<&• *
                                                         ^w V
               * J?»V >^ •* £ J- **      V -we-*. ~     V ^               x ^^     ^s^^^^^u ^^^^^ 3» fc  „  j   v
               s^,:^^ /  ,Xux  ;£^^>#fe ^,    *
                 .t^                       ^ d. *V*^    vi i-n .  ., ^r '*

                                                ^Bn!ff.
                                                                                 )•  K.^    ^
                   ^  ^!f
                  t^v      , rt*w'
ISlims,
•^,*>5^^Av*5i.'S>.  • •           „   W,      .. n.*"

                         I Vv "^"^



                            ,  "
   -«%;.- .-..V.^-.J^W«^!SV,,,..;       »
                                                                                  V   f
                                                                                                %  \
                                                                                                                      J      4   ™-l
                                                                                                                     ^  * ^    T. A,
•.•".:'•••*'':;•:'•'•'•"• '.'•'' '


-------

-------
United States
Environmental
Protection Agency
Office of
Research and
Development
Office of
Water
EPA/822/F-97-002    April 1997

-------

-------
 Over the past twenty-five years, substantial
 reductions have been achieved in the
 discharge of pollutants into the nation's air,
 lakes, rivers, coastal -waters and ground
 •water. These successes have been achieved
 primarily by controlling point sources of
 pollution and, in the case of groundwater,
 preventing contamination from hazardous
 waste sites. Although these sources continue
 to be an environmental threat in some areas,
 it is clear that the causes of impairment of a
 -water body are as varied as human activity
 itself. For example, our waters and the
 terrestrial systems associated with them
 may be threatened by urban, agricultural,
 or other forms of contaminated runoff:
 landscape modification; over-harvesting of-
 natural resources;  the introduction of exotic
 species; and deposition and recycling of
 pollutants between air, land and water.
 While EPA has focused past efforts
 primarily on particular sources, pollutants,
 or water uses, many remaining threats are
 not so readily amenable to regulatory action
 by the federal government. Therefore, we
 must look for new ways to deal with these
 issues that build upon existing programs,
 but more effectively integrate the assessment
 and management functions  of both local
 and state governments, federal agencies and
 non-governmental organizations.
     Coordinating both regulatory and
 nonregulatory programs to prevent, mitigate
 and restore ecosystem degradation maizes
 good sense for environmental, economic, and
 administrative reasons. For example, by
jointly reviewing the results of assessments
for drinking water protection, pollution
 control, wildlife habitat protection and other
factors, managers from all levels of govern-
 ment can better understand the cumulative
 impacts of human activities, determine the
 most critical problems within a watershed,
 and set priorities for action. In addition to
 the environmental benefits, this approach
 can result in substantial cost savings by
 leveraging,the financial and human resources
 available to local communities.
    Ecological risk assessment explicitly
 evaluates the potential adverse effects that
 human activities have on ecological
 resources, and organizes and presents the
 information in a way relevant to environ-
 mental decision-malting. This assessment
 provides local communities a forum to
 participate in developing management
 options for specific resources in -their
 watershed, coordinates the assessment
 capabilities in existing programs in local,
 state and federal agencies, and develops
 partnerships between government, the
 private sector and the general public.
 The information developed in the risk
 assessment ensures that evaluating threats
 to ecological systems is a conscious step in
 the land and water resource decision-malting
 process, and that the solutions we choose to
 reduce risks to  these ecosystems will permit
 economic growth and development.
    The United States Environmental
 Protection Agency is integrating the princi-
 ples of ecological risk assessment into it's
 decision-making process. The Office of
 Water is developing guidance for conducting
 watershed-scale ecological risk assessments
 as a 'community-based' effort consistent
 with the recently released Watershed
 Approach Framework (EPA 840-S-96-001).
 Concurrent to this effort, and in support of
 other USEPA programs as well, the Office
 of Researc^, and Development is developing
 risk assessment methods and techniques
 to address the relationship between human
 induced stressors and subsequent ecological
 responses.
    In this era of shrinking government,
 our financial and human resources must
 be utilized in the most cost effective manner
possible. By opening the science involved
 in the risk assessment process to the
 ultimate decision-makers, local and state
 government agencies and the general
public, we take  an important step forward
 in this direction.

-------

-------
A watershed is a geographically defined
drainage basin where rain,
springs and other sources
of water  on the
landscape
flow from
high
ground to low
areas and collect
to form streams,
rivers, lakes,
wetlands and estuaries.
to eiraroniental protection?
The adverse affects of environmental
damage occurring across the landscape
are combined in the water as it flows
into our rivers, wetlands and other valued
surface waters. What seems like minor
human impact in one part of the water-
shed may seriously impair it elsewhere
when multiple impacts are combined.
regulations to protect our
valtiie watershed resources?
Only a few problems caused by human
activities can be regulated by the federal
government. Control of industrial
discharges, for example, is a successful
part of the point source permit program
mandated by federal law and regulated
by states. But many problems, like hab-
itat destruction, contaminated surface
  run-off, increased demand for water
      by agricultural and industrial
          users, and nutrient over-
               enrichment require
                   voluntary actions
                    and effective land
                 use practices.
                   s science
         make a difference?
     Implementing management plans
  that are based on good science makes
good sense. Understanding how a
watershed ecosystem functions and
responds.to human impacts is central
to developing a plan that will achieve
desired results. This is why we are
conducting watershed ecological risk
assessments in each of the five
described watersheds.
                                                               (continued...)

-------

-------
rist assessment?
This is a systematic scientific process
for assessing the cause of observed
problems and predicting the ecological
response of watershed resources to
human activities. It depends on partner-
ships with watershed managers, includ-
ing the public, and on partnering among
scientists. It is specifically designed
to answer managers' questions
about how best to protect their valued
watershed resources.
Bat are the essential iireients
for protecting our watersheds?
   11  Partnerships among federal,
       state, and local governments,
       industry, environmental groups,
       and the public working toward
       common environmental goals.

   ii  Science to guide our under-
       standing of what ecological
       values are at risk and why.

   ii  Reasoned management decisions
       that balances environmental
       concerns with socioeconomic
       and political concerns, making
       the environment an equal partner
       at the decision table.

-------

-------