United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water (WH-553)
Washington, DC 20460
EPA-841-N-93-001
January-February 1993
#26
&EPA NFS News-Notes
The Condition of the Water-Related Environment
The Management and Ecological Restoration of Watersheds
The Control of Nonpoint Sources of Water Pollution
Notes on Environmental Education
EDITOR'S COMMENTARY: It is broadly recognized that today's struggle to free our nation from pollution, to
control nonpoint sources of water pollution, and to restore ecological balance to our watersheds will
require many changes in the way that we do things — behavior modification, as it is referred to in ac-
ademic circles. It is generally conceded that changing attitudes and habits might just be a bit tougher,
or at least different, than designing, financing, and building a sewage treatment plant. We've gleaned
a half-dozen encouraging notes about environmental education from our recent mail and readings
that we present here in the lead-off section of this issue of NFS News-Notes. The final report of Water
Quality 2000 (reported on below under the heading of Reauthorizing the Clean Water Act) has these
important words to say:
Encourage Public Education to Promote a Conservation Ethic
As a society, we must encourage public education that helps instill in our children
and the general citizenry a conservation ethic that applies to materials, water, and
energy. Basic societal changes are necessary to eliminate, whenever possible,
impairment of water quality and aquatic ecosystems. Such change hinges on
promoting pollution prevention as a priority over pollution regulation and short-term
economic gains. In the short run, we may have to rely on government regulatory
and economic incentives to promote conservation within the context of watershed
planning and management.... In the long run, however, an intensive public
education and awareness campaign is the only way we can equip citizens with the
necessary tools for such a basic societal change.
We are encouraged. Beginnings, looking to basic societal change, are underway.
— Hal Wise, Editor
INSIDE THIS ISSUE
Notes on Environmental Education
Student Volunteers Do The Job 2
Alabama's Environmental Education Initiative 3
Conservation for Third Graders 4
SCS to the Rescue 5
High School Coastal Studies In Oregon 7
Notes on Water Quality Management
Land Use and Instream Water Quality 9
New Water Quality/Ecology Symposium 11
Rural Water Quality Program Evaluated 12
Reauthorizing The Clean Water Act
Water Quality 2000 Recommendations 13
Economic Issues For Farmers on Rewrite 15
News From The States and Localities
Olympia, Washington Trains Local Businesses 16
Residential Water Quality in Virginia 17
Tennessee/National Parks Clean Up Mines 18
South Carolina Clean Water Farming 19
Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control News 20
Riparian & Watershed Management Notes
Wyoming's Watershed-Ecosystem Management Center 21
California Equals Riparian Restoration w/Economic
Development 21
Reviews
Water Quality Standards on Indian Lands 22
Handbook on Protecting Sensitive Areas 23
Manual for Greenhouse and Nursery Operators 23
Announcements
List of Wildlife Consultants Being Developed 24
How To Use The NFS BBS 24
DATEBOOK
THE COUPON
.25
.27
-------
The Conservation Connection:
Student Volunteers Do The Job
Imagine an eager, motivated volunteer crew doing quality work on needed projects your
agency can't get funded. Sound like the impossible dream? The Student Conservation
Association has recently completed several watershed-focused projects for federal agencies
and has more planned for 1993.
SCA has been matchmaking successfully for the environment since 1957. The public, nonprofit
educational organization provides high school and college students and other adults with the
opportunity to volunteer their services for the better management and conservation of our
nation's parks, public lands, and natural resources.
Students Work in Chesapeake Bay, National Forest Projects
One of several programs created by SCA is the Resource Assistant Program. In 1992, this
program assigned volunteer college students and other adults to work in the Chesapeake Bay
EstuW Program, where they helped assess the impact of commercial hydraulic clamming on
submerged aquatic vegetation. Other volunteers helped develop an atlas of waterfowl habitat
to aid local governments direct growth and land development away from habitats. A third
group completed a Chesapeake Bay waterfowl status and trends report.
In addition one volunteer worked at the Merritt Island Field Station of the National Fisheries
Research Center on the Florida coast. This project assisted U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
biologists conducting ecological research and environmental management on estuarme
habitats, fisheries, and endangered species.
Two other Resource Assistant projects were with the Forest Service Forestry Sciences Lab of
the Intermountain Research Station in Idaho and involved hydrologic studies and erosion
control. One was in the rugged headwaters of the south fork of the Salmon River. The other
was in the Priest Lake Ranger District in the northernmost part of the panhandle.
On the Oregon-California border, four volunteers assisted with all aspects of a research project
investigating the potential impacts of agricultural drainwater on fish and wildlife within the
Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuge Complex.
The approximately 1,000 volunteers with SCA's Resource Assistant Program also participated
in backcountry trail patrols, wildlife research, archaeological surveys and forest management.
This program also carries out an international exchange of volunteers with Russia.
Training and field experience in this program are designed to advance academic, career, and
personal goals. A Resource Assistant alumnus who worked with the Bureau of Land
Management in Oregon said, "I think my program with the SCA was the smartest way I could
have spent my summer. I learned more in twelve weeks than I would have learned from a
whole shelf of books or several classes."
Benefits are a Two-Way Street
Short-staffed conservation and natural resource agencies contract with SCA to recruit and
support volunteer work crews to perform various assignments for the agency. The connection
benefits both parties; the agency is supplied with eager, motivated, and low-cost work crews,
and volunteers get work experience. By working in the field for such agencies as the National
Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land
Management, and other public and private agencies, volunteers receive the kind of exposure
and experience that has encouraged nearly 70 percent of SCA graduates to seek careers in
conservation.
Conceived by Elizabeth Cushman Titus when she was a college senior in the mid-1950's, SCA
today manages a number of diverse programs designed to encourage; career development and
leadership training for youth from a spectrum of socio-economic backgrounds.
Besides the Resource Assistant Program, other SCA programs are
• The High School Program. It involves over 400 student volunteers a year in
summer work projects such as trail construction and ecological restoration in
-------
The Conservation
Connection:
Student Volunteers
Do The Job
(continued)
wilderness areas. The program also coordinates international exchange projects
involving students from Mexico and Russia.
• The Mexico-U.S. Conservation Leadership Exchange (MUSCLE). MUSCLE
brings together young people from Mexico and the United States for natural resource
conservation, leadership training, conservation education, and increased cultural
understanding. Intercultural conservation crews participate in outdoor work projects
that help protect public lands in Mexico and the United States.
• The New Hampshire Conservation Corps. Trains economically disadvantaged
and at-risk youth.
• The Henry S. Francis, Jr. Wilderness Work Skills Program. Provides training in
trail work and environmental restoration for SCA high school program supervisors,
conservation corps members, and federal agency personnel.
• Conservation Career Development Program. Encourages participation in
conservation management by minorities and disadvantaged youth. Unlike the other
programs, CCDP pays its participants a small stipend or fellowship.
SCA also produces a magazine called EARTH WORK which addresses the career needs and
interests of the conservation community.
1993 Project Planned For Mexican and American Students
One MUSCLE project planned for the summer of 1993 will put eight high school students from
Mexico and the U.S. to work on watershed protection projects, mostly streambank
stabilization, in Plumas National Forest in California. While working, the group will camp in
an isolated area of the forest; after completing the projects, the crew take a week-long
backpacking trip in the Sierra Nevada Mountains.
