United States ,
Environmental ,
Protection Agency
Office of Water,-Office-of Wetlands,
Oceans and Watersheds
Washington DC 20460"
EPA
March -2000
xvEPA Tribal Wetland Program Highlights
-------
-------
Acknowledgments
This publication was prepared by the Wetlands Division, Office of Wetlands,
Oceans and Watersheds, in the Office of Water, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). Reginald Parrish initiated project research while Matthew Witten
(Wetlands Division 1997 Sea Grant Fellow) collaborated with Parrish to move the
project forward. Brett Melone (Wetlands Division 1998 Sea Grant Fellow) continued
the project in 1998 with assistance from Lorraine Williams. Through the leadership
of Kathleen Kutschenreuter, the project was completed in 2000. Contractor support
for document production and design was provided by Tetra Tech, Inc.
The Wetlands Division acknowledges the efforts of the Tribal Wetland Work
Group (TWWG), whose members helped shape the project. The TWWG was
formed in late 1997 to serve as a sounding board for the project and to provide
information on Tribes with wetland programs. It is composed of Boyd Nystedt and
Jerry Pardilla of the National Tribal Environmental Council, Patrick Durham of
the Native American Fish and Wildlife Society, EPAs American Indian Environmen-
tal Office, EPA's Region 8 and their Montana Office, and EPA's Region 4 Office.
Other valuable contributions are the result of staff reviews by EPAs Office of Water
(Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds and the American Indian Environmen-
tal Office) and EPA's Region 5 Office.
The success of this project is largely the result of the dedication and hard work
of the people who represent the Tribes and Native organizations included as case
studies in this report. The Wetlands Division gratefully acknowledges the contribu-
tions of Mary Clare Weatherwax of the Blackfeet Tribe; Mike Connolly and
Stephanie Ostrom of the Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians; Mary Price of the
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation; Douglas Cox
of the Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin; Janet Strong of the Nisqually Tribe; Steve
Linskens of the Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin; Christine Celentano, Paul
Jackson (now with The Nature Conservancy), Tom Evans, Robin Reich, Walter
Meganack, and Violet Yeaton of Port Graham/Nanwalek Native Villages; Craig
Tepper, Patti Lodge, and Rhonda Roff of the Seminole Tribe of Florida; Luis
Zamora and Don LightningBow of the Taos Pueblo; Jeff Day and Matthew
Vanderhoop of the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head; and Candy Lupe of the White
Mountain Apache Tribe. The Wetlands Division would also like to thank Dan
LaPlant (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service,
Anchorage, Alaska) for his assistance with the Port Graham/Nanwalek case study.
In addition, the Wetlands Division extends many thanks to Amy Wing and the
Native American Fish and Wildlife Society for providing basic data on Tribal water
programs.
The Wetlands Division would also like to recognize the time and consideration
of all those Tribes and individuals whose wetland programs are not included in this
report, but who contributed to the project in important and meaningful ways. They
include Fran King Brown of the Southern Ute Indian Tribe; Daniel Pawless of the
-------
Bad River Band of Chippewa Indians; Butch Garner of the Cherokee Nation of
Oklahoma; Eric Kreeger of the Coeur D'Alene Tribe; Vina Smith of the Fort Peck
Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes; Gene Duncan of the Miccosukee Tribe; Greg Soder of
the Narragansett Tribe; Jonathan Matthews of the Nez Perce Tribe; Chris Gannon of
the Warm Springs Tribe; Julie Coffin and Heidi Leighton of the Passamaquoddy
Tribe; Skip Wyle, Dan Kuzneers, Tammis Coffin, and John Banks of the Penobscot
Nation; D.J. Monette of the San Carlos Apache Tribe; Beth Janello of the Pueblo of
Sandia; Victor Martino and Keith Dublanica of the Skokomish Tribe; Dave Fuller of
the Suquamish Tribe; and Jim Piatt of the Tesuque Pueblo.
11
-------
Executive Summary
The nation's wetlands are vital links between land and water resources. The
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in partnership with other federal
agencies, state, Tribal, and local governments, is responsible for restoring and
maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters.
EPA uses both regulatory and nonregulatory programs to further its mission of
wetland protection.
The Wetlands Division, a division of the Office of Wetlands, Oceans and
Watersheds in EPA's Office of Water, prepared this document to encourage Tribes to
develop effective wetland programs. Eleven case studies highlight various compo-
nents of wetland programs of Tribes and Native organizations. In each case study,
the description of the wetland programs or projects came directly from the Tribe or
Native organization itself. The programs and projects are categorized by general
program components, such as wetland and watershed planning or restoration.
Where a Tribe or Native organization has developed a unique program to protect
its wetlands, such programs are described separately from general program
components. Additionally, some of the case studies discuss program components
that have a beneficialimpact on wetland resources even though they do not have a
direct wetland focus.
The case studies provide information about many of the tools and strategies
Tribes and Native organizations from around the country are using to address
wetland issues so that other Tribes, as well as state and local governments, can
learn from their experience. Creative solutions can often emerge from reviewing
what others have done, and both failures and successes can be instructive. In some
of the case studies presented, Tribes or Native organizations have evaluated the
effectiveness of a tool or strategy and adjusted their wetland program to reflect
what they have learned.
In addition to the case studies, Tribal Wetland Program Highlights includes a
comparative analysis of the tools and strategies the 11 Tribes and Native organiza-
tions are using to meet their wetland protection goals. It is summarized in a table
listing the various program components and cross-referencing them to indicate
which Tribes or Native organizations include a program component as part of their
wetland protection program. Finally, appendices in the report include a wide range
of wetland-related information that Tribes should find useful.
Each Tribe is unique, and the range of possible ways to implement an effective
wetland protection program is not limited to what was done in the past. One
objective of this report is to demonstrate that every program or project to protect
wetlands is a step toward greater understanding and protection of wetland
resources.
in
-------
Introduction
describes programmatic and quantitative measures for improving water quality
nationwide, including both states and Indian country. To support attaining the
objectives of the Strategic Plan in Indian country, EPA's Office of Water published
Protecting Public Health and Water Resources in Indian Country: A Strategy for EPA/
Tribal Partnership.
Two common themes found in EPA's state and Tribal policies and programs are
capacity building and partnerships. EPA believes that the protection of public health
and environmental resources can be most effectively achieved when efforts are
designed and carried out at the local level and are based on collaborative partnerships
between local, regional, state, and national stakeholders. EPA's Wetlands Division has
historically used this strategy of encouraging capacity building and fostering partner-
ships in its efforts to promote the protection and wise use of the nation's wetland
resources.
Tribe-Specific Eligibility Criteria
For Tribes to assume many of EPA's major grant or regulatory programs, they
usually must go through a process called "Treatment in a Manner Similar to a
State," also known as TAS. TAS was first put into place in the 1986 and 1987
amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and Clean Water Act (CWA).
These amendments allowed EPA to develop a process by which Tribes could apply
for grants and program authority. EPA established a TAS process for eligibility
under various programs according to the criteria identified in the SDWA and CWA.
To be eligible for TAS, a Tribe must meet the following criteria:
• The Tribe must be federally recognized.
• The Tribe must have or be able to exercise substantial governmental
powers.
• The Tribe must have or have been delegated jurisdiction over the area in
question.
• The Tribe must have the financial, physical, and human resource capability
to implement a program effectively.
In the initial years of the TAS process, many Tribes and EPA staff found the
process to be overly burdensome. EPA has increasingly improved its own capacity
to help Tribes meet the eligibility requirements., and in 1994, the Agency developed
the "TAS Simplification Rule". Under this rule, EPA eliminated the need to meet all
four criteria each time a Tribe applies for a program. In general, once a Tribe has
been deemed eligible for one EPA program, it need only establish that it has
jurisdiction and capability for each subsequent program. This requirement is
necessary because each program might require different skills and activities to
provide protection that meets the requirements of specific statutes and regulations.
EPA Wetland Programs in Indian Country
EPA began to provide financial support to Tribal wetland programs in 1990
with the establishment of the EPA Wetland Development Grant Program. EPA
established the program to support state and Tribal efforts in the development and
implementation of wetland protection programs. In 1997 the program was ex-
panded to include assistance to local governments. More information about the
Wetland Development Grant Program is provided in Appendix II.
Tribal Wetland Program Highlights represents a continuing commitment on the
-------
Introduction
part of EPA's Wetlands Division to support the evolution of Tribal wetland programs
around the country. Geographical, ecological, cultural, and political differences
among Tribes make drawing comparisons among Tribal wetland programs a
challenge. As the case studies illustrate, tools and strategies currently used by
Tribal wetland programs are a function of many different factors, and no two
programs are alike.
Goals of Tribal Wetland Programs
The goals of Tribal efforts to protect wetland resources are based in part on an
acknowledgment that Tribal cultures have existed and evolved in the context of the
natural environment. Respect for and wise use of the environmental resources on
which Tribal societies depend is at the foundation of all their wetland programs,
which generally aim to protect economic, ecological, aesthetic, recreational,
medicinal, and spiritual values. Historically, Indians have viewed human life as
part of the natural environment, not in opposition to it. Today, non-Indians are
coming to realize that the concept of intergenerational equity should.be central in
environmental preservation and restoration philosophy. They acknowledge the
wisdom and experience of Tribal ways. Likewise, Indians are realizing that some
technologies can be compatible with their traditional beliefs and practices.
Organization of Report
This chapter discusses the purpose of the report and provides background
information on Tribal wetland programs. Chapter 2 presents a comparative
analysis of tools and strategies the 11 selected Tribes and Native organizations
are using to meet their wetland protection goals. This comparative analysis is
summarized in a table listing the various wetland program components and cross-
referencing 'them to indicate which Tribes and Native organizations include a
program component as part of their wetland protection activities.
Chapter 3 presents the 11 case studies, organized by Tribe or Native organization:
t>
• Blackfeet Tribe
• Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians
• Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation
• Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin
• Nisqually Tribe
• Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin
• Port Graham/Nanwalek Native Villages
• Seminole Tribe of Florida
• Taos Pueblo
• Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head
• White Mountain Apache Tribe
Chapter 4 presents the report's conclusions. It briefly discusses EPA's future
plans for working with Tribes to share information and develop wetland protection
strategies that meet their programmatic and technical needs and interests.
-------
Introduction
Appendices included in the report present a wide range of wetland-related
information that Tribes should find useful:
• Appendix I: EPA Regional Tribal and Wetland Contacts
• Appendix II: Sources of Support for Tribal Wetland Programs
• Appendix III: Information on Relevant Publications and Outreach Materials
• Appendix IV: Draft Core Essential Elements of a State or Tribal Wetlands
Program
-------
2
Comparative Analysis
This chapter presents a comparative analysis of the tools and strategies that
the 11 Tribes and Native organizations selected for the case studies are using to
meet their wetland protection goals. The Tribal wetland programs and projects
described in the case studies are categorized by general program components.
Where a Tribe or Native organization has developed a unique program to protect
its wetlands, such programs are described separately from the general program
components. Additionally, some of the case studies discuss program components
that have a beneficial impact on wetland resources even though they do not have
a direct wetland focus. The comparative analysis is summarized in Figure 1.
Often, Tribes develop wetland programs and projects in response to pressing
issues that must be addressed immediately. A Tribal wetland program may
initially focus on one area and gradually evolve into a more comprehensive
program. Instead, a Tribe should begin developing its wetland protection pro-
gram by reviewing publications and outreach materials (Appendix III) that
provide guidance for development of wetland programs and "Draft Core Essential
Elements of a State or Tribal Wetlands Program" (Appendix IV)- This approach,
given sufficient funding and other resources, could result in a more comprehen-
sive and efficient wetland program.
The purpose of this comparative analysis is not to advocate one approach
over another. EPA recognizes and respects the diverse situations of Tribes. The
purpose is to show what features the programs have in common and where the
programs diverge as they seek to meet the unique needs of each Tribe or Native
organization. The following general program components used in the case
studies are also used in the comparative analysis:
• Wetland and Watershed Planning
• Wetland Inventory, Assessment, Mapping
• Regulation
• Restoration
• Mitigation
• Partnerships and Stakeholder Coordination
• Education and Outreach
• Monitoring
-------
Comparative Analysis
Figure 1. Summary of Comparative Analysis
Tribe or
Native Organization
Program Component
•s
13 Pt
11
If
II
is
I
•HI)
ll
f
I
o
•TO;-
a
a
•f.
•f.
I
w
1,
Blackfeet Tribe
Campo Band
of Kumeyaay Indians
Confederated Salish and
Kootenai Tribes of the
Flathead Reservation
Menominee Tribe
of Wisconsin
Nisqually Tribe
Oneida Tribe of Indians
of Wisconsin
Port Graham/Nanwalwek
Native Villages
Seminole Tribe of Florida
Taos Pueblo
Wampanoag Tribe
of Gay Head
White Mountain
Apache Tribe
-------
Comparative Analysis
The 11 case studies represent diverse situations, but the motivations of Tribes
to protect wetland resources provide an appropriate starting point for a compari-
son of Tribal wetland programs. Similarities are present in both the motivations
of Tribes to develop wetland programs and the types of tools and strategies used
to protect their wetlands. Considerations such as the amount of wetland acreage,
types of wetlands, wetland hydrology, Tribal political framework, human impacts
on wetlands—both on and off Tribal lands, the cultural significance of wetlands,
and the species that depend on wetland habitat will in part determine the
specific types of tools and strategies for program implementation.
Many Tribes have wetlands that have been adversely affected by human
activities both on and off Tribal lands. In these cases, Tribal wetland programs
often aim to stop degradation, followed by a strategy of restoration and a plan to
mitigate potential future impacts. Other Tribes are fortunate to have wetlands
that are in a relatively pristine state, and in these instances protection of the
resource from potential impacts is the desired strategy. More common are Tribal
lands that encompass both pristine and degraded wetlands, requiring an adaptive
strategy that includes protection, restoration, and mitigation.
Wetland and Watershed Planning
A number of Tribes and Native organizations discussed in the case studies
initiated development of their wetland programs by securing an EPA Wetland
Development Grant. Development of a wetland program is one of the primary
purposes of this grant program. Historically, awards to Tribes, in comparison to
state and local governments, represent a significant portion of overall program
funds. Wheth'er or not an EPA Wetland Development Grant or similar planning;^
oriented funding source is secured, Tribes that engage in a wetland planning
process usually develop a road map for future activities. In many cases, a specific
issue is examined during the planning process. For instance, the White Mountain
Apache Tribe in Arizona is particularly interested in riparian and wetland restora-
tion, and thus their planning efforts focused on that area. The Oneida Nation in
Wisconsin is concerned about nonpoint sources of pollution. This interest led to a
cooperative effort with neighboring counties to assess the sources of those
pollutants and to develop abatement strategies along with education and outreach.
The Nisqually Tribe, because of its proximity to the Fort Lewis Military
Reservation in Washington and intensive harvesting of forest products, has found
it necessary to participate in basinwide planning efforts. This approach has
gained the Tribe the respect of other stakeholders, and has given the Tribe an
opportunity to have input into planning efforts that could potentially affect Tribal
lands. The Port Graham/Nanwalek Native Villages initiated a wetland-focused
watershed planning process to protect the pristine state of the Lower Kenai
Peninsula of Alaska. Coordinated by the Port Graham/Nanwalek Watershed
Council, this planning effort has emphasized educating Native members about
the functions and values of wetlands.
Wetland Inventory, Assessment, Mapping
In many cases, inventory and mapping of Tribal wetlands takes place as part
of the planning process. A determination of the location, extent, and condition of
a Tribe's wetlands supports the planning process. Compiling this information and
subsequently storing it in a relational, geographically referenced database can lay
the groundwork for a useful planning tool and monitoring system. The Port
-------
Comparative Analysis
Graham/Nanwalek Native Villages have created an extensive geographic infor-
mation system (GIS) database that includes information on geology, hydrology,
climate, soil, plant communities, water quality, wetlands, land ownership, land
uses, and wildlife and fishery resources. The Confederated Salish and Kootenai
Tribes of the Flathead Reservation and the Blackfeet Tribe, both in Montana, and
the Seminole Tribe of Florida, have carried out inventory and assessment efforts
and have developed a GIS that supports their planning processes. The
Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head in Massachusetts delineated and mapped its
wetlands, and developed a geographically referenced database that will store
data from the Tribe's wetland monitoring program.
Tribes must determine the appropriate level of assessment to be conducted
based on titieir financial and human resources and their goals. There are both
low-cost/low-tech and high-cost/high-tech solutions for wetland assessment. A
Tribe that cannot afford expensive computer hardware and software and outside
consultants should not dismiss the possibility of conducting an assessment of its
wetlands. In many cases, Tribes have harnessed technical assistance from federal
agencies and universities to help carry out assessment and mapping efforts.
Increasingly, volunteers are conducting, assessing, and monitoring wetiands.
Volunteer programs promote outreach and education goals while also meeting
data needs. Taos Pueblo in New Mexico developed a volunteer monitoring
program for its surface water monitoring program and plans to expand it to
wetlands monitoring. Reaching out to local experts can be the key to the develop-
ment and execution of an effective wetland assessment and mapping effort.
The Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians in Southern California is developing its
own definition and classification of wetlands based on climatic fluctuations in
addition to those based simply on hydrology, soils, and vegetation. Because of
wide variations in rainfall from year to year, the Campo Band is creating a three-
tier classification system so that wetlands with dry cycles would still be considered
wetiands. In conjunction with development of the classification system based on
climatic fluctuations, the Campo Band is drafting a wetland protection plan and
ordinance that will provide greater legal protection for "dry cycle" wetlands.
Regulation
Developing and instituting specific wetland regulations is a realm into which
many Tribes have not yet ventured. The Oneida Nation developed an Environ-
mental Policy that establishes a framework within which environmental regula-
tions can be developed. The Policy ensures that development activities are _
compatible with the Tribe's traditional environmental beliefs. However, it does
not provide for specific protection of wetland resources.
