that requires State, Federal and local actions to restore, protect and maintain the environment. Some other principal statutes that contain environmentally related requirements administered by USEPA include the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and Superfund. Examples of environmentally related statutes administered by other agencies include requirements for forest planning, endangered species. mining and agriculture. Finally, allocation of water is governed by different legal doctrines in the western and eastern halves of the country and administered by a network of Federal, State and local agencies. Watersheds have not been a key focus of State and USEPA water quality programs in the past. 3 Why, then, is USEPA endorsing this approach? This endorsement springs from a number of factors: Reco~nition of past ~ains and losses - The influential internal USEPA report, Unfinished Business and Reducing Risk, identified major gaps in water quality management resulting from the effects of
nonpoint sources and the lack of EPA activities addressing degradation and loss of aquatic habitat. The site-specific/land-use nature of these problems make them difficult to solve. An ecological perspective that includes wetlands, nonpoint sources, biological criteria and ecological risk assessment is needed to build upon the successes of the past twenty years.
definition of water Quality - Water quality must meet the physical. chemical and biological integrity mandate of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Great success has been achieved in point source control. Increasingly, however, evidence suggests that even as numeric chemical criteria are met, other sources of stress such as siltation. channelization, impoundments and loss of riparian vegetation are precluding the attainment of designated uses established by State water quality
Emer~in~
3 States are responsible for carrying out many of the requirements contained in the CWA. Thus USEPA and the States. (along with other governmental and non-governmental organizations) work together to manage and improve water quality.
The watershed protection approach
19
standards. Full implementation of this mandate serves as a springboard to the attainment of broader ecological goals encompassing land, air and water. Implementation focused on individual legal requirements - Water quality programs have concentrated on establishing solid, implementable laws over the past 30 years. This has sometimes led to specific goals and activities rather than integrated use of all available CW A tools. Opportunities to coordinate planning and permit programs, for example, were not fully pursued. Similarly, EPA and other Federal agencies have not always collaborated fully and effectively even where individual statutory mandates required similar activities or goals among different agencies. Multi-media problems/solutions/uses - Protection of public health, healthier ecosystems and pollution prevention may require different emphases and activities. These often go beyond the controls reSUlting from national criteria and uniform levels of industrial and municipal point source treatment. Solving multi-media problems and balancing competing uses must occur on a watershed level considering the specific mix of causal sources and conditions. Increased need for coordination - Finally, remaining water quality problems require specific solutions in specific geographic areas. They cannot be solved by blanket implementation of national criteria or regulations. The WPA is holistic. It integrates surface and ground water quality, water quantity and aquatic and human health issues. WPA also recognizes that greater environmental success will be achieved if goals and objectives are formulated in ecological rather than programmatic or administrative terms. Acres of wetlands protected, miles of aquatic habitat restored, ample potable water are more effective goals than numbers of permits or grants issued. It is USEPA's answer to the charge that by "concentrating on sources and pollutants, USEPA is loosing sight of the resource." WATERSHED PROTECTION APPROACH DEFINED Water quality and other agencies have different ways of implementing water quality programs. WPA is not a regulatory approach and USEPA's definition reflects an understanding of the diversity and robustness of implementation ofWPA. USEPA defines WPA by four key principles. Principle I: Sound. integrated science focused on a specific geographic area. Hydrological dermition of the area to be worked in is a major distinguishing characteristic of the WPA. Watersheds can vary in scale and reflect different geographical features such as ridgelines, coastlines, aquifer, physiographic provinces or eco• regions. The scale of the watershed can be adjusted appropriate to the problem. This focus on a landscape unit ensures that scientific and technical assessments and solutions will be brought to bear efficiently and effectively. Moreover, through working with on a landscape scale it becomes easier to integrate social, economic and cultural factors into planning and implementation. Principle 2: Stakeholder involvement. This principle is based on the premise that people protect what they love. Stakeholders are all those with any interest in the watershed including individuals, environmental groups, industries discharging in the watershed, municipal waste treatment plants, public and private water suppliers, agricultural producers and others operating in the watershed and all Federal. State and local governmental agencies with interests or responsibilities in the watershed. Extensive involvement of stakeholders as problems are identified and solutions developed results in a synergistic combination of resources, energies and expertise. Solutions have credibility with stakeholders who participated in their development. Principle 3: Intel:rated actions. Integrated actions combine the expertise, knowledge, authority and resources of stakeholders. Integrated actions mean that each stakeholder uses its individual authorities and expertise in combination with the authorities and expertise of other stakeholders to implement needed controls and other actions such as restoration, public education and monitoring. Local governments, might for example,
20
0.1. BRADY