Recently, SCA has received the prestigious Chevron Conservation Award and several national
and state Take Pride in America Awards for its innovative and effective efforts to involve
youth in the stewardship of public lands and natural resources. It has also been designated as
a "Point of Light" by President George Bush. Founder Elizabeth Titus, still actively involved
with SCA, has received several honors, including the President's Volunteer Action Award.
Being ahead of its time has only strengthened SCA's conviction that, ultimately, the protection
of our natural environment depends on the vision, inspiration, and education of an
enlightened youth.
[For more information, contact Wally Elton, Resource Assistance Program Director, or Hay Auger, High
School Program Director, at SCA, PO Box 550, Charlestown, NH 03603. Phone: (603) 543-1700.]
Alabama's Environmental Education Initiative:
Department of Environmental Management Opts for Education
Legacy, Partners in Environmental Education
\ leg-a-cy \ 1: a gift by will especially of money or other personal property.
2: something received from an ancestor or predecessor or from the past
Our legacy to future generations should be a clean, healthful environment. Our natural
resources—water, air, and land—can no longer be taken for granted. Whatever we do, our
actions have an impact on the environment. The legacy of a clean environment begins with an
understanding of our environmental options.
Legacy, Partners in Environmental Education, is a group of people in Alabama who are
working together so that our natural resources will be around for generations to come.
Legacy's initial focus was to bring together all educational and environmental groups to
provide a comprehensive program without duplicating efforts.
Before this program was initiated, several agencies, different groups, and educators were
conducting environmental programs. But most people didn't really know where to turn for
-------
Alabama's
Environmental
Education Initiative:
Department of
Environmental
Management Opts
for Education
(continued)
resources or information. By bringing everyone together, a comprehensive environmental
education program for Alabama can be achieved. Legacy programs will include an
environmental curriculum for grades K-12, a citizen's awareness program, and programs to
enable industries, corporations, small businesses, and vocational groups to make more
informed decisions about Alabama's environment.
The Alabama Environmental Education Initiative
The Alabama Environmental Education Initiative (AEEI) took form in January 1992, with the
Alabama Department of Environmental Management as facilitator. It organized Legacy, Inc., a
not-for-profit corporation that implements the program. Legacy is working cooperatively with
representatives of environmental groups and businesses to provide comprehensive
environmental education without duplicating efforts.
The AEEI was developed in response to the National Environmental Education Act of 1990,
environmental concerns of citizens, and priorities of the 1989 Alabama Environmental
Protection Plan which listed four educational provisions:
1. Environmental education policy, goals, and related plans for the state;
2. Incorporation of environmental education into K-12 curriculum;
3. Networking of environmental information/education to state and community
decision-makers, business and industry, and pertinent agencies and organizations; and
4. An on-going program of environmental information/ education outreach to the
general public.
By bringing an environmental emphasis into courses of study and providing teacher training,
the initiative encourages environmental awareness in teachers, students, and parents. Legacy
believes this awareness should lead to environmental benefits through responsible actions and
better informed decisions, which are not always possible through regulatory programs.
The Alabama Department of Education has indicated its interest in this proposal and its
willingness to offer support if the effort is comprehensive and produces material and
information that would be useful in K-12 education.
Universities, the public, and some business organizations have offered to assist. The
Environmental Protection Agency has also indicated its strong support of this effort in
Alabama. Other federal agencies will be invited to participate.
Beginning January 2,1993, a beautiful special edition environmental state license plate will be
available for Alabama cars and trucks for a tax-deductible $50 annual fee. Proceeds above costs
from the tags are designated exclusively for Legacy, Inc. Funding will also be solicited from
sources other than the general and education funds, including grants from EPA and other
agencies, donations, and fund raisers.
[Information is available from Patti Hurley, Alabama Department of Environmental Management, 1751
Congressman W. L Dickinson Drive, Montgomery, Alabama 36130. Phone: (205) 271-7938.]
The Mr. and Mrs. Fish Water Conservation and
Reuse Education Program for Third Graders
EDITOR'S NOTE: We found this inspired new program in the Summer 1992 edition of the Water Connec-
tion, a newsletter published by the New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission
(NEIWPCC).
The New England Interstate Environmental Training Center (NEIETC) and NEIWPCC, in
cooperation with EPA Region I, have developed the Mr. and Mrs. Fish Water Conservation and
Reuse Education Program for third graders. The program is designed to spread the word about
why clean water and water conservation are so important and about what people can do to
make a difference. To accomplish this, the internationally acclaimed, award-winning duo Jeff
and Deb Sandier, known as "Mr. and Mrs. Fish," of Portland, Maine have been enlisted to help
develop the program and present it in their inimitable style to third graders throughout Maine.
-------
The Mr. and Mrs..
Fish Water
Conservation and
Reuse Education
Program for Third
Graders
(continued)
Using scripts that are tailored to the location of the presentation, "Mr. and Mrs. Fish"
introduce their audiences to characters like "Ebenezer Sewage," who is visited by three aquatic
spirits before he learns not to waste water. The "Fishes" explore the question of where the
clean water that pours out of their faucet comes from and where it goes after it is washed
down the drain. Kids from the audience help play the various components of a wastewater
treatment plant and the aquatic animals that either sink or swim depending on the quality of
the discharge.
The Sandlers have visited children in more than 20 states and 16 countries, dramatically
extolling the wonders of the aquatic environment by successfully blending wit with wisdom.
Using a one-hour interactive skit, the program for third graders has proven in its premieres
this spring to be an exciting and innovative way of teaching. Students also receive a personal
"Certificate of Attendance" that lists conservation practices that children can do. Teachers
receive a training package that they can use to help integrate this material into their classroom
curriculum.
Although the pilot program is state and federally funded, NEIETC has been working to obtain
additional support from private funding sources so the program can move into a
"full-steam-ahead," privately/publicly funded phase by fall of 1992. It will then be able to
offer more programs to schools throughout New England. The program is offered at no direct
cost to school systems, except for any cost associated with busing students from various
elementary schools to a central school auditorium.
[For more information, contact Kirk J. Laffin, NEIETC, 2 Fort Road, South Portland, ME 04106,]
SCS to the Rescue
Outdoor Classrooms in Maryland
When the Maryland state budget mandated severe cuts for school science programs, Queen
Anne's County Soil Conservation District established outdoor classrooms in five of the
district's elementary and middle schools.
Mary Ann Skilling, a soil conservation planner for the Queen Anne's County Soil
Conservation District, worked with science teachers at all the district's schools to develop
outdoor classroom plans that incorporated wildlife habitat areas, forested areas, flower and
vegetable gardens, and site assessment of erosion-control measures. Children at two of the
schools noticed a severe erosion problem in the area where they wanted to plan a nature trail.
With help from Skilling and Donald Dawkins, SCS soil conservation technician, Annapolis,
Maryland, an area design that included a wetland was developed.
SCS field staff have worked for decades with thousands of local schools to help set up outdoor
classrooms, and this year they have taken advantage of the enthusiasm of the American people
for conserving, protecting, and learning about our natural resources to set a goal of an outdoor
classroom on every school site in the country. Also, they now have the assistance of Earth
Team volunteers. The Earth Team is a dedicated, seasoned corps of citizens who want to help
conserve the nation's soil and water resources. Putting their talents to work in outdoor
classrooms looks like a perfect match. The agency is developing a "how-to" packet to assist in
establishing outdoor classrooms. The program offers an area for students and teachers to
conduct natural resource investigations and provides an inexpensive, immediate "field trip"
location.