The Seminole Tribe of Florida is approved by EPA for TAS to manage its
Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 303 Water Quality Standards Program, CWA
Section 401 Water Quality Certification Program, CWA Section 319 Nonpoint
Source Grant Program, and CWA Section 106 Water Quality Management Grants
Program. This affords the Tribe a considerable amount of sovereignty in protect-
ing its aquatic resources. Specific criteria and standards for wetlands are being
developed in conjunction with the Tribe's extensive monitoring program.
The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation in
Montana are also approved for TAS to manage their CWA Section 303 Water
Quality Standards Program, CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification Pro-
-------
Comparative Analysis
gram, and CWA Section 106 Water Quality Management Grants Program. The
Confederated Tribes' water quality standards also apply to wetlands although
there are no wetland-specific criteria and standards at this time. The Confeder-
ated Tribes' Aquatic Lands Conservation Ordinance is similar to the CWA Section
404 Wetlands Protection Program. It allows for extensive review and consultation
with the Confederated Tribes' water quality projects that have potential to impact
aquatic resources on the Tribe's lands.
Many of the Tribes and Native organizations included in the case studies have
assumed some portion of administration of the CWA. These Tribes and Native
organizations recognize the significance of managing these programs in terms of the
degree of sovereignty they exert over their lands and the environmental policies that
can protect them. Determination of which CWA programs that should be assumed by
a Tribe depends on the needs, interests, resources, and capacities of individual
Tribes. The CWA Section 106 Water Quality Management Grants Program is most
commonly assumed by Tribes because this program allows a Tribe to direct funds to
particular projects. It can help develop die foundation for water quality standards as
well as other water quality programs. Table 1 indicates programs under the CWA
for which these Tribes and Native organizations are granted TAS.
Table 1
Clean Water Act
Section 106
Water Quality Management
Grants Program
Clean Water Act
Section 314
Clean Lakes
Grant Program
Clean Water Act
Section 319
Nonpoint Source
Grant Program
Clean Water Act
Section 303/401
Water Quality Standards
and Certification Program
. Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head
Seminole Tribe of Florida
Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin
Oneida Tribe of Indians
of Wisconsin
Taos Pueblo
Blackfeet Tribe
Confederated Salish and
Kootenai Tribes
of the Flathead Reservation
Campo Band of
Kumeyaay Indians
White Mountain Apache Tribe
Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin
Blackfeet Tribe
Seminole Tribe of Florida
Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head
—Application Pending
Campo Band of
Kumeyaay Indians
Seminole Tribe of Florida
Campo Band of
Kumeyaay Indians
—Application Pending
Confederated Salish and
Kootenai Tribes
of the Flathead Reservation
White Mountain Apache Tribe
-------
Comparative Analysis
Restoration
Loss and degradation of wetlands are two of the primary challenges facing
wetland and water quality specialists throughout the country, both on and off
Indian lands. Wetland planning and regulation help to reduce losses and identify
the types and sources of impacts affecting wetlands. Once the sources have been
identified and measures taken to address them, there is a need to regain the
functions and values of the healthy wetlands. Ecological restoration, particularly
wetland restoration, is being carried out across the country to return degraded
wetlands to full integrity. Determining which sites are in need of restoration and
prioritizing restoration efforts are key challenges Tribal wetland programs face
today. Wetland planning and assessment can help with these decisions, but
determination and prioritization of wetland restoration efforts must take place at
the local level. Many Tribes have found it useful to determine their wetland
restoration priorities in terms of the significance (e.g., cultural, ecological,
economic) of specific wetlands, the actual and potential impacts affecting them,
and the potential for restoration. With this information as a starting point, many
Tribes are developing practical restoration strategies.
The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation
identified wetland restoration as one of the priorities of their Wetlands Conserva-
tion Strategy. As part of implementation of the Confederated Tribes' restoration/
mitigation project, the Tribes' wetlands coordinator developed clearly stated
goals and objectives, performance standards, a detailed monitoring plan (includ-
ing a monitoring and reporting schedule), and operation and maintenance consider-
ations.
The White Mountain Apache Tribe identified restoration as an integral part
of achieving sustainability. The Tribe believes there are four cornerstones to
sustainability—people, ecosystems, culture, and sovereignty—which they con-
sider forms of natural and social capital. The Tribe's Wetlands Conservation Plan
addresses these cornerstones and discusses the role of each in attaining
sustainability. The Tribe has focused on riparian and wetland restoration, with a
particular emphasis on shifting dominant vegetation from exotic to native species.
The Tribe also developed an evaluation component to measure progress and
provide feedback to improve future restoration efforts.
The Oneida Nation, in addition to using restoration as a tool to mitigate
development impacts, is engaging in bioengineering to stabilize stream channels.
The Tribe decided to use bioengineering methods instead of traditional rip-rap
because bioengineering is more effective in the long run, less energy-intensive,
and more pleasing aesthetically. The Oneida Nation has also undertaken a
comprehensive ecological restoration plan for a 100-acre agricultural field that
includes a significant amount of wetland acreage. Part of the restoration effort
was a commitment to refrain from the use of chemical pesticides and fertilizers.
The Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head is focusing its wetland restoration efforts
on the Tribe's cranberry bogs. The Tribe cultivates cranberries traditionally and
organically, using no mechanization and no synthetic pesticides or fertilizers.
Restoration of the bogs involves manually clearing vegetation that competes with
the cranberries for light, soil, and nutrients. The Tribe is also considering installa-
tion of retention ponds and scrubber systems to minimize petrochemical and
heavy metal inflow from roadways. The Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians is
using traditional wetland and stream restoration techniques in its modern
restoration program. For centuries, the Kumeyaay people have assembled rock
structures in arroyos (intermittent streams) to build up silt carried by floodwa-
10
-------
Comparative Analysis
ters, thereby developing riparian wetland areas through the accrual of moist
sediments over time. The Campo Band has successfully restored several wetlands
in this way.
The mighty salmon is driving the restoration efforts of the Nisqually Tribe.
Many of the salt marshes along the Nisqually River were converted to cropland
early in this century, and now efforts are under way to turn these areas back into
marshes. The Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge provides motivation and support.
Wild rice and sturgeon are both extremely important culturally and nutrition-
ally to the Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin. Efforts are ongoing to reintroduce
wild rice in Tribal lakes and restore sturgeon in the Wolf River. Restoration will
be most successful and garner the most support from Tribal members when the
wetlands in question are significant to the Tribe for cultural, economic, nutri-
tional, or other reasons.
Mitigation
Wetland compensatory mitigation and wetland mitigation banking are
integral to wetland regulation. Wetland compensatory mitigation aims to com-
pensate for unavoidable wetland losses due to development authorized under the
CWA Section 404 Wetlands Protection Program permitting process. A wetland
mitigation bank is a wetland area that is restored, created, enhanced, or (in
exceptional circumstances) preserved and then set aside to compensate for future
conversions of wetlands for development activities. Although wetland mitigation
and mitigation banking remain controversial, many states, Tribes, local govern-
ments, private corporations, and nonprofit organizations across the country are
conducting mitigation projects and are realizing multiple benefits.
The Oneida Nation is engaged in a mitigation effort that is compensating for
wetland loss due to authorized development, while at the same time restoring
previously degraded wetlands to full health. In addition, the Oneida Nation is
discussing plans with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation to use Tribal
lands as a wetland mitigation bank. In such an arrangement, the Tribe would
gain wetland acreage while mitigating the impact of highway projects elsewhere
in the state. The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reser-
vation, in partnership with the Montana Department of Transportation, are
implementing a project to mitigate unavoidable impacts on wetlands resulting
from highway construction on the reservation. The Montana Department of
Transportation is providing funds, and the Confederated Tribes are restoring a
site degraded by many years of grazing as well as drainage for crop production.
The Nisqually Tribe carried out a mitigation effort to compensate for wet-
lands lost as a result of construction of a hatchery along the Nisqually River. The
Tribe has avoided nearly all impacts on the river shoreline as this is the only
developed site. The remainder of the reservation shoreline and the slope up to
the top of the bluff are maintained in mature forest and intact wetlands.
Partnerships and Stakeholder Coordination
An essential component of every wetland program is a mechanism for
stakeholder coordination during planning and program implementation. Al-
though the goals of stakeholders may vary, coordination and regular communica-
tion allow them to participate in planning and implementing a wetland program
and thus help to ensure "buy-in" at key points in the process.
11
-------
Comparative Analysis
In the case of the Port Graham/Nanwalek Watershed Council, the Council
itself is providing the forum for stakeholder coordination. These efforts are
supported by technical assistance from the Natural Resources Conservation
Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and involve not only the Port
Graham and Nanwalek Native Villages, but also the Alaska Native Claims Settle-
ment Act (ANCSA) corporations, which are the major landowners in the water-
shed. Individual Native Allotment owners are also active in the process. The
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation engage in
extensive stakeholder communication to ensure the success of their wetland
protection efforts. The Confederated Tribes are supported by the numerous
federal and state agencies and nongovernmental organizations that have land
management responsibilities within the borders of the reservation.
Education and Outreach
Education and outreach for Tribal environmental staff, as well as Tribal
members and the community, is critical to the success of any environmental
protection effort. Training for Tribal wetland staff is an effective way to build the
capacity necessary to manage a comprehensive wetland program. The White
Mountain Apache Tribe and Taos Pueblo Environmental Office are both involved
hi hosting training in which other Tribes have taken part. Such cooperation is
an effective way to get the most out of funds available for training. The White
Mountain Apache Tribe has apprenticeship and mentor programs that help
develop Tribal managers under the supervision and training of experienced
managers. In addition, the Tribe has regularly scheduled Natural Resource
Workshops that bring leaders and resource managers together to hone their
leadership skills in natural resource management. When Tribes boost their
capacity to administer wetland and water quality programs, they reduce potential
reliance on outside' consultants and enhance their ability to maintain sovereignty
over their lands and programs.
Many wetland impacts are human-induced. Regulatory and technical tools
are important hi reducing such impacts on wetlands. These tools, however,
cannot be relied on to meet all wetland protection and restoration goals. A large
part of the challenge of wetland protection is changing the mind-set of individu-
als whose combined efforts could help protect the resource over the long term.
Tribes are using numerous approaches to educate Tribal members and surround-
ing communities about wetland-related issues.
Taos Pueblo is developing a curriculum that will teach children about wet-
lands through field work, lab work, and classroom studies. The curriculum is for
grades K through 12 and is tailored to the needs of individual grade levels. The
Blackfeet Tribe environmental staff teach a wetland course at the local commu-
nity college, which promotes interest in wetland issues among young adults
seeking a career path, as well as older people who have the ability to influence
others because of their stature in the community. The Menominee Tribe estab-
lished the Menominee Sustainable Development Institute (MSDI) under the
umbrella of the College of the Menominee Nation. The focus of MSDI is to
analyze the achievements of the Menominee in sustainable forestry and apply the
findings to the larger model of sustainable development—one that can support the
economy while' balancing die environmental and social requirements of the Tribe.
The White Mountain Apache Tribe asserts that people are the human capital
needed to fortify the foundations of sustainability. To this end, the Tribe secured
12
-------
Comparative Analysis
an EPA Wetland Development Grant to help fund its Ecological Youth Camp for
Tribal children. It will raise their awareness of ecology and give them hands-on
experience.
The Port Graham/Nanwalek Watershed Council is taking an innovative
approach to education and outreach. As part of its planning and assessment
process, the Council is conducting a survey to measure the values of wetlands as
village residents perceive them. The survey results are expected to bring rel-
evance to the hydrogeomorphic (HGM) wetlands assessment method by linking
specific wetland functions to the local wetland values they support. The Council
believes that by linking wetland values as perceived by the community to the
functional assessment process, the outreach and survey effort will educate people
and provide a tool to support long-range planning.
Monitoring
Long-term monitoring of wetland health is an undertaking that involves
detailed planning, but the rewards are many. Monitoring may be the single most
important tool in measuring the overall success of a wetlands protection pro-
gram. Monitoring data can provide information to wetland specialists that will
guide future planning efforts, identify stressors, help prioritize restoration sites,
measure the success of restoration and mitigation projects, and support develop-
ment of water quality standards for wetlands. A range of wetland features can be
monitored, but always in consideration of Tribal needs and resources. Because
the objective of the Clean Water Act is to "restore and maintain the physical,
chemical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters," EPA promotes the use
of a combination of monitoring methods to ensure the most accurate assessment
of wetland integrity. Wetland monitoring can include biological, chemical, and
physical parameters.
As noted earlier (see Wetland Inventory, Assessment, Mapping on page 7),
monitoring can be costly and it requires a degree of expertise that may take time
for a Tribe to acquire. Much technical expertise is available to support the design
of monitoring projects as well as ongoing identification and analysis. Partnering
with agencies such as EPA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service, as well as
academics and local, regional, and state governments, can help Tribes locate
experts in relevant fields. In addition, the use of volunteers in monitoring pro-
grams can be effective for collection of data and serves as an important educa-
tion and outreach function as well.
The Seminole Tribe of Florida, as part of its wetland inventory effort, en-
gaged in two years of characterization of specific reference wetlands in terms of
water quality and vegetative/macroinvertebrate community types. Ongoing
monitoring includes water quality monitoring (twice monthly), macroinverte-
brate collection (quarterly), vegetative transect inventory (quarterly), and
panoramic photos (quarterly). The Tribe will use this information in the develop-
ment of wetland-specific water quality standards. Taos Pueblo has an extensive
water quality monitoring program that focuses on surface waters and boasts a
successful volunteer monitoring component. The program measures chemical
and biological conditions essential to the health of aquatic ecosystems. The Taos
Pueblo Environmental Office is educating its staff in preparation for applying to
EPA for TAS for the CWA Section 303/401 Water Quality Standards and Certifica-
tion Program. In addition, the Pueblo would like to incorporate wetlands into its
monitoring program and develop wetland-specific water quality standards.
13
-------
Comparative Analysis
The Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head delineated all of its wetlands and put all
of this information into a geographically referenced database. The Tribe is now
implementing a wetland monitoring program. The monitoring data will be stored
in the database created as part of delineation and assessment and will be used to
track the success of preservation and restoration efforts.
The Port Graham/Nanwalek Native Villages have developed bioassessment
protocols in cooperation with the University of Alaska-Anchorage campus. During
the summer of 1998, at least six sample stations were established with the
assistance of the Port Graham/Nanwalek Watershed Council. Macroinvertebrate
samples were collected to establish baseline reference conditions of Native
Villages' riverine wetlands. ^
Other Approaches
This comparative analysis focused on tools and strategies that Tribes are
using to protect their wetlands. From the discussion, it is obvious that Tribes
customize these tools and strategies to meet their needs and resource limitations.
In addition, Tribes are creative in the approaches they take in grappling with the
larger issues of resource use, sustainability, respect for the natural environment,
and the role humans and their societies play in encouraging the wise use and
preservation of natural resources.
Some of these unique approaches are discussed earlier in the context of their
use as tools in wetland protection. The Port Graham/Nanwalek Watershed
Council, for example, is working to link wetland assessment with education and
outreach. Other unique approaches are not discussed in this comparative analysis
simply because they do not fall within a specific category. For example, the
Oneida Nation is working to improve the overall sustainability of its food system
by encouraging the use of organic growing methods and developing both on- and
off-reservation markets for its sustainable products. The Oneida Nation, like all
Tribes, recognizes how natural resource issues are interconnected. This knowl-
edge places Tribes in a unique position to educate their own members and others
about how people can reconcile environmental and economic concerns.
14
-------
3
Case Studies of Tribal
Wetland Programs
This chapter presents the case studies of selected wetland programs of Tribes
and Native organizations. The case studies provide information about the tools
and strategies that 11 federally recognized Tribes and Native organizations from
around the country (Figure 2) are using to address wetland protection issues. To
the extent possible, these wetland programs were selected to represent a range of
wetland protection issues and approaches and to demonstrate the geographic
diversity among Tribal wetland programs. The following 11 Tribes and Native
organizations were selected for comparison:
• Blackfeet Tribe
• Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians
• Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation
• Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin
• Nisqually Tribe
• Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin .
• Port Graham/Nanwalek Native Villages
• Seminole Tribe of Florida
• Taos Pueblo
• Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head
• White Mountain Apache Tribe
The wetland programs and projects described in these case studies are
categorized by general program components summarized hi Chapter 2. Where
Tribes and Native organizations have developed unique programs to protect their
wetlands, such programs are described separately. Additionally, some of the case
studies discuss program components that have a beneficial impact on wetland
resources even though they do not have a direct wetland focus.
15
-------
Case Studies of THbal Wetland Programs
16
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Blackfeet Tribe
Program Components:
Wetland and Watershed Planning • Wetland Inventory, Assessment,
Mapping • Regulation • Restoration • Mitigation • Education and
Outreach
Background
The Blackfeet Reservation encompasses more than 518 miles of streams that
are part of the Missouri River and Saskatchewan River systems. The reservation
covers four watersheds and occupies a unique location on the North American
continent as some of its watersheds drain to the Gulf of Mexico and one drains
into Hudson Bay. Reservation lands are comprised of Rocky Mountain peaks with
elevations ranging from 3,400 to 9,000 feet and foothills and plains east of the
Continental Divide. The Blackfeet Reservation is bordered to the north by the
Canadian Province of Alberta and to the west by Glacier National Park.
Of the Tribe's total reservation lands of 1,525,712 acres, an estimated 5-10
percent are wetelands. The Blackfeet Environmental Office is concerned with
mitigating historic wetland loss and protecting wetland aquatic species at risk.
The estimated 8,500 Blackfeet living on Tribal lands put a high cultural value on
their wetlands. Several plant species are used for medicinal, ceremonial, and
practical purposes. For instance, the willows found in wetlands on the Blackfeet
Reservation are used to make back rests as well as sweat lodges. Several animals
important to the Tribe use wetlands as habitat, such as the beaver.
Wetland and Watershed Planning
The Tribe prepared a draft Blackfeet Wetlands Conservation Plan, which
will be distributed for public comment during 2000. The draft plan was devel-
oped by the Blackfeet Environmental Office through a collaborative process that
allowed for input from the Blackfeet Natural Resources staff. .