institute zoning requirements, which in conjunction with actions by a Federal agency, will have the desired effect. Alone, neither the local nor Federal action would have brought about the desired result. Principle 4: Evaluation. Understanding the effects of actions taken is the key to eventual success in water quality management. WP A demands that evaluation measures be designed into the process from the formation of goals to the definition of success. Experience with a number of States indicates other important conditions including the importance of monitoring, assignment of priorities and targeting of resources and the need for effective action plans and implementation. The significance of monitoring cannot be overemphasized. A good understanding of stressors and sources is crucial. The data provided by effective monitoring programs are the basis for all future actions. Experience indicates that a comprehensive study of the watershed may reveal unexpected information and change the scope of the project. Similarly, it is important that WPA help to set priorities and target resources to priority areas. Prioritization is usually necessary between watersheds and within watersheds. Priority setting and targeting methods depend on the scope of the project. Finally, WPA is not simply a planning or monitoring exercise. Implicit in the concept is implementation. Controls and remediation activities that are developed on a watershed basis and draw upon a myriad of authorities generally have a better chance of solving the problem and being implemented. EXPERIENCE TO DATE WPA is being implemented by a variety of Federal agencies, private sector organizations like the Nature Conservancy and in a number of States. USEPA has assisted more than fifteen States to examine their existing water quality programs and adopt WPA approaches. Additional States are also adopting WPA approaches. The WPA approaches adopted by States vary. Some States are setting up comprehensive approaches that reorganize all of their existing water quality activities and cover the entire State. In this case, for example, State agencies delineate watersheds and establish activities in each of the watersheds. In some cases, States adopt a rotating schedule for monitoring, plan development, implementation and evaluation in different basins over a period of years. Other States have implemented a number of watershed projects that do not cover the entire area of the State. In this case, a State agency determines that a particular problem in a watershed is amenable to a cooperative solution and a limited number of projects are initiated. While the latter approach may be appropriate for State given political and administrative realities USEPA believes that the full benefit of WPA will be realized when States adopt WPAs for all program activities for the entire area of the State. These benefits are already being realized by States that have pursued the more comprehensive approach. There are over 1000 watershed projects currently underway.4 EPA involvement in these projects varies. In some projects, USEPA is playing a leading role in organizing stakeholders and providing technical assistance, information or funding. In others, it is participating but not leading the project. Finally, in others, other agencies and organizations are playing more significant roles than USEPA. USEPA would like for this approach to occur everyWhere, but recognizes that it does not have the resources to be directly engaged in projects in even a small fraction of the nation's watersheds. Therefore USEPA is devoting its resources to creating a framework for WPA in States, tribes and territories. Direct involvement by USEPA will occur in local watershed projects as needed, particularly when national interests or resources are at stake.
4 EPA is currently assembling summaries of these projects in electronic form. Printed summaries of some of these projects are listed in the references to this anicle.
The watershed protectIOn approach
21
It is too early to categorize results of these projects. It is fair to say, however, that many projects have been initiated with much greater cooperation from more stakeholders than previously. Many projects have adopted explicit ecological goals and identified solutions that comport with those goals. Now however, actual water quality results and improvements must be documented.
ISSUES Earlier in this paper it was noted that WPA is not a new program. It is however, a new way of thinking about how environmental programs are managed. As such, there are a number of implementation issues. These include: WPA is not a panacea - WPA offers many advantages to improve management of environmental programs. It is versatile and adaptable to different institutional, legal and technical conditions. It is not appropriate in all places at all times. The challenge for environmental managers will be to apply the concept in appropriate scale, time and financial situations. WPA does not automatically replace any and all existinl: program approaches - Some ongoing activities should and must continue. Enforcement and response to emergencies cannot be tied entirely to WPA. Certain resource management challenges are regional or even continental, in scale. The challenge to managers here is similar to the one noted immediately above. Technical tools are essential - New methods of assessment and remediation are needed. They must be comprehensive, able to identify and measure cumulative and additive effects and be applicable on
varying scales. Ecological models linked to geographic information system technology hold great promise and must be developed and applied with increased urgency. Measures of success - Success must be demonstrated ecologically by new environmentally based measures. Biological indicators are key to this way of demonstrating success. Resources - While there is anecdotal evidence that WPA delivers additional environmental protection for the same or lesser costs additional data are needed. CONCLUSION WPA holds great promise for integrating all of our activities in watersheds and achieving real progress in water quality and aquatic resource protection. Stakeholders must embrace the idea and cooperatively implement the concept. USEPA and others must evaluate the results in terms of real improvement in environmental quality and be prepared to adjust ideas and approaches as results over time indicate. USEPA believes that the full benefit of WPA will be realized when States adopt WPAs for all program activities for the entire area of the State. These benefits are already being realized by States that have pursued the more comprehensive approach. REFERENCES USEPA. 1995 [in press) Watershed Protection: A Project Focus. EPA 841-R-95-004. Washington. D.C: Office of Wetlands. Oceans and Watersheds USEPA. 1995 [in press) Watershed Protection: A Statewide Focus. USEPA. 1995. The Watershed Protection Approach: /993/94 Activity Report. EPA 840-S-94-OO1 USEPA. 1990. Reducing Risk: Setting Priorities and Strategies for Environmental Protection. EPA SAB-EC-90-021. Washington. D.C: Science Advisory Board.
MY 33:4/5-8