The Soil Conservation Service is involved in a variety of conservation education projects,
many of them planned in conjunction with schools and educators, and others designed by
county soil conservation districts for the use of children and adults.
Program Emphasizes Interdependence
A group of educators, conservationists, and agricultural leaders developed a curriculum
project called "Food, Land, and People" to address gaps in environmental and agricultural
education.
-------
SCS to the Rescue
(continued)
Food, Land, and People had its origins in 1988 at a national goals workshop. Educators,
conservationists, and agricultural leaders talked about how naive many school children are
today concerning the interdependence of food, land, and people. They identified several gaps
in environmental and agricultural education:
• Missing links and relationships between the environment and agriculture
• Agriculture's role in modern society
• Cultural and societal impacts and demands on the local environment and agriculture
They pooled their resources and funding efforts to address these shortcomings through a
supplemental curriculum project in environmental education for kindergarten through 12th
grade called "Food, Land, and People." It was designed to enhance the outdoor classroom
concept and complement the U.S. Department of Agriculture's " Ag in the Classroom" and
other youth development programs, such as 4-H and Future Farmers of America. Eight
"showcase" lesson activities underwent pilot testing in the spring of 1992 in five
states—California, Colorado, Montana, New Hampshire, and Texas—and an ambitious list of
future lesson activities is waiting in the wings for later pilot testing.
Students Blow Horn at San Miguel Field Day
Tierra y Monies Soil and Water Conservation District sponsors ah annual field day in San
Miguel County, New Mexico, to bring students closer to the land of their heritage. Six years
ago, Soil Conservation Service District Conservationist Elmer Veeder proposed the outdoor
classroom concept to the San Miguel County district school board. San Miguel, like many rural
counties in the country, had experienced a migration from farms and small villages to larger
towns. The board wanted to develop a tangible program that would show results and bring
their young people closer to their native country. So they adapted the outdoor classroom
concept to a field day. The field day is actually two days at two different sites to facilitate
participation from schools across the county's 3 million acres. ;
Eight learning stations staffed by state and federal agency personnel feature demonstrations
and hands-on sessions on natural resources. Topics include wildlife management, predator
control, soil and water conservation, forestry, and fire fighting.
Two favorites are the sheep-shearing demonstrations and the State Park, and Recreation
Division's patrol boat that has a warning blast that students can sound. The field day itself has
grown into several spinoffs over the years and has resulted in Arbor Day events, Soil and
Water Stewardship Week activities, essay and coloring contests, and sponsorship of students at
the New Mexico Forestry Camp.
Plains Conservation Center in Colorado
West Arapahoe Soil Conservation District (SCD) owns and runs the Plains Conservation
Center, located in Aurora, Colorado, situated on 1,900 acres of rapidly vanishing mixed-grass
prairie that once covered almost 40 percent of the state. The Soil Conservation Service works
with the West Arapahoe SCD to develop workshops and day camps at the center, to introduce
conservation improvements to the land, to erect structures, and to help children and adults
begin to realize the impact humanity has on the fragile prairies ecosystem. "Though many of
our programs are geared toward children, I think we also reach many adults," said Fran
Branchard, PCC codirector. The Center's educational programs explain the dynamics of the
High Plains grasslands, and, more broadly, help visitors develop a personal conservation ethic.
"The Center offers seminars on a variety of subjects from use of xeriscapes (water-conserving
landscapes) to wildlife photography," noted Tudi Arneil, West Arapahoe SCD board president.
High school students along with many members of the Friends of the Plains Conservation
Center are volunteers at the Center.
Teachers Are All WET?
Participants in a new nationwide water education program—Project Water Education for
Teachers (WET)—are learning how to prepare young people to deal effectively with complex
water issues such as flooding, drought, water allocation, and water quality.
Project WET gained recognition as a "model" youth water education program in North Dakota
during the mid-1980's. In 1989, the Western Watercourse—a water resources education
-------
SCS to the Rescue
, (continued)
program at Montana State University—set out to duplicate the success of North Dakota's
program and to expand on it. Soil and water conservation districts cosponsor Project WET at
, the state level, and Soil Conservation Service specialists speak on a variety of water-related
topics. The U.S. Department of the Interior's Bureau of Reclamation will fund Project WET
nationally. The Western Watercourse and the Western Regional Environmental Education
Council will conduct at least five regional writing conferences to create original materials,
including the Project WET Science and Math Activity Guide. Especially important in Project
WET is helping teachers help students understand how important water is to all users—for
example, to municipalities, farmers and ranchers, recreationists, fish and wildlife, power
utilities, and various industries—and how essential it is for future social and economic
prosperity.
Teaching the Teachers
In Georgia, Columbia County Soil and Water Conservation District worked with Columbia
County Board of Education to organize a teachers' conservation workshop to give teachers the
tools, information, and resources necessary to teach natural resource conservation. "Experts on
local natural resources can provide new insight and are available in every soil and water
conservation district," said Philip Hadarits, Soil Conservation Service district conservationist
for Columbia and Richmond counties in Georgia. "And the best way to reach most people is to
have the experts teach the teachers," he added. Each day of a typical 5-day workshop for
teachers is designed to focus on a different conservation agency or topic, including SCS, the
Georgia Forestry Commission, the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, urban
conservation, and conservation education.
A survey was conducted between March and June 1991 to determine what Soil Conservation
Service employees and conservation district officials and employees think about conservation
education. The survey responses concluded that conservation education should be a high
priority of SCS, and half of the respondents identified the primary audience for conservation
education as students and educators. Almost all agreed on the need to focus conservation
education efforts on the importance of soil and water conservation. William Richards, Chief of
SCS, says, "Working with teachers and students is an important aspect of SCS's effort, because
it passes along an understanding about and a respect for the environment to a new generation
of Americans."
[The above information was taken from the Winter 1992 issue of Soil and Water Conservation News. Send
inquiries to Editor, Soil and Water Conservation News, Office of Public Affairs, Soil Conservation Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, P.O.Box 2890, Washington, D.C. 20013-2890.]
High School Coastal Studies and
Technology Center In Northwest Oregon
EDITOR'S NOTE: We predict great results from this kind of interaction between schools and communities.
Resource Study and Technology Becomes Curriculum
One hundred twenty-five ninth-grade students are the research staff of a new nonprofit
corporation for coastal studies in Seaside, Oregon. Called the Coastal Studies and Technology
Center, the corporation has been established at Seaside High School. Students study natural
resource, land use, and economic issues that reflect environmental needs in the community;
topics are proposed either by the program director or the students.
Since the traditional model that uses schools as the training ground for students to "become"
active citizens does not seem to fit the current pace of society, rapid changes in resource use,
and an ever-expanding technology, the Center focuses on providing opportunities for young
citizens to become active participants now, instead of waiting until graduation. Students
participate in the center by becoming student staffmembers, filling important positions in the
center and joining a study team. Student staffmembers thus develop important concepts and
skills through participation and study that emphasize the development of finished products
that contribute to their local coastal community.