Wetland Inventory, Assessment, Mapping
In 1994, wetland assessment field work began in the Two Medicine Water-
shed, followed by the Cut Bank Watershed in 1995 and the Milk River Watershed
in 1996. The St. Mary's Watershed was the fourth and last to be sampled. Each
watershed is comprised of 15 to 20 USGS topographic quadrangles and there are
more than 100 wetlands in each watershed. Field workers usually sampled for
wetiand assessments at eight sites per USGS quadrangle and classified the wetlands
during the field visits. Environmental Office staff sampled physical water parameters
and screened rather than exhaustively surveying wildlife. As of May 1998, the
wetland inventory and assessment was complete and the data compiled. The
Blackfeet Environmental Office expects to begin analyzing the data in 2000.
All wetlands that were sampled were labeled on USGS topographic quad-
rangles for future reference. A complete set of quadrangles sampled is on file at
the Blackfeet Environmental Office.
Regulation
Tribal Ordinance 90 is the Aquatic Lands Protection Law, which protects
wetlands within the Blackfeet Reservation. Tribal Ordinance 90 provides for
17
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
enforcement by fine. In November 1995, Blackfeet Community College was fined
for filling a wetland. Some non-Tribal members have also been fined for viola-
tions of this ordinance.
I Restoration
To support the restoration, enhancement, and construction of wetlands on
Tribal lands, the Blackfeet Environmental Office, in cooperation with Blackfeet
Community College, Browning Public Schools, Glacier National Park, the Bureau
of Reclamation, and Montana State University, is building a greenhouse to grow
native plants for revegetation. Wetland and non-wetland native plants will be
grown in the greenhouse.
*jS| Mitigation
^*^ Currently, the Blackfeet Environmental Office is working with the Montana
Department of Transportation and the Tribal Roads Department to develop a
wetland mitigation policy. In addition, a constructed wetland on the Perry Ranch
site is being designed by the Montana Department of Transportation as a mitiga-
tion site.
Education and Outreach
The Tribe implemented several programs to educate Tribal members about
wetlands protection and management. The Environmental Office teaches an
environmental studies course at the Tribal community college that focuses on the
natural resources of the reservation environment. Included in this course is a
segment on the Tribe's wetlands. Currently under development is an "outdoor
classroom" that will be-used to educate young Tribal members about wetlands,
while also implementing a wetland enhancement project. The Tribe's Wetlands
Program Manager makes presentations to Tribal schools on wetlands protection
and water quality.
The Blackfeet Environmental Office held a series of public meetings in which
the wetlands management program was presented to Tribal members. There was
media coverage of the public meetings. The Tribe's draft wetlands conservation
plan will be presented to the public for comment before being finalized.
An important component of the Blackfeet wetlands program is continuing
education for staff. Training for staff is provided in numerous areas, including
wetland delineation, herbology of native people, building partnerships for
watershed protection, Tribal stewardship of environmental resources, wetlands
biocriteria, water quality monitoring, bird identification, and use of .global
positioning systems (GPS) and GIS software.
Sources of Support
The Tribe received funding for wetlands assessment work beginning in 1993
through an EPA Wetland Development Grant. The Tribe was able to continue
developing its comprehensive wetlands program through additional funding by
EPA's Wetland Development Grant Program for 1996 and 1997. The Tribe was
again awarded an EPA Wetland Development Grant in 1998, specifically for
developing a wetland mitigation strategy for all highway construction projects to
ensure that wetlands protection goals are met. Work on the wetland mitigation
strategy will be done in cooperation with Tribal natural resource programs, the
U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the Montana Department of Transportation.
18
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Contact
Mary Clare Weatherwax, Manager, Wetlands Program, or
Gerald Wagner, Director, Blackfeet Environmental Office
EO. Box 2029
Browning, MT 59417
Phone: (406) 338-7421/7422
Fax: (406) 338-7451
19
-------
Case Studies o/TH&al Wetland Programs
20
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Campo Band
of Kumeyaay Indians
Program Components:
Specialized Wetland Classification System
Planning • Regulation • Restoration
Wetland and. Watershed
Background
The Campo Indian Reservation, located in southwestern California, lies 45
miles east of the Pacific Ocean and one-half mile north of the United States
border with Mexico. The reservation is on a high desert plateau with oak wood-
lands and chamise and redshank chaparral grasslands. Waters of the reservation
include the Campo and Diabold Creeks and Springs, and riparian and spring-fed
isolated wetlands south of the Laguna Mountains. The reservation consists of two
separate areas: Old Campo, which has 710 acres, and the New Reservation,
which has 15,802 acres. All reservation land is Tribally owned. All land use
decisions, including where to locate even a single home, are made by the General
Council for the benefit of the Tribe as a whole.
Growth in industrial and residential development, both on and off the
reservation, has made environmental planning a priority for the Campo Band.
Agricultural activities, septic systems, underground storage tanks, industrial
activities, and residential development pose threats to the integrity of the surface
and ground waters of the reservation. Currently, the Campo Band has a water
pollution control program that includes an Existing Water Resource Information
Inventory, weather monitoring, inventory and monitoring of groundwater and
streams, and identification and delineation of wetlands.
Specialized Wetland Classification System
The Campo Band is developing its own definition and classification of
wetlands based on climatic fluctuations in addition to soils, hydrology, and
vegetation. The region experiences wide variations in rainfall from year to year.
Dry cycles occur with several years of desert-type rainfall with less than 10 inches
of precipitation annually. Wet cycles also occur with several years of up to 30
inches of annual precipitation. On the average, the region receives from 16 to 20
inches of annual precipitation. There are areas on the Campo Reservation where
in wet cycle years, a wetland (standing water and wetland vegetation) is present,
but few indicators of wetlands are present in dry cycle years. The Campo Band is
creating a specialized 3-tier wetland classification system, under which wetlands
that may not be considered wetlands according to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
delineation criteria during dry cycles would be considered wetlands. The classifi-
cation system will be used to help prioritize which wetlands require the most
protection.
The Campo Band is also integrating the specialized wetland classification
system into a modeling effort to determine the storage capabilities of aquifers.
Rates of replenishment and depletion of aquifers vary depending on rainfall, the
type of geology overlying the aquifer, and the type of wetland. Through this
effort, the Campo Band is integrating its wetland program with other parts of its
water program to achieve multiple goals.
21
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Wetland and Watershed Planning
The Tribe prepared a draft wetlands protection plan. The draft plan in-
cludes efforts to increase protection of those wetlands that would be identified as
dry cycle wetlands under the Tribe's specialized wetland classification system.
Regulation
A draft wetlands ordinance was prepared along with the draft wetlands
protection plan. The draft ordinance would provide greater legal protection for
wetlands that would be identified as dry cycle wetlands under the Tribe's special-
ized wetland classification system. The Tribe is also in the process of developing
water quality standards.
Restoration
From evidence of historic wetland and stream restoration activities
throughout the original Kumeyaay territory, including the reservations of the
Kumeyaay in what is today Mexico, the Campo Environmental Protection Agency
developed a modern restoration program. For centuries, the Kumeyaay people
have assembled rock structures (formerly by hand) in arroyos (intermittent
streams) to build up silt carried by floodwaters, thereby developing riparian
wetland areas through the accrual of moist sediments over time. Using modern
methods, the Campo Band has restored wetlands in riparian areas. In 1993, the
Campo Band completed a project that successfully restored an intermittent
stream to a perennial stream.
In 1995, the Campo Band discontinued leases with cattle ranchers who used
to graze cattle on Tribal lands. Cattle grazing caused adverse impacts on wetlands
in riparian areas. This "restriction on grazing has allowed planted willow trees to
thrive and native grasses to compete with European grasses.
Sources of Support
Since their long-term assessment strategy attempts to consider the impacts of
multi-year meteorological and hydrological cycles, and does not offer rapid
results, the Campo Band has had difficulty obtaining funding to support efforts in
this area. In the past, the Campo Band received funding under EPA's Wetland
Development Grant Program and Nonpoint Source Grant Program.
Contact
Mike Connolly
Water Pollution Control Program
Campo Environmental Protection Agency
36190 Church Road, Suite 4
Campo, CA 91906
Phone: (619) 478-9369 or 478-2177
Fax: (619) 478-2758 or 478-2367
22
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Confederated Salish
and Kootenai Tribes
of the Flathead
Reservation
Program Components:
Wetland and Watershed Planning • Wetland Inventory, Assessment,
Mapping • Regulation • Restoration • Mitigation • Partnerships and
Stakeholder Coordination
Background
The Flathead Reservation in west-central Montana has a population of about
20,000 and covers more than 1.2 million acres. Although much of the reservation
is rural and agricultural, development pressures from highway construction and
suburban sprawl from nearby cities are a constant threat. Farming and ranching
also have impacts on the reservation's natural resources. Historically, grazing and
wetland drainage for agriculture have posed some of the most significant impacts
on the reservation's wetland resources. The reservation is the home to five other
threatened or endangered species, specifically, the trumpeter swan, grizzly bear,
bald eagle, peregrine falcon, and northern grey wolf. These and many other fish
and wildlife species found on the reservation are at least in part dependent on
wetland ecosystems for food, water, and habitat.
Aquatic resources on the Flathead Reservation are extensive and diverse.
Lacustrine wetlands (associated with lakes and reservoirs) occur adjacent to
Flathead Lake, the largest natural freshwater lake in the western United States,
and around numerous large irrigation reservoirs. Riverine wetlands (associated
with larger rivers and streams) occur along the Flathead, Jocko, and Little
Bitterroot Rivers. Palustrine wetlands (associated with ponds, small streams,
seeps, springs, and wet meadows) occur throughout the reservation, including
areas of extremely high densities of pothole wetlands in the Mission Valley.
Wetland and Watershed Planning
_ In December 1994, Hie Confederated Tribes completed The Flathead
Reservation Wetlands Conservation Strategy. This strategy was intended to
provide baseline information and an initial framework to help private, state,
federal, and Tribal entities involved in wetland management on the reservation
work in a more coordinated and efficient manner. Comprehensive in nature, the
strategy includes:
• The Confederated Tribes' wetlands conservation goals and objectives
• Assessment of wetland resources on the reservation
• A wetland inventory quality assurance project plan
• Evaluation of existing Tribal mechanisms for wetlands protection and
restoration
• Strategies for improving the protection, restoration, and development of
wetlands
23
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
• Recommended procedures for documenting progress
• Recommendations for implementing the Wetlands Conservation Strategy
Currently, the Wetlands Coordinator is developing the Confederated Tribes'
Wetlands Conservation Plan. When complete, the plan will be a detailed road
map of how to implement the Wetlands Conservation Strategy.
Wetland Inventory, Assessment, Mapping
As part of developing the Wetlands Conservation Strategy, the Confeder-
ated Tribes completed an extensive assessment of the wetland resources on the
reservation. Specific tasks completed by the Confederated Tribes as part of this
process included:
• Production of National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, in cooperation
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (reservation lands are the only
place in Montana with NWI maps)
• Digitization of NWI maps for use in the Confederated Tribes' geographic
information system (CIS)
• Acquisition and classification of high-resolution multi-spectral digital
imagery, ADAR (Airborne Data Acquisition and Registration), to identify
wetlands missed by the NWI and to identify wetland changes in the
pothole wetland areas of the Mission Valley
• Use of Arc/Info and GRID software to analyze the CIS data from the NWI
maps and classified remote imagery
• Completion of vegetation and water quality inventories of selected wedands
The last task involved field inventories of wetland plant communities and
riparian areas. The field inventories also collected information on wetland water
quality (chemical and physical) features.
Regulation
The Confederated Tribes have two programs that serve to legally protect
wetland resources on the reservation. The two programs and their legal mecha-
nisms are discussed below.
The Shoreline Protection Program is responsible for administering the
Shoreline Protection Ordinance 64A (revised) and the Aquatic Lands Conserva-
tion Ordinance 87A. The purpose of the Shoreline Protection Ordinance is to
"conserve and protect Flathead Lake and all navigable waters within the Flathead
Reservation." The purpose of the Aquatic Lands Conservation Ordinance is to
"prevent the degradation of Reservation waters and aquatic lands by regulating
construction or installation of projects upon aquatic lands whenever such projects
may cause erosion, sedimentation, or other disturbances adversely affecting the
quality of Reservation waters and aquatic lands."
The Confederated Tribes are approved for TAS to manage their CWA Section
303 Water Quality Standards Program and CWA Section 401 Water Quality
Certification Program. Water quality criteria, designated uses, and an
antidegradation policy are all included in the Confederated Tribes' water quality
standards. The Confederated Tribe's water quality standards were recently
challenged by the State of Montana. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the
Confederated Tribes and EPA, holding that the Confederated Tribe's TAS was
appropriately determined.
24
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
In addition to developing and administering the Water Quality Standards
Program and the Water Quality Certification Program, the Water Quality Program
administers the Water Quality Management Ordinance 89B. The purpose of this
ordinance is to "restore, and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological
integrity of Reservation waters." The ordinance specifies programmatic items
such as reporting requirements and enforcement mechanisms.
The Water Quality Program is also developing a nonpoint source manage-
ment plan detailing the implementation of best management practices at the
watershed level. This plan will evaluate the contribution of nonpoint sources of
pollution to surface waters. Tribal water quality staff have assisted with develop-
ment of a nutrient loading study for Flathead Lake conducted by the Flathead
Basin Commission.
Restoration
In partnership with the Montana Department of Transportation, which is
providing funding, the Confederated Tribes are implementing the first wetland
ecosystem restoration project on the reservation. Before restoration began, the
site was impacted by extensive grazing along with drainage of wetlands to allow
for crop production. In addition, the dominant vegetation at the site had shifted
from native to introduced species. A key goal of the project is to return as much
vegetation as possible to native species.
Essential to the long-term success of the wetland restoration project are
clearly stated goals and objectives, performance standards, a detailed monitoring
plan (including a monitoring and reporting schedule), and operation and mainte-
nance considerations. The monitoring plan will be implemented beginning in
1999, when the restoration work is complete. The Confederated Tribes will
monitor selected parameters to determine achievement of performance stan-
dards. The selected parameters are wetiand mapping; functional assessment,
before and after restoration; annual photographic records; water level; vegeta-
tion; aquatic invertebrates; wildlife populations; and amphibians. The breadth
and depth of the monitoring plan demonstrates the complexity of this restoration
project. The Confederated Tribes are eager to see the results of their hard work
and planning on this project, so they will be better equipped to plan for the next
restoration opportunity on the reservation.
Mitigation
One of the priorities of the Wetland Protection Office, as outlined in the
Wetlands Conservation Strategy, is the mitigation of impacts from highway
construction. The Confederated Tribes are implementing a wetland ecosystem
restoration project to mitigate for unavoidable impacts to wetlands resulting from
highway construction on the reservation. This restoration project and its associ-
ated monitoring plan were described earlier.
Partnerships and Stakeholder Coordination
Not unlike many other reservations throughout the country, a significant
portion of Flathead Reservation lands are held by non-Indian interests. This
makes management of natural resources difficult to coordinate because of the
large number of private landowners that are stakeholders. Compounding this
problem are the myriad governmental agencies and conservation organizations
that have land holdings or land management responsibilities on the reservation.
These agencies and organizations include the Bureau of Indian Affairs; U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service; Bureau of Reclamation; Natural Resources Conservation
Service; Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks; Montana Department
of State Lands; The Nature Conservancy; Montana Land Alliance; and Lake,
25
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Sanders, Missoula, and Flathead Counties. The Wetlands Coordinator and Water
Quality Program staff coordinate extensively with stakeholders, including govern-
ment agencies, private landowners, nongovernmental organizations, and others,
to promote effective protection and wise use of the Tribe's aquatic resources.
Sources of Support
EPA awarded the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes funding under the
Clean Water Act Section 104(b)(3) Wetlands Protection Program for 1992-1994,
which enabled the Confederated Tribes to develop the Wetlands Conservation
Strategy. Clean Water Act Section 104(b)(3) Wetlands Protection Program
funding was also awarded in 1995 and 1996, which was used to develop the
Wetlands Conservation Plan, in addition to producing a refined assessment of
wetland resources, the development of specific public outreach and education
objectives and projects, and evaluation criteria for development of watershed-
based wetlands protection projects. In 1998, Clean Water Act Section 104(b)(3)
Wetlands Protection Program funding was also awarded, to develop and provide
wetlands training to the Shoreline Protection Board and Shoreline Protection
Office in six training modules, classroom presentations, and field trips to project
sites carried out under the Tribal Aquatic Lands Ordinance.
Contact
Mary Price, Wetlands Coordinator
Natural Resources Department
RO. Box 278
Pablo, MT 59855
Phone: (406) 675-2700
Fax: (406) 675-2806
26
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Menominee Tribe
of Wisconsin
Program Components:
Forest-Based Sustainable Development • Restoration • Education and
Outreach
Background
The Menominee Indian Reservation is located in northeastern Wisconsin.,
near the city of Green Bay. Of the 235,000 acres of Tribal land, 220,000 acres are
forested and 24,000 acres are wetlands, including peat swamps and wild rice
fields. The word "Menominee" means "people of the wild rice" in the Algonquin
dialect that the Menominee People speak. There are more than 440 miles of
rivers and streams, and 123 lakes covering 4,000 acres, throughout the reserva-
tion. The Wolf River and its South Branch drain most of the Menominee lands.
The water resources found on the reservation are important to the
Menominee People and the natural environment. A diverse population of wildlife
and flora depend on the forested and riverine environments. In turn,, those
species represent essential cultural, spiritual, and nutritional resources upon
which the Menominee People depend. These resources include wild rice, trout,
sturgeon, bald eagles, osprey, a variety of duck species, swans, geese, heron,
cranes, otters, beaver, crows, ravens, thrushes, chickadees, black bear, and deer.
The Menominee are very proud of the Tribe's efforts to maintain their
magnificent forest, which sits in sharp contrast to neighboring deforested areas.
The Menominee believe they continue to enjoy a healthy forest as a result of the
interplay of several factors over the past 200 years. History, culture, politics,
litigation and court decisions, legislation, economics, spiritual and ethical values,
and applied forestry, ecology, and technology, have combined to enable the
Menominee to avoid the "tragedy of the commons" so often cited as the cause of
much environmental degradation. In doing so, they have succeeded in maintain-
ing the quality of their wetland and water resources.
Forest-Based Sustainable Development
The Menominee Tribal government has collaborated with the business arm of
the Tribe, Menominee Tribal Enterprises, along with many other partners, to
institutionalize forestry best management practices, creating a renowned forest-
based sustainable economy that protects the rivers, streams, lakes, and wetlands
on the reservation. Although the Tribe's forest-based sustainable development
program is not a wetlands protection program, the protection of wetlands
afforded by forestry best management practices is substantial. Sustained yield,
continuous forest inventory, and harvesting methods such as selection cutting,
shelterwood, and clear-cutting, are used to maximize the profitability and
sustainability of the enterprise. The forestry practices that the Tribe has long
maintained are designed to protect the waters of die Tribe as well as the soil and air.
Menominee Tribal Enterprises produces forest products that are certified to
be harvested sustainably and ensure long-term stewardship of forest resources.
Their products are certified by two independent certification agencies—Scientific
27
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Certification Systems (The Forest Conservation Program) and the Rainforest
Alliance (Smart Wood). The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is an international
body that has developed principles and criteria for forest stewardship worldwide.
FSC hi turn accredits certification agencies to certify sustainable forestry opera-
tions. A 1997 booklet on the Menominee forest-based sustainable development
tradition tells visitors to the Menominee reservation:
Because of the wisdom and commitment our ancestors used in the
practices and principles of sustainable development, while on the
Reservation you will be able to travel through a forest where you
will find: towering white pines, some of which are more than 200
years old... thriving species used as indicators for ecosystem health
such as the Eastern Hemlock and Canadian Yew; eagles soaring
over treetops, and cormorants feeding their young in the old mill
pond; and bobcat, bear, and a host of other wildlife species . . .
At the foundation of the management principles and practices of Menominee
Tribal Enterprises is recognition of a need for a balance between the environ-
ment, the community, and the economy. The Menominee philosophy is based on
traditional beliefs and is further supported by the modern notion of "Sustainable
Development." An excerpt from the Menominee Tribal Enterprises web site
explains:
Menominee Tribal Enterprises has been built upon the understand-
ing of the need to integrate advanced science, technology, and busi-
ness practices, within a cultural context, to remain competitive and
profitable for current as well as future generations of Menominee
People. The commitment to intergenerational equity is a key deter-
minate of the decision-making and management of MTE, in that
immediate gain is deferred to a long term (150 year) and sustain-
able planning horizon.
I Restoration
Historically, wild rice and sturgeon are two of the most important cultural
and nutritional resources for the Menominee Tribe. These two native species
depend on wetlands habitat for survival. The Tribe is working to enhance the
biological integrity of its wetlands through wild rice reintroduction in Tribal lakes
and restoration of sturgeon in the Wolf River. These ongoing restoration efforts
are being monitored and will be evaluated to determine their success.
Education and Outreach
In 1993, the Menominee Sustainable Development Institute (MSDI) was
established under the umbrella of the College of the Menominee Nation. The
focus of MSDI is to analyze the achievements of the Menominee in sustainable
forestry and apply this to the larger model of sustainable development—one that
can support the economy while balancing the environmental and social require-
ments of the Tribe. The MSDI and the college are working at all grade levels to
increase the number of Tribal members who pursue advanced degrees in natural
resources and business management. For example, MSDI is developing activities
for students in grades K-12 that will emphasize the Menominee as both a tradi-
tional people with strong cultural ties to the forest and a people that make
visionary decisions regarding resource management.
As part of a project funded by EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office, the
Menominee produced several outreach products that promote their sustainable
forestry practices. The Tribe produced a technical manual describing the
28
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Menominee forestry practices and the Menominee Tribal Enterprises Forest
Management Plan. The technical manual describes some of the Tribe's forestry
practices. A more general "layman" brochure was produced to raise awareness in
the community and across the state about the positive effects of the program. In
addition, the Tribe produced and distributed a sustained yield forestry manage-
ment video, conducted tours, and organized a seminar promoting the Menominee
silviculture model. The Menominee recognize outreach and education as impor-
tant components of their program and choose various media to reach diverse
audiences. The Tribe's outreach efforts can help others in the Wolf River basin
implement sustainable forestry practices, thereby increasing opportunities for
sustainable development.
Sources of Support
The Menominee Tribe has received funding from numerous sources, includ-
ing the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, Wisconsin Department of Natural Re-
sources, University of Wisconsin (along with assistance from professors, research-
ers, and students), U.S. Forest Service, EPA, The Ford Foundation, and First
Nations Development Institute Eagle Staff Fund.
Contact
Douglas Cox
Environmental Services Department
PO. Box 910
Keshena, WI 54135-0910
Phone: (715) 799-4937
Fax: (715) 799-4323
29
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
30
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Nisqually Tribe
Program Components:
Wetland and Watershed Planning • Wetland Inventory, Assessment,
Mapping • Restoration • Partnerships and Shareholder Coordination
Background
The Nisqually River arises from a glacier on Mount Rainier and flows 78
miles in a northwesterly direction to enter the southern end of Puget Sound.
Historically, the Nisqually People lived throughout the Nisqually River basin and
in nearby areas of southern Puget Sound. Today, the Nisqually Indian Reserva-
tion, approximately 1,500 acres, is located along 6 miles of the western shore of
the Nisqually River, beginning 5 miles upstream from the river's deltai The
reservation lies mostly on a high gravely plateau above the river. All wetlands
within the reservation are located in the floodplain of the river at the foot of a
high bluff. These wetlands were created either out of seeps from the steep valley
wall or from meandering and flooding of the river itself. The entire reservation
shoreline and the slope up to the top of the bluff are maintained in mature forest
and intact wetlands. The only developed area along the shore is the site of the
Kalama Fish Hatchery, one of two fish-rearing facilities managed by the Tribe.
The Clear Creek Hatchery, a larger facility constructed by the Tribe, sits within
the reservation boundaries on lands occupied by the Fort Lewis Military Reserva-
tion on the eastern side of the river. Mitigation required for site development has
resulted in the creation of 5 acres of wetlands near the hatchery plus 8 acres of
tidal wetlands.
The Nisqually River enjoys better protection along its entire length than
many of the other rivers in Washington State. Its headwaters and the uppermost
13 river miles reside within Mount Rainier National Park and a good portion of
its delta lies in the Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge. No major industrial or
population centers are located in the basin. However, two hydroelectric dams
approximately 40 miles upstream from the refuge block the upstream migration
of anadromous salmonids. (Historically, a natural waterfall in this location
similarly blocked upstream fish movement.) Much of the remaining shoreline is
in a natural state due to efforts by several entities such as the Fort Lewis Military
Reservation, the City of Tacoma (as partial mitigation for its two dams), the
Nisqually River Basin Land Trust, and the Nisqually Indian Tribe.
Wetland and Watershed Planning
The Nisqually Tribe acts to protect wetlands in the basin beyond reserva-
tion boundaries in a number of ways. It participates in the Timber, Fish and
Wildlife Agreement, a 10-year-old cooperative process for regulating forest
practices in Washington State. This agreement allows for Tribal recommendations
and technical input regarding logging activities near streams and wetlands. The
Tribe's Natural Resources Department employs staff knowledgeable about wet-
lands to review applications, make recommendations, and render technical
assistance to landowners and state agency personnel.
Only recently were wetlands considered for additional protection under the
state's watershed analysis process. The Nisqually Tribe, along with other treaty
31
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wet/and Programs
Tribes, are very active in this process. Covered by the Washington State Forest
Practices Regulations, this process calls for the analysis of whole sub-basins to
determine the best ways to prevent damage to streams, fish, and more recently,
wetlands. The Nisqually Tribe initiated the two most recent watershed analyses in
the Nisqually River basin. The Tribe is making efforts, under new grant funding,
to develop a comprehensive watershed plan, including identifying key wetlands
for protection and restoration.
The Nisqually Tribe sits on the Nisqually River Council, an interagency body
committed to the protection and enhancement of the Nisqually River basin
through education, advocacy, and coordination. Created in 1987, the Council also
includes state and federal resource agencies, local governments, and Fort Lewis.
Wetland Inventory, Assessment, Mapping
Most of the middle Nisqually River basin and nearly all of its major tribu-
tary, the Mashel River, lie within the commercial forest lands of four major timber
interests. These timber interests, along with the Nisqually Tribe, the Nisqually
River Council, and others have formed a Natural Resource Management Plan for
cooperative protection of the waters of the basin. One of the results of this effort,
funded by both the Washington Department of Ecology's Centennial Clean Water
Fund and the Nisqually Tribe, is a complete inventory of the wetlands in the plan
area. The final document not only contains comprehensive maps and ratings of
each wetland, but also makes recommendations for restoration activities specific
for each wetland. The next phase of this effort involves the identification and
prioritization of wetlands most in need of restoration along with evaluation of
the most cost-effective methods of restoring those wetlands.
| Restoration
The Nisqually Tribe began a long-sought-after wetland restoration effort in
1998. Historically, the Nisqually River delta occupied hundreds of acres on the
edge of Puget Sound, home to myriad creatures, including salmon resting and
feeding before their seaward migration. At the turn of the century, farmers diked
most of this salt marsh, converting these biologically productive areas into
pasture and cropland. The Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge currently occupies
the western half of the former marsh. The refuge is developing plans to breach
the dike in several spots to allow the waters of Puget Sound to enter and regain
some of the tidelands. Across the river, the eastern portion is still occupied by a
400-acre active farming operation. After years of negotiation, the Nisqually Tribe
recently purchased this farm with the intention of gradually bringing back the
salt marsh. The process of restoration has already begun through the creation of
an opening in a dike to allow tidal water to enter 8 acres of pasture. Eventually,
most of the Nisqually River delta will once more be home to a thriving commu-
nity of tideland creatures including, of course, the young salmonids.
Partnerships and Stakeholder Coordination
Extensive cooperation between the U.S. Army at Fort Lewis Military
Reservation and the Nisqually Tribe has occurred over the past several years.
Under a Department of Defense grant, both in-stream work and riparian restora-
tion were accomplished along Muck Creek, a major salmon stream passing
through Fort Lewis. Plantings around a large headwater spring/wetland were
included in the project. At the Tribe's urging, Fort Lewis has protected several
headwater wetlands on its lands.
Just as in other areas, wetland loss due to agricultural development has
occurred in the Nisqually River basin. The Nisqually Tribe has worked with a
32
-------
Cose Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
large dairy farm adjacent to the river to reduce pollutants entering the river and
associated wetlands. However, there are numerous small "hobby" farms dotting
the landscape whose cumulative impacts on wetlands are substantial. Wetland
impacts from these small farms are the next logical issue to address in terms of
wetlands protection. This process demands a gradual building of communication
and rapport with local rural citizens groups and conservation districts. The
Nisqually Tribe has begun to build those bridges.
The Tribe's staff work very closely with the Nisqually River Basin Land Trust,
a nonprofit corporation whose primary objective is to keep the entire shoreline of
the river in its natural state flowing through mature forests and productive
wetlands. The land trust holds title to 215 acres, including several riparian
wetlands in the river corridor. Tribal fishers have donated and prepared delicious
baked salmon for land trust functions and Tribal artisans have donated tradi-
tional art objects for the land trust's annual fund-raising auction.
In summary, the Nisqually Tribe actively participates with many different
groups—governmental, community, environmental, and civic—with the goal of
protecting or restoring the rivers, streams, and wetlands in the Nisqually River
basin. They do ttiis by serving on committees, acquiring funding for practical
projects, supporting wetland assessment and planning efforts, and staffing
positions to offer regulatory and technical assistance. In general, the Tribe gets
involved whenever the opportunity arises to influence the future of the aquatic
resources in the basin.
Sources of Support
Washington State Department of Ecology's Centennial Clean Water Fund and
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have funded nearly all the projects described in
the case study. However, the Bureau of Indian Affairs supports the Timber, Fish,
and Wildlife technical staff position and has provided funding for the two Tribe-
initiated watershed analyses. The Department of Defense has funded work for the
protection of Muck Creek since it involves mostly Fort Lewis lands.
Contact
Janet Strong
Natural Resources Division
12501 Yelm Highway, SE
Olympia, WA 98513
Phone: (360) 438-8687
Fax: (360) 438-8742
33
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
34
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Oneida Tribe
of Indians of Wisconsin
Program Components:
Wetland and Watershed Planning • Restoration • Mitigation
Partnerships and Stakeholder Coordination • Monitoring
Background
The Oneida Nation Reservation is located on the metropolitan fringe of the
city of Green Bay in northeastern Wisconsin. The reservation boundaries encom-
pass some 65,400 acres, of which 11,500 acres are owned by the Tribe or Tribal
members. The reservation is home to nearly 4,000 of the 12,000 Tribal members
who comprise the Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin. Duck Creek, a major
tributary of Green Bay, divides the reservation in half. Burma Swamp, the head-
waters of Duck Creek, lies outside reservation lands, and is heavily affected
agricultural runoff. Due to the checkerboard nature of the reservation, the Tribe's
environmental resources are affected not only by its own activities, but also by
those of its neighbors. Indeed, 90 percent of the original wetlands within the
boundary of Tribal lands were destroyed through ditching and conversion to
cropland. The Tribe determined through aerial photographs that approximately
1,454 acres of the 65,400 acres that comprise the reservation are wetlands. The
cumulative impacts of wetlands losses and ongoing nonpoint source pollution has
led to degraded water quality and unstable stream flows on the reservation.
Through its various environmental programs and policies, the Oneida Nation
attempts to balance the economic needs of the Tribe with environmental protec-
tion. This is reflected in their Environmental Policy, as well as in the Tribal
governmental structure that makes decisions affecting economic development,
planning, and environmental protection. The Oneida Nation developed an
Environmental Policy that serves as a guide for all Tribal development activities.
The goal of the Tribe's Environmental Policy is twofold. It serves as the frame-
work for the development of environmental codes, and it ensures that develop-
ment activities are compatible with the Tribe's traditional environmental beliefs.
The Policy describes the Oneida Environmental Philosophy, distinguishing be-
tween historical and contemporary perspectives. The historical perspective
explains that environmental respect and protection are part of the Oneida
collective heritage, upon which its existence is based. The contemporary perspec-
tive acknowledges the modern challenges to this heritage and states that this
policy will have the force of law in 1) working toward the goal of nondegradation
of the environment, 2) maintaining a level of zero discharge of toxic and hazard-
ous chemicals to the environment, and 3) recognizing the use of best available
technologies for environmental restoration activities and disposal of hazardous
materials. In addition, the Environmental, Health and Safety Department requires
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review on all Tribal projects. This
ensures that environmental assessments are conducted on all proposed projects
and that alternatives are considered before impacts take place.
To promote economic development while protecting natural resources, the
Oneida have established cooperative links between their Environmental Re-
sources Board and their Economic Development Division. For example, in 1993
35
-------
Case Studies of Trtbal Wetland Programs
the Economic Development Division proposed to build a business park and
expand a gaming facility. The Environmental Resources Board worked with the
Economic Development Division to mitigate the impact.
Recognizing the linkages between their local food system and their natural
resources, the Oneida are also concerned with reducing the environmental
impacts of their agricultural practices. The Oneida Community Integrated Food
System is committed to "environmentally sensitive and responsible agricultural
development" and "organic and healthy food production and processing," while
feeding the Tribe's people and building external markets for their products. This
effort further demonstrates that economic development and environmental
protection are not mutually exclusive.
Like many Tribes in the United States, the Oneida Tribe has struggled to
maintain both the quantity and quality of its lands. Beyond the ecological func-
tions provided by wetlands to humans, the Oneida culture places high value on
the wildlife that depend on wetlands as habitat. In addition to improving environ-
mental conditions that impact human health and well-being, the Oneida Nation is
concerned with protecting and restoring wildlife habitat.
Wetland and Watershed Planning
The Oneida National Water Quality Standards (WQS) include provisions
that serve to protect, preserve, restore, and enhance water quality and the
quantity necessary to maintain healthy aquatic habitats within the Waters of the
reservation. It is a goal to maintain populations of wetland plant and wildlife by
protecting food supplies, reproductive and nursery areas, and preventing the
establishment of nuisance species.
The Oneida are involved in cooperative policy making and planning beyond
reservation borders. Under the provisions of the Wisconsin Nonpoint Source
Pollution Abatement Program, the Oneida Nation, in partnership with the Wis-
consin Department of Natural Resources, the Wisconsin Department of Agricul-
ture, Trade and Consumer Protection, the Brown County Land Conservation
Department, and the Outagamie Land Conservation Department, developed the
Nonpoint Source Control Plan for the Duck, Apple, and Ashwaubenon Creeks
Priority Watershed Project. Approximately 95 percent of the Oneida Nation
Reservation lies within those watershed boundaries. Development of the plan was
a collaborative effort, aimed at assessing nonpoint sources of pollutants in the
watershed and developing abatement and education strategies. The importance
of wetlands and stream corridors is highlighted in the plan as integral to improv-
ing water quality. In addition, restoration of wetlands and riparian areas is a
recommended strategy for improving the water quality of this watershed.
| Restoration
As a demonstration project for the Nonpoint Source Control Plan for the
Duck, Apple, and Ashwaubenon Creeks Priority Watershed Project, the Oneida
Environmental, Health and Safety Department is using bioengineering techniques
for stream stabilization in Duck Creek. Bioengineering uses vegetation as an
alternative to rip-rap. The project experienced some difficulties in establishing
vegetation, but this was expected. The Environmental, Health and Safety Depart-
ment chose bioengineering over traditional rip-rap because the stabilization is
more effective once vegetation is established, it is more aesthetically pleasing, it
impacts the environment less, and the work is less energy-intensive. These
advantages compensate for the fact that revegetation will take longer than
installing rip-rap.