-------
High School
Coastal Studies and
Technology Center
In Northwest Oregon
(continued)
Neal Maine, Special Projects Director at the Center, says the historic "teacher" position has
been changed to "program director" to reflect the move from the teacher-based model that has
dominated education for so long. Even the students had to be "deprogrammed" from their
traditionally passive role, he said, so they could accept the responsibility of their active roles as
research staff.
Studies at the Center are not classified as traditional school subjects; the day-to-day program is
driven by relevant, current local issues. Students perform studies and develop finished
products with assistance as needed in any discipline. Special attention is given to helping
students develop the necessary technological skill and providing access to knowledge that will
help them complete the projects in a usable format. Community organizations or interest
groups then receive the completed study.
Support for Center From Many Sources
Support for the program is multifaceted; EPA made a $5,000 grant through the Environmental
Education Act to hire students as research assistants, and the local school district pays the
teachers' salaries. Local businesses, Portland State University, resource-based study groups,
local, state, and federal agencies, industries, foundations, and a host of other organizations
have made grants and have provided extensive technological support. They also support the
active participation of students in the hands-on study of coastal resources and issues.
A wide variety of technical and field equipment is available to the student researchers,
including six computer work stations, a remote sensing meteorology station, an ozone
monitoring station, and a satellite downlink station for receiving weather satellite data.
Students network with 70 other high schools around the world for cooperative studies
through the Global Lab Project. Their field survey equipment includes a Global Positioning
System and computer-based Graphic Information System to support computer mapping.
Contributions to Community
An ecological framework has been developed to guide the studies and interface with other
projects going on the region. Such a framework helps build credibility with the variety of
groups and individuals cooperating in studies conducted by the staff. One of the key elements
of the center is the organization of student staff and educators to work cooperatively with
citizens, resource managers, and researchers on local studies.
A nearby estuary is the site for many of the resource study projects. Some completed or current
projects include the following:
• Participating in wetland studies as a part of a World Wetlands Watch Program
involving 30 other schools around the world.
• Serving as research assistants in a state-funded study of the impacts of trampling on
intertidal areas in the north coast.
• Monitoring created wetlands through cooperative study with EPA Wetlands
Division.
• Participating in a two-year cooperative study with National Marine Fisheries on
temporal and spacial distribution of juvenile fish in the lower Columbia River.
• Participating in global plot studies in cooperation with 70 high schools around the
world through the Global Lab Project. The Center's study plot for the program is
located in a newly established salt marsh in the local estuary.
• Studying the ecological impact of a local "spring break." The final report was
presented to the city council and study committee. Students now serve on that
committee.
• Sponsoring public agency forums and teleconferences for other students and
community members. :
• Working with a professional film maker to produce a film called "Coastal Change,
Past and Future."
• Assisting in a geological study to trace the history of tsunamis in the local area.
8
-------
High School Students and community members have worked together on a number of projects as well,
Coastal Studies and including
Technology Center m ^ summer program to map and inventory estuary islands.
In Northwest Oregon • ,
(continued) • A drift bird study.
• The cataloging of thousands of dietary remains from a local 2500 year-old Native
American residence site.
The Coastal Studies and Technology Center also includes a staff development component
where local educators and teachers from the region develop field techniques and upgrade their
technology skills. For example, a three-day wetlands ecology project for Oregon teachers was
held in cooperation with Portland State University, and next summer, the Center will serve as
the study site for the Coastal Wetlands Institute for Educators.
Special Projects Director Maine feels that student participation in projects that make important
contributions to the local, regional, and world community makes good sense for the future.
Learning effective use of technology in the context of real-world studies also makes the Center
a highly useful resource both for young citizens and for their community partners, he said.
[For more information, contact Mike Brown, Seaside High School, 1901 N. Holladay, Seaside, Oregon
97138. Phone: (503) 738-5586. Or contact Neal Maine, Seaside Schools, 1801 S. Franklin, Seaside,
Oregon 97138. Phone: (503) 738-5591.]
Notes on Water Quality Management
Relating Land Use and Buffer Areas to In-Stream
Water Quality: The Salt Fork Watershed in Illinois
by John Tippett, Research Triangle Institute and
Karen Guglielmone, Tetra Tech, Inc.
Properly sized riparian buffers (or filters) can nearly eliminate the effects of nutrient runoff on
a nearby waterbody. Nonpoint source managers have known this for years. But, until now, it
has been difficult to prove to land owners and land use planners without long-term,
sometimes extensive (and expensive) demonstration projects. Technology—computers,
digitizing equipment, geographic information systems, etc.—has changed all that.
Using the Salt Fork watershed in east-central Illinois, researchers for the Illinois State Natural
Survey (ISNS) have developed a prototype computer program that allows local decision-makers
in the central corn belt plains to evaluate and compare the effects of various land use changes
on the quality of local waters, and to see how the use of riparian buffers can mitigate these
potential impacts. With this prototype, an operator enters the current land use configuration
and the proposed land use changes, and the system estimates the water quality impacts that are
likely to occur at any location within the watershed as a result of changes in nutrient loading.
The Study
This project began when the ISNS decided to conduct a study to
1. examine the empirical relationships that exist between the land use/cover patterns in
a watershed and in-stream nutrient concentrations, and
2. provide information to assist in the formulation of watershed-level planning and
management methodologies.1
ISNS researchers chose to conduct their study on the Salt Fork watershed, a 500-square mile
drainage to the Vermilion River severely impacted by the nutrients and sediment in urban and
agricultural runoff. The watershed is typical of those found in the central corn belt plains.
ISNS set about collecting water quality data from December 1983 through December 1984 at 22
sampling stations throughout the Salt Fork watershed. They measured nitrate-nitrogen,
ammonia-nitrogen, nitrite-nitrogen, turbidity, minimum and maximum biweekly
Osborne, L.L., and M.J. Wiley. 1988. Empirical relationships between land use/cover and stream water quality in an agricultural
watershed. Journal of Environmental Management 26:9-27; and Wiley, M.J., LL Osborne, and R.W. Larrimore. 1990. Longitudinal
structure of an agricultural prairies river system and its relationship to current stream ecosystem theory. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci.
47:373-384.
-------
Relating Land Use
and Buffer Areas to
In-Stream Water Quality:
The Salt Fork
Watershed in Illinois
(continued)
temperatures, specific conductance, pH, and soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP) and entered
the information into a computer database.
The watershed boundaries for each sampling station were digitized from U.S. Geological
Survey topographic maps, and stream networks were digitized from EROS High Altitude
photos. This information was entered into ARC/INFO geographic information system (GIS).
ISNS also collected land use/cover data on the Salt Fork watershed for use as data layers in
the GIS. Using National High Altitude Program aerial photographs, they established five
categories of land use/cover (agriculture, urban, forest, lake, and barren land), and digitized
the acreage of each category into ARC/INFO. From this, ISNS researchers determined that
about 90 percent of the watershed is cultivated in row crops, primarily corn and soybeans, and
that the watershed's urban areas—Champaign-Urbana and Rantoul—-comprise approximately
5 percent of the overall land area. The cities dominate the watershed's upper reaches. Another
5 percent of the watershed is made up of forested lands, barren areas, and wetlands.