36
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
In 1994, the Dexter Road Project was initiated as a comprehensive ecological
restoration plan for a 100-acre agricultural field that was historically planted in
crops. This restoration effort involved a comprehensive plan for woodland,
wetland, and grassland restoration, with a commitment to refrain from using
chemical pesticides or fertilizers during the restoration. The project involved
reintroducing more than 100 native species of forbs and grasses on 37 acres.
During the spring of 1996, 36,000 conifer and hardwood seedlings were planted
as part of this project. The small natural wetland was allowed to restore itself
naturally.
a£| Mitigation
^^ The Tribe requires wetland mitigation, using an unofficial but working
policy of a 2:1 replacement ratio (i.e., two wetland acres are restored for each
wetland acre impacted) in current and future projects. Similarly, there are
mitigation requirements for trees removed, at a 2:1 ratio. In 1993, the Environ-
mental Resources Board and the Economic Development Division agreed to set
aside 270 acres surrounding the Oneida Nation Light Business Park for wildlife
habitat restoration. A comprehensive restoration plan was developed and work
began in 1994. The plan included reforestation, grassland habitat, food plots for
wildlife, wetlands, and brooding ponds. The Tribe reports that planted vegetation
has become established and many mammals and birds (including nine species of
ducks) have returned to the restoration area. Currently, the Tribe is developing a
maintenance and management plan for the site, to ensure its ecological success.
.Additionally, the Tribe is designing and installing signs to educate the public
about this restored wildlife habitat.
The Tribe is discussing plans with the Wisconsin Department of Transporta-
tion to use Tribal lands as a wetland mitigation bank. Under such an arrange-
ment, the Tribe would gain wetland acreage while mitigating the impact of
highway projects in other parts of the state.
Partnerships and Stakeholder Coordination
The Oneida Nation has participated in many U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture programs intended to restore and protect the natural environment of the
reservation. In 1997, the Tribe received a $677,312 grant under the Environmen-
tal Quality Incentives Program to provide cost-share funding to landowners who
install best management practices to reduce nonpoint source pollution. In addi-
tion, the Oneida Nation Farm has placed more than 1,500 acres of sensitive land
into the Conservation and Wetland Reserve Programs.
The Oneida are a partner in the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Indian Affairs, Circle of Flight program, which focuses on enhancing waterfowl
habitat. Since 1991, the Circle of Flight program has distributed $3.7 million to
24 reservations and 3 inter-Tribal organizations for waterfowl and wetland
enhancement projects.
Monitoring
I The tributaries within the Oneida Reservation are affected by nonpoint
source pollution, as well as pollution coming directing from the Fox River. This
has resulted in fish consumption advisories, degraded water quality, and de-
' creased recreational and cultural uses. The objective of monitoring is to gather
environmental information on the water quality of the Reservation. This informa-
tion will be used for analysis and research, and compliance with Oneida Water
Quality Standards and the Oneida Water Resource Ordinance.
37
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Although many investigations have been undertaken, comprehensive water
quality monitoring is only beginning on waters of the Reservation. The Oneida
Water Resources Team works cooperatively with USGS in establishing fixed sites
for the collection of water quality data and hydrologic data. The goals of monitor-
ing are to 1) determine the basic water quality in Reservation lakes and streams
and 2) determine the successes or failures of best management practices by,
tracking water quality over time.
Sources of Support
The Oneida have received funding from numerous sources, including the
Oneida Nation Environmental Resources Board, Circle of Flight, the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources Nonpoint Source Pollution Abatement Program,
the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Environmental Quality Incentives Program,
and EPA's Coastal Environmental Management and Great Lakes Programs.
Contact
Steve Linskens or Jeff Sanders, Environmental Planners
Environmental, Health and Safety Department
EO. Box 365
Oneida, WI 54155
Phone: (920) 497-5812
Fax: (920) 496-7883
38
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Port Graham/
Nanwalek
Native Villages
Program Components:
Wetland and Watershed Planning • Wetland Inventory, Assessment,
Mapping • Partnerships and Stakeholder Coordination • Education and
Outreach « Monitoring
Background
Port Graham and Nanwalek are two Aleutiiq villages located on the Lower
Kenai Peninsula of Alaska. The Port Graham/Nanwalek Watershed Council was
formed to protect and preserve an area that includes two adjacent watersheds:
English Bay River and Port Graham River and their tributaries. The two water-
sheds consist of approximately 100,000 acres of steep mountainous terrain and
glacially developed river valleys with elevations ranging from 3,000 feet to sea
level. The valley bottoms and lower slopes are covered with Sitka spruce old
growth forests; alpine tundra meadows occur in the higher elevations.
Marine, estuarine, riverine, palustrine, and lacustrine type wetlands are
represented in the two watersheds. A large number of these wetlands provide
high-quality spawning and rearing habitat for resident and anadromous fish,
including five species of salmon, halibut, cod, and trout. The Nanwalek Salmon
Enhancement Project has resulted in restoring yearly returns of approximately
40,000 adult sockeye salmon in the English Bay Lakes.
Other wildlife represented include numerous types of shellfish, waterfowl
and marine birds, eel, harbor seals, moose, black bear, mountain goat, porcupine,
and otter. Plant communities include Sitka spruce forest, tall alder shrub, halo-
phytic grass wet meadows, halophytic sedge wet meadows, sedge moss bog
meadows, alpine scrub, bluejoint reedrass-forb meadows, pondlily, eelgrass, and
marine algae. Each one of these plants and animals constitutes an integral part of
the two villages' subsistence-based economies. Medicinal plants and berries found
in the watersheds are important culturally and in providing medicine for village
members. Some medicinal plants and berries found in the two watersheds are
yarrow, Bethlehem star, devil's club bark and root, licorice fern, mountain ash,
rose petals and hips, cranberry, salmonberry, blueberry, mossberry, trailing
raspberry, nagoonberry, watermelon berry, fiddleheads, wild celery, goose
tongues, and wild onions.
Wetland and Watershed Planning
The Port Graham/Nanwalek Watershed Council was formed as a result of
meetings convened by the Chugachmiut Environmental Health Program to
conduct a region-wide survey on where funding for a wetlands protection plan
was most needed. The Chugach Regional Resources Commission, the U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service, and the Tribal
councils and Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) corporations attended
the meetings. Discussion at these meetings revealed that, in spite of the pristine
nature of the area's wetlands and other resources, proposed logging and other
commercial activities threatened the status quo, and that the watersheds of the
39
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
40
Port Graham and Nanwalek Villages stood in greatest need of a wetlands plan.
Once funding was secured, the Council was charged with developing a Wetlands
Conservation Plan encompassing the 100,000-acre planning area comprising the
two watersheds. The Port Graham/Nanwalek Watershed Council, which is
composed of people from various organizations within the two villages, meets
every two months for discussions and workshops.
Because tine ecosystems are largely healthy, the management approach of the
Watershed Council is to prevent degradation as both communities experience
growth in transportation systems, housing, and commercial resource harvests of
timber and fish. The Port Graham and Nanwalek Wetlands Conservation Plan is
turning out to be a watershed management plan with a wetland emphasis
because all of the resources are so closely linked. The Plan uses the Natural
Resources Conservation Service's planning process as a model and represents a
broad base of sponsors and stakeholders with mutual interests in the watersheds
and wetlands of the area, including Tribal councils, regional and village Native
corporations, and special interest groups. The plan is not intended to create or
expand wetland regulation, but rather to help landowners, local residents, and
land managers make wise land and resource management decisions that are
compatible with existing laws and regulations. To that end, the plan will recom-
mend how federal, state, and borough regulations should be implemented within
the two watersheds. The plan will also be used to leverage assistance or funding
from other projects, both regional and federal.
The Port Graham and Nanwalek Wetlands Conservation Plan is comprehen-
sive in scope, and includes:
• A detailed description of the planning area, including geology, hydrology,
climate, soils, plant communities (with names of species listed in Aleutiiq
and Latin), water quality, wetlands, land ownership, land uses, and
wildlife and fishery resources
• A section on plant and animal species used for subsistence
• Village histories
• An overview of relevant laws and regulations
• Stakeholder scoping issues, including:
— Natural resource and other development activities
— Environmental impacts that have been identified
— The relationship between regulation and property rights
— The role of education in watershed and wetland management and protection
— Specific management issues that need to be addressed by the Council
• Guidance in formulating alternatives to plan recommendations
• Plan implementation, providing annual work plans
Wetland Inventory, Assessment, Mapping
As a result of efforts of the Council, stakeholders in the two watersheds
have gained a greater appreciation for the interconnectedness of the region's
wetlands and the other natural resources that support humans, animal, and plant
life. A focus of the Council is to develop resource management planning tools that
help people understand why wetlands are important. For management and
assessment purposes, they have developed a matrix that identifies local society
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
values of wetland dependent natural resources. These values are stated in terms
of subsistence, cultural, and spiritual importance to the communities. Additional
columns will then be added to the matrix that identify the wetland functions that
support each expressed value, as well as the HGM (the hydrogeomorphic method
of assessing wetland functions) subclass and model. The Council also recognizes
the importance of linking HGM with measures of biological integrity "because
people can relate to critters and are interested in protecting them." The Council
benefits from the work of a geographic information system contractor, who was
hired to help organize information about the villages' resources. An example of
the matrix is presented below:
Wetland
Resources
Plants
Herbs
Shrubs/Trees
Berries
Large Animals
Moose
Bear
Goat
Small Animals
Porcupine
Rabbit
Grouse
Fish
Dollies
Trout
Salmon
Subsistence
value
Cultural
value
Spiritual
value
How used
(when,
where, why)
HGM
subclass
& model
Supporting
function
Partnerships and Stakeholder Coordination
The Council itself is providing the forum for stakeholder coordination.
These efforts are supported by technical assistance from the Natural Resources
Conservation Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and consist of not
only the Port Graham and Nanwalek Native Villages, but also the Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) corporations, which are the major landowners
within the watershed. Individual Native Allotment owners are also active partici-
pants in the process.
Education and Outreach
For education and outreach purposes (including educating the Council
itself), the Council developed a fact sheet that discusses 1) how a wetland
assessment tool is needed to make management decisions about wetlands; 2) that
the important things about wetlands are called wetland values, which include
such things as the plant and animal life that they support and the flood protec-
tion and groundwater replenishment they provide; 3) that wetlands have value
because of where they are (location) and what they do (function); and 4) that
determining their location and function is essential in the assessment, planning,
and management of wetlands. The fact sheet discusses the role of HGM and how
the Council is applying it by focusing on those wetland functions that support
41
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetfand Programs
local wetland values. Finally, it explains that mapping wetlands is an important
component of the assessment process.
The Council also developed education and outreach tools to help village
members better understand the functions and values of wetlands, what is being
done to protect them, and what they can do to help. These tools include a
colorful and informative brochure that is simple and easy to read, but provides a
level of detail allowing those with more in-depth or technical interests to be
engaged, and an 11-minute video that displays local wetland types and associated
natural resources and including sound bites from several Council members
describing the importance of wetlands and watershed planning. The video and
brochure, which were distributed to every household in the two villages, invite all
members to join in the planning process.
Monitoring
1 The Port Graham/Nanwalek Native Villages have developed bioassessment
protocols in cooperation with the University of Alaska-Anchorage campus. During
the summer of 1998, at least six sample stations were established within the
project area, with the assistance of the Port Graham/Nanwalek Watershed
Council. Macroinvertebrate samples were collected to establish the baseline
reference conditions of the Native Villages' riverine wetlands.
Sources of Support
The Port Graham and Nanwalek Native Villages have received funding from
numerous sources, including the Chugachmiut Environmental Health/Protection
Program, Chugachmiut Forestry/Lands Program, an EPA Wetland Development
Grant, and the Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Contacts
Christine Celentano
Chugachmiut
4201 Tudor Centre Drive, Suite 210
Anchorage, AK 99508
Phone: (907) 562-4155
Fax: (907) 563-2891
Dan LaPlant
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
949 East 36th Avenue, Suite 400
Anchorage, AK 99508
Phone: (907) 271-2424
Fax: (907) 271-3951
42
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Seminole Tribe
of Florida
Program Components:
Wetland Inventory, Assessment, Mapping • Regulation
Wetland Research
Monitoring
Background
The sovereign lands of the Seminole Tribe of Florida are spread out among
five reservations, known as the Hollywood, Big Cypress, Brighton, Tampa, and
Immokalee Seminole Indian Reservations. In addition to these reservations, the
Seminole Tribe has reserved Tribal fishing and hunting rights on lands adjacent to
the eastern boundary of the Big Cypress Reservation that were granted to the
Seminole Tribe by the State of Florida.
In spite of modernization of many aspects of Seminole life, Tribal members
still maintain strong ties with their land and natural resources. For instance,
cypress trees and sabal palms are harvested to construct chickee huts, once the
only form of shelter, now used for ceremonial and recreational purposes. Many
Tribal members are avid hunters who enjoy the availability of wild hogs and deer
within the swamps, marshes, and hammocks of the rural reservations. The
Seminoles place a high value on arable soils, surface and ground water, swamps,
marshes, rangeland, timber, medicinal plants, and wildlife. In one way or another,
these natural resources are either directly dependent on wetlands, or the manner
in which they are managed can impact the health of wetlands. Thus, wetland
conservation is a top priority for the Seminole Tribe.
Like many contemporary Tribal members throughout the United States today,
Seminoles range from traditionalists who see themselves as one with nature and
are ever protective of it to more progressive members who have taken the
opportunity to capitalize on their available resources to obtain economic self-
sufficiency and advancement for the Seminole-Tribe as a whole. The Tribal
government is faced with reconciling these often competing interests and encour-
aging growth and development that need to be sustained to provide future
generations of Seminoles with opportunities.
Big Cypress Reservation
The Big Cypress Reservation is the largest of the Seminole reservations,
located in the southeastern corner of Hendry County and the northwestern
corner of Broward County, encompassing approximately 81.5 square miles or
52,160 acres. This reservation is an integral part of the regional water manage-
ment system, as a pathway for water flow into the adjacent Big Cypress National
Preserve, and ultimately into Everglades National Park. In addition, the Tribe de-
pends on surface and groundwater resources located on Big Cypress for potable
uses as well as agricultural production. Due to the ecological, cultural, and
socioeconomic importance of the Big Cypress Reservation, it is the focus of much
of the Tribe's efforts in defining and solving natural resource problems overall.
The Big Cypress Reservation lies at a junction of soil and vegetation types. To
the east lie the classic sawgrass everglades (extensive prairies with occasional
43
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
tree islands), underlain by highly organic muck soils. Muck soils indicate that, at
least in the past, high soil moisture inhibited degradation of plant remains and
peat formed. To the west, there is primarily a more sand or rocky soil base and, in
general, a forested terrain with occasional wet prairies interspersed. Cypress
heads/strands are frequent and higher sites consist of pine flatwoods maintained
by a schedule of burning. The winter dry season is followed by a summer wet
season, leading to wide fluctuations in water levels across the reservation. Most
wetlands dry out completely when rains slacken. This may have been different in
the past before extensive regional hydrologic modifications (described later) were
made. For example, in one old-growth cypress head in the southern "Native Area"
there are very tall cypress knees, up to 5.5 feet tall. This indicates that the
maximum water level at this site used to be in the 5-foot range, yet the present-
day maximum seems to be less than 2 feet based on the height of the lichen/moss
line on the knees. The knees of these extremely old cypress trees remain as
bioindicators of hydrology prior to drainage.
Development of water resources and urbanization both on and off Tribal
lands has led to considerable impacts on the quantity and quality of water, as well
as wetland and wildlife resources on the reservation. Upstream agriculture has
increased phosphorus loadings, leading to an imbalance in the composition and
distribution of flora within the larger Everglades ecosystem. Regional hydrologic
modifications (in the form of the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control
Project built during the canal building era of the 1960s) have greatly reduced the
regional supply of water, virtually stopping all water flow into the reservation
from the north except for that which enters through the North and West Feeder
Canals. Local hydrologic changes (in the form of construction of wetland rim
ditches and berms, and field and collection ditches in the pastures and agricul-
tural fields) affect the distribution of water that is still available, and thus repre-
sent significant impacts on wetland integrity as well.
Wetland Inventory, Assessment, Mapping
_ In 1992, with funding from an EPA Wetland Development Grant, the Tribe
undertook a comprehensive program for locating, delineating, and mapping
wetland resources on all its reservations, including the Big Cypress Reservation. A
wetland database was developed, including 1) wetland boundaries digitized from
1" = 400' scale aerial photographs and field truthed for verification, 2) a two-
tiered classification system distinguishing between swamps and marshes and
distinctive types of each, 3) a classification modifier that identified types of
evident impacts, and 4) the acreage of each wetland mapped.
The primary objective of the mapping and inventory project was to identify
the limits of wetlands, as defined under prevailing federal guidelines (1987 Corps
of Engineers methodology), for use as a planning tool in the design and regulation of
future projects on the reservation. This mapping project produced a planning tool
that is now used to assess the wetland impacts from proposed uses of Tribal
lands.
44
Regulation
In 1987, as part of a settlement agreement resulting from a water rights
dispute, the Seminole Tribe, the State of Florida, and the South Florida Water
Management District entered into a Water Rights Compact. The Compact set
ground rules by which the parties to the Compact had to abide in relation to
water rights, outlined how future disputes would be resolved, and allowed for
essential protection of wetlands within reservation boundaries. The signing of the
Compact led the Tribal Council of the Seminole Tribe of Florida to create the
Water Resource Management Department (WRMD). WRMD, overseen by the
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Seminole Water Commission (SWC), is charged with protecting and evaluating the
Tribe's land and water resources and facilitating wise use and conservation of
these resources by other departments and individuals doing business on Tribal lands.
SWC and WRMD developed the Tribal Water Code to establish a legal frame-
work for protecting and restoring the waters of the Tribe's reservations. The
Seminole Tribe was granted TAS status by EPA to implement the Clean Water Act,
including setting water quality standards for Tribal lands. In early 1998, SWC
approved Final Rules for Water Quality Protection and Restoration: Rules to Carry
Out the Federal Clean Water Act and the Tribal Water Code. The Final Rules
include water quality standards for the Brighton and Big Cypress Reservations,
and provisions for the beneficial use and Conservation of water resources. These
standards and provisions cover wetlands as well as surface waters. WRMD is
working to improve the existing water quality standards to place more emphasis
on wetlands. These efforts are described below.
The overall goal of the Big Cypress Water Conservation Plan, of which the
Tribe's wetlands program is an integral part, is to join all of the reservation's
water and land resources in a single, controllable system to better serve both
human and environmental needs. This integrated concept of reconnecting
wetland resources with the associated upland areas will be assessed as a possible
guide for other landowners in the Everglades watersheds and other American
Indian reservations with wetland resources.
Monitoring
\ Part of the inventory effort described earlier included two years of charac-
terization of specific reference wetlands, in terms of water quality and vegetative
and macroinvertebrate community types. This effort was continued into an
ongoing monitoring program. The current monitoring program includes water
quality monitoring (twice monthly), macroinvertebrate collection (quarterly),
vegetative transect inventory (quarterly), and panoramic photos (quarterly). In
addition, each of the monitoring sites has a water level recorder for groundwater
elevation monitoring.
The Tribe is developing wetland biocriteria to assist in the early detection of
impairment to water quality resulting from land use upstream of reservation
wetlands. The Tribe would like to incorporate biological criteria for wetlands into
the Tribal Water Code Water Quality Standards. Ultimately, thresholds will be
found where wetland functions can be maintained while serving the many water
resource needs of the reservation, such as water storage, flood control, water
quality enhancement, and water table/aquifer replenishment, thereby improving
the Tribe's ability to protect and enhance its wetland resources while at the same
time maintaining or enhancing species diversity through the establishment of
specific biological criteria. The current monitoring program provides a strong
foundation upon which to build a biocriteria development program.
In addition to augmenting the wetlands data they collect, in terms of types of
information and number of sites monitored, it is a top priority of WRMD to
improve the quality of the data collected. Random lab testing is done on a
constant basis, and the quality assurance plan for data collection is currently
being revised and updated.
Wetland Research
WRMD is constantly reassessing and fine tuning its research questions to
ensure that the Tribe's efforts are directing scarce resources to the most pertinent
issues. Nutrient loading and the effects of previous hydrologic modification pose
specific challenges to the Tribe, and part of their research is aimed at developing
45
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wet/and Programs
best management practices that" can reduce the impacts of these factors on
wetland water quality and habitat integrity. An emerging area of research interest
for the Tribe is forested wetland systems (especially bald and pond cypress),
which form a large part of the western Everglades. These systems are understud-
ied and ill-defined. The Tribe believes that research into the functioning of these
systems will help increase the overall understanding of the Everglades as an
ecological system.
Sources of Support
The Seminole Tribe received an EPA Wetland Development Grant that
supported the Tribe's wetland mapping and inventory project on the Big Cypress
Reservation. Ongoing monitoring and research efforts are supported through a
collaboration of Tribal, BIA, EPA, and NPS funding sources.
Contact
Craig Tepper, Director
Water Resource Management Department
6300 Stirling Road
Hollywood, PL 33024
Phone: (954) 967-3402
Fax: (954) 967-3489
e-mail: water@gate.net
46
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Taos Pueblo
Program Components:
Education and Outreach • Monitoring
Background
Taos Pueblo, sitting at an elevation of 7,600 feet, is the northernmost of the
19 Pueblos of New Mexico, located in north-central New Mexico. Tribal lands
consist of approximately 98,000 acres, encompassing three distinct biozones—
alpine tundra and lakes, mixed conifer and aspen forests, and high desert pinon
and juniper forests.
The Rio Pueblo and the Rio Lucero, along with their associated watersheds,
compose the two major drainage basins on Taos Pueblo lands. Both rivers have
their headwaters—Blue Lake and Bear Lake, respectively—in the northern
montane region of the reservation known as the Blue Lake Wilderness Area. Both
rivers flow from an elevation of approximately 12,000 feet at their headwaters to
5,200 feet at their floodplains, where they meet the Rio Grande. These two lakes
are designated as "outstanding Tribal resource waters" and are provided special
protection under the Tribe's proposed water quality standards. The Rio Pueblo
flows directly through the historic village, supplying water for ceremonial and
domestic purposes. The Rio Lucero is primarily used for irrigation and grazing.
Taos Pueblo members are extremely proud of their traditional culturally oriented
lifestyle, as evidenced by the following statement on their web site: "We pride our
lifestyle with nature as the true source of our existence."
Taos Pueblo has approximately 800 acres of freshwater wetlands on Tribal
lands. These wetlands are an ancient glacial bed, and snowmelt from higher
elevations recharges them. According to the Taos Pueblo Environmental Office,
there used to be 1,000 acres of wetlands in this area. The loss of wetlands is
attributed to development and an increased demand for water beyond Pueblo
borders, resulting in over-pumping of groundwater. Loss of natural springs near
these wetlands is also attributed to groundwater pumping. Annual spring runoff
has not been sufficient to compensate for the increased demand for water.
The remaining wetlands on Taos Tribal lands are in relatively pristine condi-
tion. To protect them, the Pueblo employs the traditional tools of rotation and
exclusion of livestock, including cattle, horses, bison, and buffalo, to avoid the
impacts of overgrazing on water quality. Additionally, all crops grown upstream
from the wetlands are grown "organically," without the use pesticides, fertilizers,
and other chemicals that could impact the integrity of Tribal waters. Other
sustainable agriculture techniques, such as the use of cover crops, buffer strips,
and composting, are used to promote healthy soil and reduce erosion.
Education and Outreach
Education and training of Environmental Office staff and Tribal members is
a top priority for Taos Pueblo's environmental program. Pueblo members are very
traditional in their view of the environment—they want very much to protect it,
but are apprehensive about using modern, technological approaches to protec-
tion. One of the main objectives of the Environmental Office's education and
47
-------
Case Studies offribal Wertand Programs
outreach effort is to help Pueblo members overcome this apprehension, which
will ultimately help the Pueblo develop effective environmental protection
programs.
Capacity building of staff is furthered by embracing a partnership approach
to education and training. Taos Pueblo is fortunate to receive expert technical
assistance from Dr. Gerald Jacobi of New Mexico Highlands University in the area
of benthic macroinvertebrate identification. The River Watch Network, a nongov-
ernmental organization, has been extremely valuable in training staff on monitor-
ing techniques. Continuing education is an integral component of the environ-
mental program at Taos Pueblo. In fact, other Tribes and pueblos in the region
have benefited from the knowledge of the Taos Pueblo Environmental Office.
Environmental Office staff have conducted several training sessions in water
quality monitoring for other Tribes and pueblos, which are now developing and
implementing their own monitoring programs.
In addition to the monitoring program, the Environmental Office is engaged
in other education and outreach activities. The Environmental Office produced
several brochures that describe their programs, and specifically, the biological
monitoring program. Currently under development are separate curricula de-
signed for four different age groups: K-3, 4-6, 7-9, and 10-12. Three different
curricula are being developed for each group, covering 1) benthic
macroinvertebrates and their relationship to water quality and monitoring; 2)
wetlands ecology and conservation, and their relationship to the larger watershed
ecosystem; and 3) solid waste issues. The three major components of the cur-
ricula are class work, lab work, and field experience. The Environmental Office is
receiving support on this project from EPA Region 6, and there is much interest
from other schools, pueblos, and Tribes. The Environmental Office believes that
education and outreach are two of their most important tasks in furthering
environmental protection on and off the Pueblo.
The Pueblo has not yet adopted its own water quality standards. The Envi-
ronmental Office is focusing on educating and building the capacity of its staff. In
this way, once standards are adopted, the staff will be positioned with the appro-
priate knowledge to implement die program. According to an Environmental
Office brochure: "Taos Pueblo's goal of the environmental program is to become
self sufficient and train Tribal members to understand and implement protection
and preservation of our environment." The Tribe prides itself on the fact that
environmental staff is made up solely of Pueblo members, furthering a sense of
ownership of Tribal resources. The Environmental Office also collaborates
extensively with other Tribes and organizations that have similar interests. Taos
Pueblo has a volunteer monitoring program that supports the specific goals of the
water quality monitoring program, while also furthering the outreach efforts of
the Environmental Office by educating interested Pueblo members about water
quality and the impacts humans have on environmental quality.
I Monitoring
I Taos Pueblo has an extensive water quality monitoring program that
focuses on surface waters. They are already in the process of developing a
monitoring program specifically for wetlands, based on the foundation and
success of the surface water monitoring program. The Environmental Office
believes that it is important to monitor the health of wetlands, just as it is for
surface waters, to have a baseline of integrity to use as a reference point in
making management decisions and evaluating impacts to the resources. The
surface water quality monitoring program considers chemical and biological
conditions to measure the health of the ecosystem and determine the type and
48
_
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
source of stressors impacting the waterbodies. Chemical monitoring includes pH,
conductivity, dissolved oxygen, temperature, total alkalinity, phosphorus, and
nitrates. Biological monitoring focuses on the collection and identification of
benthic macroinvertebrates. The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Identification Project
began in the spring of 1996. The biological monitoring program is based on
reference site criteria, with a pristine site, an impacted site, and a recovered site.
The program uses protocols based on the EPA Rapid Bioassessment Protocol.
Sources of Support
The Taos Pueblo has received funding or technical assistance and support
from EPA Region 6, EPA's American Indian Environmental Office, Bureau of
Reclamation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, River Watch Network, Rio Grande Restora-
tion, and the HACK Technical Training Center. Several technical experts also
provide support to the Pueblo, including Kenneth King, Licensed Geologist; Dr.
Gerald Jacobi, New Mexico Highlands University; and Jeff Toomey, Northern New
Mexico Community College.
Contact
Luis Zamora, Director
Environmental Office
PO. Box 1864
Taos, NM 87871
Phone: (505) 751-4601
Fax: (505) 751-3905
e-mail: tpeo@laplaza.org
Internet home page: www.laplaza.org/tpeo
49
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
50
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Wampanoag Tribe
of Gay Head
Program Components:
Wetland and Watershed Planning • Wetland Inventory, Assessment,
Mapping • Restoration • Monitoring
Background
The Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) is located on the westernmost
point of Martha's Vineyard, off the coast of southern Massachusetts. Tribal lands
span 530 acres, of which 35 percent are wetlands. While all of the wetlands are
culturally important to the Tribe, cranberry bogs are especially significant for the
Wampanoag. Wampanoag means "colors by the sea" in the Aquinnah Wampanoag
language, and this name is exemplified by the ripening cranberries during harvest
season. Cranberry bogs are naturally occurring on Tribal lands and were created
by receding glaciers (i.e., glacial waters filling depressions scoured by the glacier
movements). In previous centuries, the Tribe harvested what the bogs produced
naturally. Cranberries are now cultivated by the Tribe, using traditional methods
that preserve the cranberry plant's habitat. Cranberry bogs make up 15 to 20
acres of the Tribe's total acreage and produce a bounty of cranberries every year.
This harvest is celebrated on Cranberry Day, the Wampanoag traditional holiday,
held on the second Tuesday of October every year.
Aquinnah is practically an island unto itself, with the Coastal Great Ponds,
Menemsha and Squinocket, separating it from the rest of Martha's Vineyard. The
two ponds are each 600 acres, one being salt water and the other brackish. The
ponds are very important to the local economy as a tourist attraction as well as
for commercial and recreational fishing. The ponds are shared between the Tribe
and the towns of Aquinnah and Chilmark. This joint use has encouraged the
three entities to collaborate on a comprehensive watershed plan discussed below.
Other wetlands in the area are important habitat for fish, shellfish, and waterfowl
(including Canada geese, teal, mallard, and black ducks), all of which are har-
vested for subsistence by Tribal members. Bay scallops, quahogs, soft shell clams,
oysters, other shellfish, and lobster are also found in these areas and are very
important to the local Tribal economy. Tribal lands lie above Martha's Vineyard's
sole source aquifer. Most of the island depends on well water for its drinking
water supply, making wetland protection even more important.
Other significant species relying on the habitats in and around the bogs
include several species of orchids and Nantucket shadbush, which is listed as
threatened by the state. This habitat is also essential nesting and foraging habitat
for the Northern harrier hawk.
Wetland and Watershed Planning
To ensure that shared resources in the watershed are protected, the Tribe
engaged in a watershed planning process with the towns of Aquinnah and
Chilmark in 1996. The three jurisdictions share the Coastal Great Ponds, and all
have an impact on the water resources upon which residents of the two towns
and Tribal members depend. The trio convened a scoping session with stakehold-
ers from the towns and the Tribe, which resulted in a prioritization of assessment
51
-------
Cose Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
activities. Through this prioritization effort, the towns and the Tribe identified
policies that should be enacted to protect their shared water resources.
Wetland Inventory, Assessment, Mapping
The Tribe delineated all of its wetlands and stored the data in ArcView, a
geographic information system (CIS). The Tribe also conducted a nonpoint
source assessment for their portion of the watershed and cultural use studies of
their wetland resources.
Restoration
Although cranberry cultivation in Massachusetts is a big business, the
Wampanoag cultivation of cranberries is strictly a cultural, as opposed to com-
mercial, activity. In other words, all of the cranberries harvested are reserved for
Tribal consumption. The Tribe cultivates cranberries traditionally and organically,
using no mechanization and no synthetic pesticides or fertilizers. All work
associated with growing the cranberries is done by hand, an important tradition
in the Wampanoag culture. The Tribe views cranberry cultivation as integral to
their Tribal heritage and current well-being, and thus believes that by avoiding
the use of machines and chemicals, they are preserving the cranberry habitat so
that it can continue to produce cranberries for current and future generations.
The Tribe's goal is to preserve the bogs as they are naturally occurring.
The Wampanoag Natural Resources Department is engaged in a variety of
activities to preserve and restore the cranberry bogs. Restoration of the bogs
involves manually clearing vegetation that competes with the cranberry plants,
blocking light and using soil and nutrients that the cranberry plants need. Preser-
vation efforts are concerned with mitigating the impacts of nonpoint source
pollution flowing into the bogs. A highway goes right through the bogs and has
thus disturbed the natural drainage that existed before the road was built. The
Tribe is concerned about the potential impacts of runoff of petrochemicals and
heavy metals from the highway as well as storm water runoff. Currently, the Tribe
is looking into building retention ponds and installing petroleum scrubbing catch
basins along the flow of storm water to remove the petrochemicals and heavy metals.
Monitoring
^83 Through funding from EPA and technical assistance from the Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
the Tribe is in the process of implementing a wetlands monitoring program. The
Tribe periodically inventories biological diversity, including species diversity, within
the bogs. This monitoring data will be stored in the Tribe's CIS database. It will
be used to track the success of their wetland preservation and restoration efforts.
Sources of Support
The Tribe has received Clean Water Act Section 104(b) (3) Wetlands Protec-
tion Program funding as well as Section 106 funding. The NRCS provides funding
for a part-time Tribal-NRCS staff position. The Tribe continues to receive funding
from the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs' Section 638 Tribal Program for water
resources, fish and wildlife, and natural resources.
52
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
Contact
Matthew Vanderhoop, Director
Natural Resources Department
20 Black Brook Road
Gay Head, MA 02535
Phone: (508) 645-9265
Fax: (508) 645-3790
53
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
54
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
White Mountain
Apache Tribe
Program Components:
Wetland and Watershed Planning • Restoration • Education and Outreach
Background
The Fort Apache Indian Reservation, home to the White Mountain Apache
Tribe, is located in east-central Arizona. Tribal lands encompass more than 1.6
million acres ranging in elevation from 2,700 to 11,400 feet. Thousands of miles
of streams flow through the reservation, including more than 600 miles of fish-
bearing streams. In recognition of the ecological and cultural significance of these
waters, the Tribe designated all riparian zones as sensitive areas to be restored to
full health. The Tribe adopted a Wetlands Conservation Plan to guide the restora-
tion and other wetlands that are degraded.
Tribal wetlands provide habitat at various life stages for many species of
plants and animals that are economically and culturally important to the White
Mountain Apache Tribe. Trophy elk, ponderosa pine, native trout, the Arizona
willow, and other native wetland plant species are among the biota that depend
on healthy wetland habitat. The White Mountain Apache's diverse environmental
management programs work together to protect these and other resources that
Tribal members depend on for subsistence, cultural, and economic reasons.
Overgrazing by domestic, feral, and wild ungulates is a major source of riparian
degradation, leading to soil compaction, bank erosion, and shifts in vegetation
composition to non-native species. Livestock overgrazing dates back to the early part
of this century when non-Indian grazing permits were first issued by the federal
government. Subsequently, intensive road and railroad construction, vegetation
eradication, reseeding with exotic species, channel manipulations, and other
federal land management efforts contributed to a legacy of riparian degradation.
The protection of the Tribe's water resources is an integral part of its
multipronged effort to achieve sustainable development. The White Mountain
Apache acknowledge four cornerstones to sustainability, which are interdepen-
dent and mutually reinforcing. The Tribe recognizes these cornerstones as forms
of social and natural capital essential to its existence. The four cornerstones are:
• People, with knowledge, awareness, faith, and energy to promote sound
resource management
• Ecosystems, that are currently in, or can be restored to, healthy and
productive conditions
• Culture, instilling strong values that bind communities, that facilitate long-
range planning based on traditional knowledge and experience, and that
encourage promotion of healthy ecosystems
• Sovereignty, including the power to make unfettered decisions about Tribal
resources
At the heart of the Tribe's sustainable development program is the strategy of
restoration of all four cornerstones. The Tribe's wetlands protection efforts
55
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
56
address three of the cornerstones directly and are discussed in this case study.
The fourth area, sovereignty, is all-encompassing and is addressed by virtue of the
Tribe's proactive approach to natural resource management.
Wetland and Watershed Planning
In 1995, the Tribe was awarded an EPA Wetland Development Grant to
begin development of a wetlands conservation plan. The Tribal Wetlands Conser-
vation Plan (Council Resolution 12-97-367) was adopted in December 1997. It
serves as a guide for the riparian and wetland restoration efforts currently under way.