ARC/INFO was also used to determine the total area of each land use/cover category within
five riparian buffer zones (less than 100 feet, from 100 to 200 feet, from 200 to 400 feet, from 400
to 1,000 feet, and greater than 1,000 feet) around the stream channel.
Next, ISNS developed a series of 40 equations to describe the response of instream nutrient
concentrations as a function of land use/cover patterns and location within the watershed.
These equations became part of a computer program to demonstrate their potential
application to land use/water quality planning.
The first test run, on a 48-square mile subwatershed, proposed converting 100 acres of
agricultural land to urban land. The scenario was run for each of the five; riparian buffer zones.
It is not surprising that the model predicted in-stream nutrient concentrations would increase
as a result of this land use change. However, by running the model using the different buffers,
ISNS showed that the impact of the land use change could be mitigated. The model predicted
an almost negligible change in in-stream SRP and nitrate concentrations when a buffer zone
larger than 1,000 feet was maintained; a 30 percent increase in SRP and a 20 percent increase in
nitrates when a buffer between 400 and 1,000 feet was maintained; approximately a 78 percent
increase in SRP and a 55 percent increase in nitrates when a buffer between 200 and 400 feet
was maintained; a 140 percent increase in SRP and, approximately, a 95 percent increase in
nitrates when a buffer between 100 and 200 feet was maintained; and almost a 180 percent
increase in SRP and 140 percent increase in nitrates with a buffer of less than 100 feet.
Obviously, larger riparian buffer zones protected Salt Fork water quality better.
Implications for Watershed Management and as a Tool for TMDLs
The Salt Fork watershed study quantified the benefits provided by riparian buffers. Watershed
managers can use this information in several ways. ,
• Special attention should be paid to waterbodies with minimal riparian buffers when
identifying and prioritizing impaired waters. Nonbuffered stream reaches are likely
to have substantially higher nonpoint source loadings than stream reaches buffered
by as little as 200 feet.
• Special attention should be paid to waterbodies with minimal riparian buffers when
locating other types of nonpoint source controls, such as BMPs. It is in nonbuffered
areas that BMPs may prove most effective in protecting water quality. By allocating
BMPs to nonbuffered areas, states could increase the cost-effectiveness of
implementing nonpoint source controls, especially those required to meet the load
allocations specified by a total maximum daily load (TMDL). In addition,
management measures that involve the protection or creation of riparian buffers
may prove invaluable in supplementing other types of BMPs.
• Integrating nonpoint source loading models with the GIS buffering techniques
developed for this study could refine predictive capability. Refined models more
accurately predict the potential water quality changes associated with implementing
BMPs at any location within a watershed. This, in turn, would provide
decision-makers with more solid information from which to allocate loads within a
TMDL.
[For more information on the Salt Fork Watershed Study contact Lewis L. Osborne, Aquatic Biology
Section, Illinois State Natural History Survey, 607 £ Peabody Drive, Champaign, IL 61820, phone (237)
244-2139.]
1O
-------
Wafer Environment Federation Forms New Water
Quality/Ecology Symposium; Conference Sets Record
EDITOR'S NOTE: The following article was submitted by Harvey Olem, Chairman of Water Environment
Federation's new Surface Water Quality and Ecology Symposium.
A record 13,000 attendees and 557 exhibitors converged on New Orleans for the Water
Environment Federation's (WEF, formerly Water Pollution Control Federation) 65th Annual
Conference and Exposition, September 20-24,1992.
Nearly all major conference activities were staged in the vast New Orleans Convention Center,
including 17 preconference seminars, the week's 74 technical sessions, and the final closing
session.
On Monday, President Roger J. Dolan highlighted the need for increased communication and
information exchange, sentiments echoed by those following him in the opening session.
"Environmental protection is a worldwide concern," Dolan said, "Many solutions to correct
worldwide environmental concerns will depend on yet undeveloped and communicated
scientific and technological knowledge." This increased communication is vital to the
Federation's vision, he said.
In his address at the opening session, Poul Harremoes, a professor at the Technical University
of Denmark and the winner of the 1992 Stockholm Water Prize, focused on society's role in
reducing pollution, especially from diffuse sources. "We can no longer deal with water supply,
water runoff, and sewers as separate issues," he said. "The problems of pollution are related to
every element of society in the broadest and the basic sense of the word."
EPA Assistant Administrator for Water Lajuana K. Wilcher, stressed the need for
environmental stewardship as well as sound, sustainable development policies that carefully
manage the earth's natural resources. "We as a world must learn to do more to develop
sustainable technology and alter lifestyles so that we live more in harmony with the Earth,"
she said. Wilcher noted that much progress has been made since the Clean Water Act of 1972,
but pollution from wet weather runoff and nonpoint sources must continue to be addressed.
New Surface Water Quality and Ecology Symposium Added
Among the 74 technical sessions presented during the conference were seven sessions making
up the newly created Surface Water Quality and Ecology Symposium.
The symposium provides a new and cohesive, high quality technical program, marrying the
programs of committees on ecology, marine water quality, nonpoint sources, toxic substances
and air quality impacts. The new symposium joins WEF's original six symposia. "Having a
symposium devoted exclusively to water quality and ecological issues helps WEF live up to its
new name and broad focus on preserving water quality," said Maureen Novotne, WEF staff
liaison.
This year, the sessions included topics such as identification, reduction, and management of
toxic substances; stormwater impacts; environmental monitoring and assessment; water
quality modeling and planning; and nonpoint sources. Most of the sessions were very well
attended, averaging 150-200 people. Nearly 40 papers were included in a proceedings
distributed at the meeting.
"We were very pleased at the interest in the new symposium and look forward to putting
together high quality sessions for the technical program next year in Anaheim," Novotne said.
"In fact, the symposium organizers find that more and more colleagues in the water quality
and ecology field are looking to WEF to provide leadership in this area."
Next year, the Surface Water Quality and Ecology Symposium hopes to sponsor an additional
session on coastal water quality issues. At its February meeting, it will finalize the sessions for
next year's Anaheim technical program. A call for abstracts is included in the Datebook section
of this issue of Neius-Notes.
[For more information, contact Harvey Olem, 1020 Eden Street, Suite 205, Herndon, VA 22070. Phone:
(703) 709-0099.]
11
-------
Performance of the Ten-Year
Rural Clean Water Program Evaluated
EDITOR'S NOTE: The following article was prepared by Judith Gale, a staff .member of the Water Quality
Group at North Carolina State University. Thank you, Judith. !
In September, the North Carolina State University Water Quality Group released a summary
report evaluating the Rural Clean Water Program (RCWP), a federally sponsored nonpoint
source pollution control program initiated in 1980 as an experimental effort to address
agricultural NFS pollution. The evaluation was conducted by the National Water Quality
Evaluation Project (NWQEP) at North Carolina State University in cooperation with the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the EPA.
The Rural Clean Water Program is one of the few national NPS pollution control programs
that has combined land treatment and water quality monitoring to document NPS pollution
control effectiveness. Monitoring results have been used to adjust and reifine land treatment
practices designed to control NPS pollution. The RCWP was administered by the USD A -
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service in consultation with EPA. The USDA-SCS
and Extension Service and many other federal, state, and local agencies also participated.