The Wetlands Conservation Plan focuses on protecting, maintaining, and
restoring the Tribe's wetlands. Protection guidelines currently under development
will address the needs of different wetland types (meadows, marshes, and lakes),
to protect them from the primary sources of impacts to wetlands (cattle overgraz-
ing, feral horses, elk, and roads). The implementation plan proposes demonstra-
tion projects for the ID Restoration Area and North Fork Watershed. The plan also
includes a monitoring and evaluation program that will allow for measuring
progress as well as providing feedback to the implementation process.
Restoration
In 1995, the White Mountain Apache Tribe initiated a riparian-wetland
assessment and restoration program on the reservation. The program initially
focused on passive restoration at 13 sites by excluding livestock from riparian
areas with fencing. The primary objective of the riparian restoration program was
to encourage the recovery of degraded sites by allowing vegetation to grow. By
emphasizing relatively low-cost passive restoration, the program sought to
generate a broad base of information on the recovery potential of degraded areas
and guide more intensive restoration efforts. Sites were selected across the
reservation at various ecological zones ranging in elevation from 5,000 to nearly
9,000 feet. Sites were chosen based on preliminary identification of problem
areas and/or suggestions by Tribal members familiar with the history of degrada-
tion and recovery potential of the sites.
In addition to livestock exclusion, the White Mountain Apache Wetlands
Program works to reduce feral horse and elk populations in sensitive areas to
encourage recovery of wetland plants. In addition, the Tribe seeds and transports
native species in sensitive areas.
In 1997, the Tribe conducted an evaluation of seven restoration sites to gauge
the effectiveness of the initial restoration strategy. The sites included Horseshoe
Cienega and Pacheta Cienega, both of which are meadows that sit at high eleva-
tions. Kentucky bluegrass and Rocky Mountain iris had displaced the native
sedges at Horseshoe Cienega as a result of a lowering of the water table. Exclu-
sion, sedge seeding, and transplanting, and other measures, helped to re-establish
the native wetland plants.
Many lessons were learned from the initial restoration efforts that have
helped shape future activities. For instance, passive restoration was successful at
sites that had native wetland plants, but not in sufficient concentrations due to
heavy animal impacts. These sites tended to be more functional than some of the
other sites. In these cases, fencing was the most appropriate tool. At other sites,
however, the channels were hampered by severe physical dysfunctions that
needed to be addressed before passive restoration could yield much improvement.
Knowledge gained from these lessons sparked the development of a decision-
making process to support planning for future restoration projects. The decision-
making process is focused on site-level planning to address those factors that most
-------
Case Studies of Tribal Wetland Programs
limit riparian recovery. The Tribe notes that while making such evaluations, it is
critical to keep in mind how the controlling forces of geomorphology, plants, and
animals are intertwined. The early phase of the process should assess the extent
to which channel hydrology and geomorphology are limited by off-site conditions.
One of the most important lessons that the White Mountain Apache learned
from their restoration efforts is that non-woody wetland vegetation, such as
sedges, rushes, reeds, and bulrushes, play a critical role in maintaining stream
structure and function. This lesson is now being applied to the more arid lands at
lower elevations of the reservation.
Education and Outreach
People are the human capital needed to fortify the foundations of
sustainability. Education and outreach for staff and Tribal members are integral
components of the White Mountain Apache's restoration strategy. Regularly
scheduled Natural Resource Workshops bring together leaders and resource
managers to hone leadership skills in natural resource management. Apprentice-
ship and mentor programs help develop Tribal managers under the supervision
and training of experienced managers. The Tribe holds field workshops that
attract Tribal members from all over the West. The most recent workshop, which
focused on riparian management, was held in cooperation with the InterTribal
Timber Council.
A permanent fund was established by the Tribal Council to assist students of
natural resource management. An EPA Wetland Development Grant helped fund
an Ecological Youth Camp for young Tribal members to raise their awareness of
ecology and to get hands-on experience in the field.
The cultural dimension of restoration is addressed through various efforts to
enlist elders and other Tribal members to apply traditional knowledge of place,
plants, and animals. This information guides resource management and educa-
tion programs. The Tribe is working to encourage eco-tourism ventures by Tribal
members, while instituting plans to ensure that such development is compatible
with cultural and environmental concerns. In 1999 the Tribe's Land Restoration
Fund, matched by outside funds, began to provide a permanent source of funding
to sustain these evolving initiatives.
Sources of Support
The White Mountain Apache Tribe received an EPA Wetland Development Grant
under Clean Water Act Section 104(b)(3), and an EPA Water Pollution Control
Grant under Clean Water Act Section 106. The Tribe also received a U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service Challenge Cost Share Award. Other funding and support were
obtained from the Arizona Water Protection Fund, the U.S. Forest Service Rocky
Mountain Station in Flagstaff, Arizona, and through the Job Training Partnership Act.
Contact
Candy Lupe, Manager
Watershed Program, Wetlands Project
BO. Box 700
Whiteriver, AZ 85941
Tel: (520) 338-4346 x 284
Fax: (520) 338-5195
57
-------
Case Studies ofTribal Wetland Programs
58
_
-------
Conclusions
EPA is dedicated to supporting Tribal efforts to maintain and restore the
physical, chemical, and biological integrity of aquatic ecosystems throughout
Indian country. As government-to-government relations have evolved, EPA and
Tribes are improving their abilities to work together to solve complex environmen-
tal and public health issues. The EPA Wetland Development Grant Program provides
support for development of Tribal wetland programs that achieve wetland-specific
goals along with supporting a Tribe's broader strategy of protecting and enhancing
environmental quality and public health. Steady financial support for Tribal
programs will help to ensure future monitoring, research, and protection for Tribal
wetlands. c
EPA serves as a catalyst to bring interested parties and experts together to
discuss wetland-related issues. EPA's Wetlands Division has sponsored two Tribal,
wetland-focused meetings in different regions of the country. In July 1997, the
Oneida Nation hosted Building Native American Partnerships—Wetlands Conserva-
tion Planning for the Protection and Restoration of Wetland, Floodplain, Riparian
and River Systems in Green Bay, Wisconsin. In September 1998, the Skokomish
Tribe hosted pStulas, A Time for Hearing—A Tribal Forum for Natural and Aquatic
Resources in Olympia, Washington. These two meetings were planned in response
to discussions at EPA's National Wetlands Meeting in Boulder, Colorado, in Septem-
ber 1996. Tribal representatives attending that meeting pointed out the need for .
improved communication and coordination between EPA and Tribes to work more
effectively toward meeting natural resource protection and restoration goals. The
two regional meetings were very successful in providing a forum for frank discus-
sion of past and current problems and in generating ideas for developing solutions
to these problems.
As this report demonstrates, there is a growing recognition by both Tribes and
EPA that much can be learned from one another in protecting wetland resources.
The single most daunting challenge facing Indian and non-Indian natural resource
managers today is development of strategies to protect and restore ecosystems
without negatively affecting local and national economies. This challenge is
particularly acute for Tribes because in many cases their economies have not
developed to the extent necessary to provide the desired standard of living for their
members. Their natural resources maybe severely degraded by activities from _
which they did not gain monetarily. This type of situation puts many Indians at a
disadvantage not necessarily understood by non-Indians. Additionally, the cultural
and spiritual significance of Tribal natural resources and the associated traditional
knowledge of these resources are poorly understood by non-Indians, making even
more difficult the process of overcoming cultural differences to work together to
protect the environment and public health.
59
-------
Conclusions
EPA will continue to work with Indians, other native peoples, and non-Indians
to tackle environmental protection and public health issues. EPA sponsors applied
wetlands research that may be applicable to Tribal wetland protection efforts. EPA
will continue to share this information with Tribes and work with them to develop
strategies that meet their programmatic and technical needs and interests. The EPA
Wetlands Division hopes that these case studies will serve as a resource for Tribal
governments and other governments as they develop and refine their wetland
protection programs. The Division invites all interested Tribes to share their
experiences in wetlands protection and planning so this valuable information
resource can be updated and expanded in the future.
60
-------
I
EPA Regional Tribal and
Wetland Contacts
REGION 1
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
JFK Federal Building Boston, MA 02203
Phone: (617) 918-1111
Fax: (617) 565-3660
Jim Sappier, Indian Coordinator
Mail Code PAG 2300
Phone: (617) 918-1672
Fax: (617) 918-4940
Patricia Anderson, Wetlands Coordinator
Phone:(617)918-1824
REGION 4
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303-3104
Phone: (404) 562-9900
Fax: (404) 562-8174
Mark Robertson, Indian Coordinator
Phone: (404) 562-9639
Fax: (404) 562-9598
William L. Cox, Wetlands Coordinator
Phone: (404) 562-9351
REGION 2
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
290 Broadway
New York, NY 10007-1866
Phone:(212)637-3000
Fax: (212) 637-3526
Christine Yost, Indian Coordinator
Mail Code 2PM-E1
Phone: (212) 637-3564
Fax: (212) 637-3772
Dan Montella, Wetlands Coordinator
Phone: (212) 637-3801
REGION 5
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
77 W. Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604-3507
Phone: (312) 353-2000
Fax: (312) 353-4135
Casey Ambutas, Indian Coordinator
Mail Code 5ME-19J
Phone: (312) 353-1394
Fax: (312)353-1120
Sue Elston, Wetlands Coordinator
Phone: (312) 886-6115
REGIONS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
841 Arch Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Phone: (215) 814-5000
Fax: (215) 814-5103
Ralph Sphagnola, Wetlands Coordinator
Phone: (215) 814-2718
REGION 6
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1445 Ross Avenue
12th Floor, Suite 1200
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Phone: (214) 665-6444
Fax: (214) 665-2146
Ellen Greeney, Indian Coordinator
Mail Code 6E-FF
Phone: (214) 665-6778
Fax: (214) 665-2118
1-1
-------
Appendix I
Richard Prather, Wetlands Coordinator
Phone: (214) 665-8333
REGION 7
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone: (913) 551-7000
Fax: (913) 551-7467
Kim Olson, Indian Coordinator
Phone: (913) 551-7539
Fax:(913)551-7863-
Cheryl Crisler, Wetlands Coordinator
Phone: (913) 551-7820
REGION 8
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
99918th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
Phone: (303) 312-6312
Fax: (303) 312-6369
Sadie Hoskie, Tribal Manager
Mail Code 80EA
Phone: (303) 312-6343
Fax: (303) 312-6741
Dave Ruiter, Wetlands Coordinator
Phone: (303) 312-6794
REGION 9
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: (415) 744-1305
Fax: (415) 744-2499
Clancy Tenley, Tribal Program Manager
Mail Code E-4
Phone: (415) 744-1607
Fax: (415) 744-1604
Nancy Woo, Wetlands Coordinator
Phone: (415) 744-1164
REGION 10
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone: (206) 553-1200
Fax: (206) 553-0149
Alan Moomaw, Tribal Program Specialist
Phone: (206) 553-6220
Fax: (206) 553-6647
Scott Sufficool, Indian Coordinator
Phone: (206) 553-6220
Fax: (206) 553-0151
Lee Daneker, Chief
Aquatic Resources Unit
Phone: (206) 553-1380
1-2
-------
II
Sources of Support for Tribal
Wetland Programs
These case studies demonstrate the many diverse partnership opportunities
available to Tribes to protect their wetlands and associated resources. The EPA
Wetland Program Development Grant (see page II-4) is an excellent source of
funding for Tribes to initiate and develop wetland programs. Long-term operational
costs of Tribal wetland programs pose particular challenges to Tribes, as funding
for operational expenses is difficult to secure. The scarcity of long-term funding for
Tribal wetland programs has led many Tribes to develop partnerships with organi-
zations that can help them meet their wetlands protection goals. Partnerships may
result in funding of particular projects, but in-kind assistance to Tribes is also a
practical way for Tribes and their partners to meet mutually beneficial goals even
though dollars do not change hands. Examples of in-kind assistance in these case
studies include management assistance provided by the Natural Resources Conser-
vation Service to the Port Graham/Nanwalek Watershed Council and technical
expertise provided by professors at Northern New Mexico Community College and
New Mexico Highlands University to the Taos Pueblo.
The sections below present a list of programs available through EPA and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) that support Tribal wetland programs.
Other federal agencies that have programs that support Tribal wetland programs
include the Department of Defense, the Department of Commerce/National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Health and Human Services,
the Department of the Interior/Bureau of Indian Affairs and Fish and Wildlife
Service, and the Department of Transportation. A more complete overview is
available from the publication, Funding for Habitat Restoration Projects: A Com-
pendium of Current Federal Programs with Fiscal Year 1996-1998 Funding Levels,
A Citizens Guide (see Appendix III for information). It offers a comprehensive
survey of many of the programs discussed here as well as those available from the
other federal agencies mentioned earlier. Additionally, the 1997 Catalogue of
Federal Domestic Assistance is an excellent source of funding information (see
Appendix III for information).
EPA Programs
Clean Water State Revolving Fund—Section 205 of the Clean Water Act autho-
rized the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) to provide grants or "seed
money" to all 50 states plus Puerto Rico to capitalize state loan funds. The states,
in turn, make loans to communities, Tribes, individuals, and others for high
priority water quality activities. As money is paid back into a revolving fund, new
loans are made to other recipients that need help in maintaining the quality of their
water. Currently, the program has more than $20 billion in assets. The SRF allows
states and Tribes the flexibility to use funding for projects that will address their
highest-priority water quality needs. While traditionally used to build or improve
wastewater treatment plants, loans are increasingly used for wetlands protection;
-------
Appendix II
n-2
agricultural, rural, and urban runoff control; estuary improvement projects; wet
weather flow control, including storm water and sewer overflows; and, alternative
treatment technologies such as constructed treatment wetlands.
Many people believe they would rather have a grant. Most water quality
experts are more familiar with grants and, consequently, many misconceptions
persist. In fact, a loan may be a better deal. Why? First, no cash is required up
front. Most grant programs require significant cost shares (as much as 40 percent
or more). An SRF loan can cover 100 percent of project costs with no cash up front.
Second, SRF loans provide significant cost savings over the life of the loan. A
0 percent SRF loan will cost approximately 50 percent less than the same project
financed by a commercial loan at 7.5 percent. Additionally, a 0 percent SRF loan is
equivalent to receiving a 50 percent grant (where the other 50 percent (match) is
financed at market rate). Third, financing a project with an SRF loan means fewer
federal requirements than any federal grant. In addition, the 51 SRF programs are
experienced in helping applicants through the loan application process and provid-
ing a wide range of technical assistance.
Contact
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Clean Water State Revolving Fund Branch (4204)
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: (202) 260-7359
Fax: (202) 260-1827
Internet: www.epa.gov/owm
Community/University Grants—This grant program is administered through
the Office of Environmental Justice and is funded by media-specific statutes. The
objective of the program is to increase environmental awareness, expand outreach,
and provide education and training in socioeconomically disadvantaged communi-
ties. Historically, grants have involved partnerships between Tribal colleges and
universities.
Contact
Environmental Justice Hodine: (800) 962-6215
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund—Authorized by the Safe Drinking
Water Act Amendments of 1996, this program offers formula grants to assist public
water systems in building drinking water infrastructure and protecting source water
quality. Up to 10 percent of funds can be used for land acquisition and conservation
easements in order to protect.source waters.
Contact
Safe Drinking Water Hotline: (800) 426-4791
Environmental Education Grant Program—Section 6 of the National
Environmental Education Act provides funding to support the design and implemen-
tation of environmental education programs that enhance critical thinking and
problem solving skills to ensure informed, responsible decisions are made to protect
the environment. Information maybe obtained from the Regional Tribal Contact
(Appendix I).
Environmental Justice Small Grants—This grant program, administered by
the Office of Compliance Assurance, is funded by media-specific statutes. Its
purpose is to provide assistance to grassroots, community-based groups to support
projects related to environmental justice. Historically, grants have involved Tribal
efforts to monitor and improve the health of Tribal waters.
_
-------
Appendix ]3
Contact
Environmental Justice Hotline: (800) 962-6215
Indian Environmental General Assistance Program—This program,
administered by the American Indian Environmental Office, provides funding for
Tribes to build their capacity to plan, develop, and establish environmental
protection programs. Information may be obtained from the Regional Tribal
Contact (AppendixI).
Indian Set-Aside Program—Section 518 of the Clean Water Act authorized EPA
to create a grants program to help pay for the planning, design, and construction of
wastewater treatment systems to serve Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Villages.
The Indian Set-Aside (ISA) Program is administered by EPA through a cooperative
effort with the Indian Health Service. Applicants can obtain a copy of the guidance
document, entitled "Guidelines and Requirements for Applying for Grants from the
Indian Set-Aside Program" (April 1988), to determine howto apply for these grants.
An Addendum to the guidance document was issued in March 1995. The guidance
document can be obtained by contacting EPA's Regional ISA Coordinator (Appendix I)
for the area in which you are located. The guidance document can be obtained by
contacting your Regional Tribal Coordinator (Appendix I).
Nonpoint Source Implementation—This program is authorized by Section
319 of the Clean Water Act. It is administered by the Office of Wetlands, Oceans,
and Watersheds, and aims to assist states and Tribes in implementing EPA-approved
nonpoint source programs. Programs funded in the past have included a variety of
wetland, riparian, and watershed restoration activities.
Contact
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Nonpoint Source Control Branch (4503F)
Assessment and Watershed Protection Division
Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: (202) 260-7100
Fax: (202) 260-7024
Partnership for Environmental Research: Water and Watersheds
Competition—This grant program is authorized by the Clean Water Act and
administered through the Office of Research and Development and the National
Science Foundation. It aims to support research that contributes to an improved
understanding of the processes that govern the quality of water resources.
Contact
Barbara Levinson: (202) 564-6911
Sustainable Development Challenge Grant Program—This grant program
is administered by the Office of Air and Radiation and is funded by media-specific
statutes. It aims to address non-sustainable behavior through community involve-
ment.
Contact
Pamela Hurt: (202) 260:2441
Water Pollution Control State and Interstate Program—This program is
authorized under Section 106 of the Clean Water Act and is administered by the
Office of Wastewater Management. It aims to establish and maintain adequate
measures for prevention and control of surface and groundwater pollution.