With a total appropriation of $64 million, the RCWP funded 21 experimental watershed
projects representing a wide range of impaired water uses. Projects were located in Alabama,
Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee-Kentucky,
Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Landowner participation was voluntary, with cost
sharing and technical assistance offered as incentives for implementing best management
practices. Five RCWP projects received additional federal funding for comprehensive
monitoring and evaluation.
The RCWP experience provides valuable information for current and future NPS control
programs. RCWP projects have contributed significantly to our body of knowledge about NPS
pollution and control technology, the effectiveness of BMPs, and the role of voluntary cost
share programs in reducing agricultural NPS pollution. The following are a few of the many
contributions and accomplishments of the RCWP projects:
• Florida: Fencing, water management, and animal waste management systems in
the Taylor Creek-Nubbin Slough RCWP project have reduced phosphorus
concentrations in water entering Lake Okeechobee by more than 50 percent.
• Delaware: Water quality monitoring in the Approquinimink River RCWP project
documented a 60 percent decrease in phosphorus and a 90 percent decrease in
sediment reaching impaired waterbodies as the result of conservation tillage and
animal waste management BMPs. Improved fertilizer management cut the preproject
phosphorus application rate in half.
• Oregon: Innovative animal waste management systems installed on dairies in the
Tillamook Bay project reduced bacterial contamination of oyster beds in the bay,
resulting in the reopening of shellfish beds to commercial and recreational harvesting.
• Vermont: The St. Albans Bay project successfully employed a paired watershed
study to document the pollutant export reduction associated with changing from the
common practice of spreading manure on frozen ground to the manure management
BMP. Significant reductions in indicator bacteria were documented In tributaries.
The evaluation of the Rural Clean Water Program is based on the findings from mid- and
post-project on-site evaluations of the 21 RCWP projects. Additional information was obtained
from a short answer questionnaire completed by project personnel, a telephone survey of
farmers in project areas who did and did not participate in RCWP projects, project ten-year
and annual reports, and technical assistance provided by NWQEP to the RCWP projects
during the past ten years.
The report describes the structure and objectives of the RCWP; articulates lessons learned from
the RCWP about the design, organization, funding, management, implementation, monitoring
and evaluation of agricultural NPS pollution control programs and projects; and provides a
brief synopsis of each RCWP project. The lessons focus primarily on experimental NPS
pollution control projects designed to scientifically evaluate the effectiveness of land treatment
strategies in improving water quality. ;
12
-------
Performance of the The evaluation of the RCWP should be of interest to legislators and government officials,
Ten-Year federal and state NFS program managers, water quality project personnel, water resource
Rural Clean Water managers and planners, and other natural resource management professionals.
Program Evaluated [Copies of the Summary Report: Evaluation of the Experimental Rural Clean Water Program may be
(continued) ordered from Janet Young, NCSU Water Quality Group, 615 Oberlin Road, Suite 100, Raleigh, N.C.
27605-1126. Phone: (919) 515-3723. Currently, copies are free. Later reprints will be available at cost. A
more extensive report on the RCWP evaluation will be published next year.]
Reauthorizing The Clean Water Act
Water Quality 2000 Coalition
Calls For Changes In U.S. Water Policy
In November, Water Quality 2000—a unique and diverse coalition of industry, environmental
groups, government, academics, and professional and scientific societies—issued its report
calling for major changes in U.S. policies and programs to protect water resources. The
document, A National Water Agenda for the 21st Century, proposes a new, integrated national
policy to achieve the Water Quality 2000 vision: "Society living in harmony with healthy
natural systems."
The group's deliberative and policy development process, which began in 1989, involved over
80 organizations, often major competing interest groups.
-'Implementing the vision will in many instances require fundamental changes in our
government institutions, manufacturing or farming practices, and individual lifestyles," said
Paul H. Woodruff, chairman of the Water Quality 2000 Steering Committee. Woodruff,
president of Environmental Resources Management, Inc. in Exton, Pa., and a representative of
the Water Environment Federation, called the report "a significant milestone in the national
clean water debate."
He also said, "Our recommendations should be of great value to the new Congress and
Administration, as well as state and local officials, business leaders, educators, and others
concerned with protecting water resources."
Robert Adler, senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington,
D.C., and steering committee vice chairman, said, "Despite twenty years of notable progress
under the Clean Water Act, we still have not met the basic goals of the law—to restore the
health of the nation's rivers, lakes and coastal waters. In a remarkable consensus-building
process, Water Quality 2000 identified the reasons for our remaining water quality problems
and proposed constructive solutions. This agreement proves that by working together, we can
reach agreement on the best ways to solve serious environmental problems. But we now face
the hard part—we need the resources and commitment to implement Water Quality 2000's
wide-ranging recommendations."
"Although much progress has been made in improving the quality of the nation's waters since
the first Clean Water Act was passed in 1972, more remains to be done," said John B. Coleman,
corporate environmental affairs manager for the DuPont Company in Wilmington, Del., and
steering committee member. "The Water Quality 2000 process has been a model for integrating
divergent views, and the report provides a framework for meaningful improvements in water
quality. DuPont and the other industry members of Water Quality 2000 are committed to
doing our part and to working with other groups to bring about the continuous improvement
needed."
Watershed Approach Central to Strategies Implementation
Water Quality 2000's new integrated, holistic national policy to provide for improved
protection of surface and ground waters is comprised of three interrelated strategies:
• pollution prevention
• increased individual and collective responsibility for protecting water resources
• a reorientation of water resource programs and institutions along natural watershed
boundaries
1 For background on Water Quality 2000's earlier Phase II report, Challenges for the Future, which identified the problems facing surface
water, groundwater, and drinking water, see News-Notes #23 (August-September 1992).
__ ———
-------
Water Quality 2000
Coalition
Calls For Changes
In U.S. Water Policy
(continued)
Chairman Woodruff explained the meaning of key terms he used:
Integrated means a policy that protects surface, ground and coastal waters and aquatic
habitat.
Holistic means a policy that considers human health, water supply* and ecological concerns
and avoids simply transferring pollution from one medium to another.
Pollution prevention means that we must manage our affairs — how we live, farm,
produce, consume, and transport — so that as a society we generate less pollution and
manage the wastes we produce better. Our recommendations for pollution prevention include
a mix of voluntary and mandatory measures to promote continuous improvement in all
sources and sectors. This includes agriculture, manufacturing, land development, energy,
transportation, commercial activity, and individual households. Prevention is particularly
important as a strategy for controlling runoff from agricultural and urban lands, our biggest
remaining water quality challenge.
Increased individual and collective responsibility means we must empower the
American people to adopt a heightened sense of responsibility for protecting water resources.
It also means that all of us must contribute our fair share to the cost of cleanup and
prevention. Responsible behavior—in households, on farms, and in factories—should be
encouraged through education, incentives, and yes, sometimes, regulation.
Implementation of watershed planning and management is central to all of our other
recommendations. One of the biggest institutional impediments to progress is the fact that
water programs are typically created and managed along political boundaries. Nature, of
course, does not recognize political boundaries. Watersheds are the logical hydrological unit
within which to plan, implement, and evaluate our prevention efforts....
The watershed approach allows us to make rational decisions concerning the allocation of
limited financial resources} For example, whether in a given watershed it would be more
effective—in terms of improved water quality—to spend $20 million helping to implement
best management practices for agriculture or to spend the same amount for improvements in
municipal wastewater treatment plants.
To support these strategies, Water Quality 2000 offers some 85 specific suggestions for action
in the areas of education and public awareness, science and technology, planning, funding,
and incentives, legislation, and regulation. Many of these actions would be implemented
locally within an overall watershed management/pollution prevention framework.
According to the report, "... solutions based exclusively on a standardised national approach
seem unlikely to be successful. The watershed approach may be the only sensible way to
address point sources and runoff in an integrated fashion." :
A National Water Agenda for the 21st Century was developed over an 18-month period with the
involvement of over 100 experts serving on five multidisciplinary work groups. A 20-member
steering committee supervised the work group process and production of the final report. The
member organizations did not agree on every issue, and several areas of disagreement are
noted in the report. "In general," the report states, "differences involved specific actions
needed to implement agreed-upon goals."
Publication of A National Water Agenda for the 21st Century concludes the latest phase of a
three-year cooperative effort by Water Quality 2000 to define the nation's remaining water
quality problems, develop consensus solutions, and promote their implementation. An interim
report, Challenges for the Future, was published in June 1991.
In the next phase of its work, Water Quality 2000 plans to use the latest report to encourage
discussion and implementation of the recommended solutions at all levels of government and
in the private sector.
Woodruff said, "We are at a crucial juncture, where decisions we make today will determine the
quality and quantity of water available to our children and grandchildren. These recommenda-
tions, developed with input and participation from a wide variety of disciplines and interests,
will be of tremendous value to all of our organizations as we make these decisions."
Water Quality 2000 is supported by grant funding and contributions from member
organizations. Major financial supporters have included U.S. EPA, the U.S. Department of
14
-------
Water Quality 2000 Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the George
Coalition Gund Foundation, the Johnson Foundation, and the Water Environment Federation.
Calls For Changes [Copies of A National Water Agenda for the 21st Century can be purchased from Water Quality 2000, 601
In U.S. Water Policy Wythe-Street, Alexandria, VA 22314-1994. The cost is $25 per copy, plus postage and handling. Call
(continued) 800-666-0206 and specify order number TT02. For further information, contact Tim Williams or Nancy
Blatt at the above address. Phone: (703) 684-2418.]
American Farm Bureau Federation Assesses the
Economic Issues For Farmers in the Rewrite of CWA
EDITOR'S NOTE: An October conference, Clean Water and the American Economy, held in Arlington, VA,
was sponsored by EPA and Resources For the Future. American Farm Bureau Federation Chief Econo-
mist, John K. Hosemann, gave a speech entitled: Economic Issues for Farmers in the Rewrite of the
Clean Water Act. Below are excerpts of his talk, covering the main points made in his presentation.
Introduction
Sorting out the economic issues to be dealt with in the rewrite of the Clean Water Act is a
humbling experience. The approach in this paper is to focus on some fundamental economic
issues. Should the fundamental economic issues get swept aside, there are obviously still many
serious issues with which farmers must struggle.
Issue #1 — Property Incentives
The first major economic issue that all farmers now worry about is the right to own property
and to use it efficiently.
The confusion about federal wetland delineations among at least four federal agencies, the
passage and now implementation of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) amendments,
endangered species, FIFRA, and Senate Bill 1081 to rewrite the Clean Water Act all have
command-control regulations for farm activities and have added to the risk and uncertainty in
the U.S. farming business.
Issue #2 — Science Missing
A second economic issue in the Clean Water Act rewrite is the fact that we simply cannot
prove the cause/effect linkage between specific farm level activity and water quality. Broad
generalizations, allegations, and nonscientific monitoring (Clean Water Act, Section 305B State
Reports to EPA) are not sufficient to make policy recommendations for widespread changes in
farm practices. We must do better.
Issue #3 — Diversion of Human Capital
The regulatory pressures of wetlands, clean water, endangered species, coastal zone
management, and the antitechnology media hysteria that currently drives the policy debate
are already imposing costs on farmers in terms of the human intellectual capital that is now
diverted to unproductive regulatory activity.
Issue #4 — Lower Asset Values
Constraints on farm resource ownership and uses will sooner or later translate into a lower
income stream as land uses are restricted. With income potential reduced, asset values will
surely decline. This economic issue poses substantial considerations for farm financial
institutions, rural schools and other institutions dependent on the tax base. Rural development
will be penalized in the process of more federal water quality micromanagement.
Issue #5 — Zero Must Go
Extending the technology-based, command-control policy and regulatory regimes to nonpoint
source problems raises the fundamental economic issue of zero pollution. Zero pollution is
simply an uneconomical and impractical policy goal.
In a forthcoming paper "The 1991 Clean Water Act: Reauthorize, Reform, or Repeal?" Meiners
and Yandle write:
Scientific evidence about the consequences of pollution tells us that we can stop short of zero
discharge for many pollutants, but that we should strive for zero for certain toxic materials. The
old fixation on zero pollution is a barrier to effective, lower cost control. If ambient quality
standards are set for receiving waters, or the amount of pollutants that may be discharged are
established, decision-makers can solve the resulting problem. They know where they are headed;
they must then find the most effective way of getting there.
15
-------
American Farm
Bureau Federation
Assesses the
Economic Issues
For Farmers in the
Rewrite of CWA
(continued)
The overall environmental debate and the water quality debate seems to have matured beyond
the naive notion that zero pollution is a workable policy goal. The debate seems to be
refocusing not on the "either/or" questions, but rather the "how" question.
Issue #6 — Cost and Environmental Effectiveness
The Coastal Zone Management Act amendments made very detailed management recom-
mendations for farmers for grazing, erosion, nutrients and pesticides, irrigation, and confined
animal facilities. These measures and practices are well on their way to becoming the "farming
law" in the states impacted by the CZMA. Policymakers are likely to extend these rules to the
rest of the nation via the Clean Water reauthorization. At least two points need to be made.
First, it is not enough to look at the "macro" impacts of the proposed changes in farming
practices in CZMA states. Totaling up the aggregate costs of best management practices will in
all likelihood mislead policymakers to believe that CZMA will not "cost very much." The real
cost of the CZMA regulations of land and water used in farming will be the cost imposed on
the farm (firm) level of decision-making. Secondly, the environmental effectiveness of the
proposed regulatory measures have not been proven.
Issue #7 — Risk Assessment
It has been said before but it is worth noting again that once the links between water quality
and nonpoint source problems have been identified in site-specific terms; the next step should
be to determine what the risks are to both human health and to well-defined environmental
values. Simply put, farmers cannot stay in production if zero remains the: federal policy goal of
acceptable risk for humans, plants, and animals.
Issue #8 — Economic Impact/Implications for New Entrants
Those who fail to accept the globalization of the U.S. economy and particularly of U.S.
agriculture will insist on extending the command-control technology-based prescription to
nonpoint source contamination problems. Absent scientific proof of the cause-effect linkages
between site-specific farm-level activities and production practices, such a generalized
approach will penalize those farmers who, for whatever the reasons, are already at or below
commonsense acceptable discharge levels. If this happens, one can expect the cost of
production to rise unnecessarily for those who are already doing a "good job."
Issue #9 — Rural Development
A regulation-induced reduction in farm numbers will surely translate into reduced
opportunity off the farm in rural areas and communities. Larger farm units are not as likely to
do business locally. These units will be large enough to buy direct from input suppliers,
bypassing the services of local farm input suppliers. Maintaining the competitive family farm
structure through a new focus on water quality standards would not have this negative impact.
Concluding Comments
The real agenda in the national iwater quality debate is that the cost of further restrictions on
point sources is very high relative to potential environmental gains and, therefore, it will be
"cheaper" to impose restraints on agricultural activities (nonpoint sources). This naive
assessment could produce substantial unintended economic consequences and little water
quality improvement if policymakers fail to account for the importance of fundamental
economic issues for the typical farm enterprise.
[For further information, contact the American Farm Bureau Federation, 225 Touhey Ave., Part Ridge, IL 60068.]
News from tfie States and Localities,
Where the Action Is
Olympia, Washington, Wants To Make
Clean Water Work For You
EDITOR'S NOTE: The following article is from a press release that came across our desk the other day.
We think its a neat idea, so we pass it on to our readers. Everybody has a role to play in the quest for
clean water. Pollution Prevention begins at home and in the workplace.
Thurston County construction, landscaping, janitorial, auto, and equipment repair businesses
are invited to a free workshop to learn ways to prevent water pollution and manage wastes.
16
-------
Olympia, The workshop will be on Tuesday, February 9,1993, from 7 to 9:30 p.m. at the Tyee Hotel in
Washington, Wants Olympia, Washington. There will be four break-out sessions—one for each business type—and
To Make Clean the training will be provided by professionals working in each of the business areas.
Water Work For You The workshop is sponsored by Operation: Water Works, a voluntary education project
(continued) developed to provide technical assistance and community recognition to businesses with the
potential to contaminate the county's water resources.
Initiated in 1991, the project is sponsored by the cities of Olympia and Lacey and Thurston
County and funded through a Department of Ecology Centennial Clean Water Fund grant. It
focuses on auto and equipment repair, construction, landscaping, and janitorial businesses.
Interested businesses complete a self-assessment identifying areas where they can improve the
way they manage wastes, educate and train employees, prevent erosion, and protect streams
and shorelines. Next, they prepare their own unique Pollution Prevention Plans which address
how they work on areas where they could do better.
These two steps qualify them as an Operation: Water Works participant. This means they have
educated themselves on Best Management Practices (BMPs) for protecting water quality. It
does not shield them from potential enforcement action—but such action maybe less likely if
they've learned about BMPs.
Participants receive a recognition sticker, mention in the project's publications and
advertisements, and public congratulations for their efforts to become educated. This year, the
project ran four quarter-page ads with photos in the South Sound Business Examiner recognizing
business participants.
During 1992, over 60 local businesses attended four free workshops—one for each business
group—and learned about the BMPs for their typical business activities. So far, 20 participants
have completed Pollution Prevention Plans and received Operation: Water Works decals. So if
you work in one of the identified business areas, get involved. Attend the February workshop.
If you think you are already "doing the right things" but would like some help figuring out
what you can do better, the project is there to help. As a consumer, make Operation: Water
Works part of a new New Year's resolution to shop smarter. Look for the Operation: Water
Works decal. Tell your contractor, mechanic, landscaper, or house cleaner about the program.
[For more information, contact Eva Shinagel, City of Olympia Water Resources Program, OOOPIumk
Street, P.O. Box 1967, Olympia, Washington 98507-1967. Phone: (206) 753-5457.]
Virginia Cooperative Extension Establishes
Residential Water Quality Demonstration Project
The Virginia Cooperative Extension Service, Prince William Unit, has received a grant from the
United States Department of Agriculture Extension Service, to develop a statewide model for
public information programming on residential lawn care practices and alternative septic
systems impacts on water quality in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The grant will allow
expansion of an innovative residential program initiated two years ago by the Prince William
Unit in the residential planned community of Lake Ridge, Va.
"This program is possibly the first attempt by USD A to use residential field days and
demonstration lawns as a method of assessing what motivates homeowners to adopt
recommended water quality BMPs for home landscapes," said Dr. Waldon Kerns, water
resources economist with Virginia Tech, and overall grant coordinator. "Reports continue to
document that waters in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries contain unacceptable levels of
pollutants; we know that they are not all coming from farms," added Kerns.
Extension Agent Marc Aveni, who is in charge of the program, believes that the residential
overuse of fertilizers and pesticides can be a significant source of nonpoint source pollution to
both ground and surface water. "A typical homeowner probably applies more fertilizer and
pesticide on a per acre basis than any farmer I know of," said Aveni. Aveni stressed that the
objective of the program is to educate homeowners on the correct usage of fertilizers and
pesticides. "We are not antichemical," said Aveni, "We simply want people to know what they
are doing before they get out on their lawns with bags of nitrogen fertilizer and bug spray."
Plans call for a high profile program that uses residential field days in various locations
throughout the county. The events center around the topics of soil testing, fertilizing in the fall,
leaf recycling, mowing and pruning, composting, use of native plants, and integrated pest
management. The events also feature individual demonstration lawns that adopt the
_ _ —
-------
Nonpoint Source NEWS-NOTES is an occasional bulletin dealing with the condition of the environment and the control of
nonpoint sources of water pollution. NFS pollution comes from many sources and is caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and
through the ground. As the runoff moves, it picks up and carries away natural pollutants and pollutants resulting from human activity,
finally depositing them into lakes, rivers, wetlands, coastal waters, and groundwater. NFS pollution is normally associated with agricul-
tural, silvicultural, mining, and urban runoff. Hydrologic modification is a form of NFS pollution which often adversely affects the bio-
logical integrity of surface waters.
I
NPS NEWS-NOTES is published under the authority of section 319(1) of the Clean Water Act by the Nonpoint Source Information
Exchange. (WH-553), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St. SW, Washington DC 20460. FAX # (FTS/202) 260-1517. Hal
Wise (Terrene Institute-grantee), Editor; Elaine Bloom (TetraTech), Associate Editor; Susan V. Alexander (EPA, Region VI) and Anne
Welnberg (EPA, Assessment and Watershed Protection Division), Contributing Editors. Corresponding Editors: Margherita Pryor, (EPA,
Oceans and Coastal Protection Division), Sherri Fields, (EPA, Wetlands Division), and John Reeder (EPA, Office of Ground Water and
Drinking Water). Paula Monroe (EPA, Office of Water, Oceans and Watersheds) Publisher. Unless otherwise attributed, all material in
this bulletin has been prepared by the editors and the views expressed are not statements of EPA policy unless specifically identified
as such and do not necessarily reflect the views of EPA. Mention of commercial products or publications does not constitute endorse-
ment, or recommendation for use, by EPA.
For inquiries on editorial matters, call (FTS/202) 260-3665 or FAX (FTS/202) 260-1517. For additions or changes to the mailing list,
please use the COUPON on page 27 and mail or FAX it in. We are not equipped to accept mailing list additions or changes over the
telephone. \ •
if 1 9 9 2 *
THE YEAR OF
CLEAN WEER
Recycled/Recyclable
Printed with Soy/Canola Ink on paper that
contains at least 50% recycled fiber
v/EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
NPS News-Notes (WH-553)
Assessment and Watersheds Protection Division
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
PRESORTED FIRST CLASS MAIL
Postage and Fees Paid
EPA
G-35
------- |