H-3
-------
Appendix II
Contact
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Wastewater Management (4201)
Section 106 Tribal Coordinator
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: (202) 260-5828
Fax: (202) 260-1040
Water Quality Management Planning—Section 106 of the Clean Water Act
authorizes funding through formula grants to assist states and Tribes in water
quality management planning. The program is administered by the Office of
Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds.
Contact
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Assessment and Watershed Protection Division (4503F)
Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: (202) 260-7040
Fax: (202) 260-7024
Wetland Program Development Grants—Section 104(b) (3) of the Clean
Water Act provides funding to states, Tribes and local governments for wetland
protection, management or restoration. The grants must be used for the develop-
ment of new, or refinement of existing wetland programs, not for operational
support. This grant program is administered through the Office of Wetlands,
Oceans and Watersheds. Annual Grant Guidance for this program can be found on
EPA's website atwww.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/partner.html.
Contact
Shanna Draheim
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Wetlands Division (4502F)
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: (202) 260-6218
Fax: (202) 260-8000
H-4
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Programs
Conservation of Private Grazing Land Initiative—The Conservation of
Private Grazing Land (CPGL) Initiative will ensure that technical, educational, and
related assistance is provided to those who own private grazing lands. It is not a
cost-share program. This technical assistance will offer opportunities for better
grazing land management, protecting soil from erosive wind and water, using more
energy-efficient ways to produce food and fiber, conserving water, providing habitat
for wildlife, sustaining forage and grazing plants, using plants to sequester green-
house gases and increase soil organic matter, and using grazing lands as a source
of biomass energy and raw materials for industrial products. For more information
about CPGL, contact USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).
Conservation Technical Assistance—The purpose of Conservation Technical
Assistance (CTA) is to assist land users, communities, units of state, Tribal, and
local government, and other federal agencies in planning and implementing
conservation systems. The purpose of the conservation systems is to reduce erosion,
-------
Appendix H
improve soil and water quality, improve and conserve wetlands, enhance fish and
wildlife habitat, improve air quality, improve pasture and range condition, reduce
upstream flooding, and improve woodlands.
Contact
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Deputy Chief for Natural Resources Conservation Programs
Natural Resources Conservation Service
EO. Box 2890
Washington, DC 20013
Phone: (202) 720-4527
Environmental Quality Incentives Program—The Environmental Quality
Incentives Program (EQIP) provides technical, educational, and financial assistance
to eligible farmers and ranchers to address soil, water, and related natural resource
concerns on their lands in an environmentally beneficial and cost-effective manner.
The program provides assistance to farmers and ranchers in complying with
federal, state, and Tribal environmental laws, and encourages environmental
enhancement. The program is funded through the Commodity Credit Corporation.
The purposes of the program are achieved through the implementation of a conser-
vation plan that includes structural, vegetative, and land management practices on
eligible land. Five- to ten-year contracts are made with eligible producers. Cost-
share payments may be made to implement one or more eligible structural or
vegetative practices, such as animal waste management facilities, terraces, filter
strips, tree planting, and permanent wildlife habitat. Incentive payments can be
made to implement one or more land management practices, such as nutrient
management, pest management, and grazing land management. Of the funding
available for the program, 50 percent will be targeted at natural resource concerns
relating to livestock production. The program is carried out primarily hi priority
areas that may be watersheds, regions, or multi-state areas, and for significant
statewide natural resource concerns that are outside of geographic priority areas.
For more information about EQIP, contact your local NRCS office, or:
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Deputy Chief for Natural Resources Conservation Programs
Natural Resources Conservation Service
EO. Box 2890
Washington, DC 20013
Phone: (202) 720-1845
Rise to the Future: Fish US—This program is administered by the U.S. Forest
Service and offers grants and assessment and implementation assistance to protect
and restore national forest fish habitats and enhance opportunities for use and
enjoyment of national forest fisheries.
Contact
Fisheries Program Leader, MarkHudy: (202) 205-1205
Soil Survey Programs—The National Cooperative Soil Survey (NCSS) program
is a partnership led by NRCS, state agricultural experiment stations, and state,
Tribal, and local units of government that provide soil survey information necessary
for understanding, managing, conserving, and sustaining the nation's limited soil
resources. Soil surveys provide an orderly, on-the-ground, scientific inventory of soil
resources that includes maps showing the locations and extent of soils, data about
the physical and chemical properties of those soils, and information derived from
that data about potentialities and problems of use on each kind of soil in sufficient
detail to meet all reasonable needs for farmers, agricultural technicians, commu-
E-5
-------
Appendix II
nity planners, engineers, and scientists in planning and transferring the findings of
research and experience to specific land areas. Soil surveys provide the basic
information needed to manage soil sustainably. They also provide information
needed to protect water quality, wetlands, and wildlife habitat. Soil surveys are the
basis for predicting the behavior of a soil under alternative uses, its potential
erosion hazard, potential for ground water contamination, and suitability and
productivity for cultivated crops, trees, and grasses. Soil surveys are important to
planners, engineers, zoning commissions, tax commissioners, homeowners, and
developers, as well as agricultural producers. For more information about NCSS,
contact your local NRCS office.
Stewardship Incentives Program—The Stewardship Incentives Program (SIP)
provides technical and financial assistance to encourage non-industrialjprivate
forest landowners to keep their lands and natural resources productive and healthy.
Qualifying land includes rural lands with existing tree cover, or land suitable for
growing trees, that is owned by a private individual, group, association, corpora-
tion, Indian Tribe, or other legal private entity. Eligible landowners must have an
approved Forest Stewardship Plan and own 1,000 or less acres of qualifying land.
Authorizations maybe obtained for exceptions of up to 5,000 acres. For more
information about SIP, contact your state forestry office.
Watersheds Operations—Small Watershed Program and Flood Prevention
Program (WF 08 or FP 03)—The Small Watershed Program works through local
government sponsors and helps participants solve natural resource and related
economic problems on a watershed basis. Projects include watershed protection,
flood prevention, erosion and sediment control, water supply, water quality, fish
and wildlife habitat enhancement, wetlands creation and restoration, and public
recreation in watersheds of 250,000 or fewer acres. Both technical and financial
assistance are available. For more information, contact your local NRCS office, or:
Contact
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Deputy Chief for Natural Resources Conservation Programs
Natural Resources Conservation Service
EO. Box 2890
Washington, DC 20013
Phone: (202) 720-4527
Watershed Surveys and Planning—The Watershed and Flood Prevention Act,
P.L. 83-566, August 4,1954, (16 U.S.C. 1001-1008) authorized this program. Prior
to FY96, small watershed planning activities and the cooperative river basin surveys
and investigations authorized by Section 6 of the Act were operated as separate
programs. The 1996 appropriations act combined the activities into a single
program, entitled the Watershed Surveys and Planning program. Activities under
both programs are continuing under this authority. The purpose of the program is
to assist federal, state, and local agencies, and Tribal governments to protect
watersheds from damage caused by erosion, floodwater, and sediment, and to
conserve and develop water and land resources. Resource concerns addressed by the
program include water quality, opportunities for water conservation, wetland and
water storage capacity, agricultural drought problems, rural development, munici-
pal and industrial water needs, upstream flood damages, and water needs for fish,
wildlife, and forest-based industries. Types of surveys and plans include watershed
plans, river basin surveys and studies, flood hazard analyses, and flood plain
management assistance. The focus of these plans is to identify solutions that use
land treatment and nonstructural measures to solve resource problems. For more
information, contact your local NRCS office.
n-6
-------
Appendix 11
Wetlands Reserve Program.—The Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) is a
voluntary program to restore wetlands. Participating landowners can establish
conservation easements of either permanent or 30-year duration, or can enter into
restoration cost-share agreements where no easement is involved. In exchange for
establishing a permanent easement, the landowner receives payment up to the
agricultural value of the land and 100 percent of the restoration costs for restoring
the wetlands. The 30-year easement payment is 75 percent of what would be
provided for a permanent easement on the same site and 75 percent of the restora-
tion cost. The voluntary agreements are for a minimum 10-year duration and
provide for 75 percent of the cost of restoring the involved wetlands. Easements and
restoration cost-share agreements establish wetlands protection and restoration as
the primary land use for the duration of the easement or agreement. In all in-
stances, landowners continue to control access to their land. For more information
about WRP, contact your local NRCS office, or:
Contact
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Watersheds and Wetlands Division
Natural Resources Conservation Service
EO. Box 2890
Washington, DC 20013
Phone: (202) 690-0848
Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program—The Wildlife Habitat Incentives
Program (WHIP) provides financial incentives to develop habitat for fish and
wildlife on private lands. Participants agree to implement a wildlife habitat
development plan and USDA agrees to provide cost-share assistance for the initial
implementation of wildlife habitat development practices. USDA and program
participants enter into a cost-share agreement for wildlife habitat development.
This agreement generally lasts a minimum of 10 years from the date the contract is
signed. For more information about WHIP contact your local NRCS office, or:
Contact
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Deputy Chief for Natural Resources Conservation Programs
Natural Resources Conservation Service
EO. Box 2890
Washington, DC 20013
Phone: (202) 720-1845
n-7
-------
Appendix II
H-8
-------
Ill
Information on Relevant Publications
and Outreach Materials
Funding
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. June 1998. General Services Administration,
Washington, DC. A government-wide compendium, updated twice yearly, of all 1,381
federal programs, projects, services, and activities that provide assistance or benefits to
the American public. These programs provide grants, loans, loan guarantees, services,
information, scholarships, training, insurance, etc. Available in multiple formats. For a copy,
contact: Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog Staff (MVS), General Services Administra-
tion, 300 7th Street, SW, Suite 101, Washington, DC 20407. Phone: (202) 708-5126.
Available on the Internet: http://aspe.os.dhhs.gov/cfda/index.htm, or www. cfda.gov.
Catalog of Federal Funding Sources for Watershed Protection (Second Edition), EPA 841-
B-99-003. February 2000. The Catalog provides information to watershed practitioners on
Federal funding programs that might be available to fund different aspects of watershed
protection and local-level watershed projects. The document contains one-page fact sheets for
each of the 69 funding sources (grants and loans) that provide information on the type of
projects funded and eligibility requirements. Contacts and Internetsites are also provided for
each of the programs so the reader may obtain further information. This Second Edition of
the Catalog updates EPAs Catalog of Federal Funding Sources for Watershed Protection,
printed in 1997 (EPA 841-B-97-008). For a copy, contact NSCEP (see page III-4).
Funding for Habitat Restoration Projects: A Compendium of Current Federal Pro-
grams with Fiscal Year 1996-1998 Funding Levels, A Citizens Guide. 1998. Restore
America's Estuaries (RAE), Washington, DC. For a copy, contact: RAE, 1200 New
York Avenue, NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC 20005. Phone: (202) 289-2380, Fax:
(202) 842-4932. Available on the Internet: www.estuaries.org.
Financing State Wetland Programs. 1990. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Wetlands Protection. For a copy, call the EPA Wetlands Information
Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
Performance Partnership Grants for State and Tribal Environmental Programs:
Revised Interim Guidance. 1996. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. For a copy,
call the EPA Wetlands Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
General
Top 10 Watershed Lessons Learned. 1997. U.S. EPA, Office of Wetiands, Oceans, and
Watersheds, Washington, DC. EPA 840-F-97-001.Foracopy,contactNSCEP (see pagem-4).
Exploring Wetlands Stewardship: A Reference Guide for Assisting Washington
Landowners. 1996. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.
Publication No. 96-120. For a copy, contact Washington State Department of
Ecology, Publications Office, EO. Box 47600, Olympia, WA 98504-7600. Phone:
(360) 407-7472. Available on the Internet: www.wa.gov/ecoZogy. ni-1
-------
Appendix 111
m-2
Handbook for Wetlands Conservation and Sustainability, Second Edition. 1998.
Izaak Walton League of America. For a copy, contact Izaak Walton League of
America, Save Our Streams Program, 707 Conservation Lane, Gaithersburg, MD
20878-2983. Phone: (301) 548-0150, Fax: (301) 548-0146. Email: sos@iwla.org.
Internet: Twvw.iwZa.org.
Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds 1998 Publication List 1998. U.S. EPA,
Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC. EPA 840-B-98-001.
For a copy, contact NSCEP (see page III-4).
Wetlands Information Resource Guide. 1994. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 2, Water Management Division, Marine and Wetlands Protection Branch. EPA 902-'
K-94-001. For a copy, call the EPA Wetlands Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
Monitoring, Assessment, and Technical Documents
Tribal Environmental and Natural Resource Assistance Handbook. 1999. Product of the
White House Domestic Policy Council, Working Group on American Indians and Alaska
Natives, Subgroup on Environment and Natural Resources and the Native American
Fish & Wildlife Society. Available on the Internet at www.epa.gov/indian/tribhand.htm.
Federal Coastal Wetland Mapping Programs. 1990. U.S. Department of the Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. Biological Report 90 (18). For a copy,
call the EPA Wetlands Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
A Handbook of Constructed Wetlands: A Guide to Creating Wetlands for Agricultural
Wdstewater, Domestic Wastewater, Coal Mine Drainage and Stormwater in the Mid-
Atlantic Region. 1995. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation
Service and the U.S. EPA, in cooperation with the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Resources. For a copy, call the EPA Wetlands Information Hotline at
1-800-832-7828.
Monitoring Wetlands: A Manual for Training Volunteers. 1996. Adopt a Beach, in
cooperation with U.S. EPA Region 10 and King County Surface Water Management
Division. For a copy, contact Adopt a Beach, P.O. Box 21486, Seattle, WA 98111-3486.
Protecting Natural Wetlands: A Guide to Stormwater Best Management Practices. 1996.
U.S. EPA, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC. EPA 843-B-
96-001. For a copy, call the EPA Wetlands Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
The Volunteer Monitor, Volume 10, No. 1, Spring 1998. For a copy, call the EPA
Wetlands Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828. This is the National Newsletter of
Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring. The specified issue is solely dedicated to
wetlands monitoring, Previous issues have also dealt with wetlands, and are
available from The Volunteer Monitor, 1318 Masonic Avenue, San Francisco, CA
94117. Fax: (415) 255-0199. Back issues also available.on the Internet at
www. epa.gov/owow/volunteer/vmj.ndex. html.
The Volunteer Monitor's Guide to Quality Assurance Project Plans. 1996. U.S. EPA,
Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC. EPA 841-B-96-003.'
For a copy, contact NSCEP (see page III-4).
Volunteer Stream Monitoring: A Methods Manual 1997. U.S. EPA, Office of
Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC. EPA841-B-97-003. For a copy,
contact NSCEP (see page III-4).
Wetland Bioassessment Fact Sheets. 1998. U.S. EPA, Office of Wetlands, Oceans,
and Watersheds, Washington, DC. EPA 843-F-98-001. For a copy, call the EPA
Wetlands Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
-------
Appendix HI
Outreach
Adopt Your Watershed! 1997. U.S. EPA, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds,
Washington, DC. EPA-800-F-97-001. For a copy, contact NSCEP (see page III-4).
America's Private Land: A Geography of Hope. 1996. U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. For a copy, call the EPA Wetlands
Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
America's Wetlands: Our Vital Link Between Land and Water. 1995. U.S. EPA, Office
of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC. EPA843-K-95-001. For a
copy, call the EPA Wetlands Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
Oases for Wildlife: Small and Farmed Wetlands. 1996. National Audubon Society.
For a copy, call the EPA Wetlands Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
Protecting Floodplain Resources: A Guidebook for Communities. 1996. Federal
Interagency Floodplain Management Task Force. For a copy, call the EPA Wetlands
Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
Wetlands and Highways: A Natural Approach. 1994. U.S. Department of Transporta-
tion, Federal Highway Administration. Publication No. FHWA-PD-94-004. For a
copy, call the EPA Wetlands Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
Wetlands Reading List: Pre-Kindergarten through Grade 12. 1994. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Wedands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC. EPA
843-B-94-002. For a copy, call the EPA Wetlands Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
Working With Wetlands. 1994. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation
Service, Washington, DC. Agriculture Information Technical Bulletin Number 672.
For a copy, call the EPA Wetlands Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
Policy/Guidance
Water Quality Criteria and Standards Plan—Priorities for the Future. June 1998,
Interim Final Draft. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Wash-
ington, DC. EPA 822-R-98-003. For a copy, contact NSCEP (see page III-4).
Water Quality Standards for Wetlands'. 1990. U.S. EPA, Office of Wetlands, Oceans,
and Watersheds, Washington, DC. EPA 440/S-90-011. For a copy, call the EPA
Wetlands Information Hotline at 1-800-832-7828.
Wetlands and 401 Certification: Opportunities for States and Eligible Indian Tribes.
1989. U.S. EPA, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC.
Web Sites of Interest
Bureau of Indian Affairs: www.doi.gov/bureau-indian-affairs.html
Code of Federal Regulations: www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html
Envirofacts—EPA Grants Information and Database Query:
www.epa.gov/enviro/html/gics/index.html
Environmental Law Institute: www.eli.org
EPA American Indian Environmental Office: www.epa.gov/indian
EPA Office of Grants and Debarment: www.epa.gov/ogd/index.htm
EPA Office of Wastewater Management: www.epa.gov/owm/indian
m-3
-------
Appendix III
EPA Wetlands Division: www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands
Federal Register: www.access.gpo.gov/sujlocs/aces/acesl40.html
National Environmental Performance Partnership System (NEPPS):
www. epa.gov/regional/regional. htm
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Grant Management Circulars:
www.whitehouse.gov/WH/EOP/OMB/html/miscdoc/status.html
Guide to OMB's Grants Management Circulars and Related Documents and Fax-on-
Demand Information: www.whitehouse.gov/WH/EOP/OMB/Grants
Society of Wetland Scientists: www.sws.org
The Nature Conservancy: www. tnc. org
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station:
www.wes.army.miJ/el/wetlands/wetlands.html
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service:
www. nrcs. usda.gov
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: www.fws.gov
Wetland Science Institute: www.pwrc. usgs.gov/wli
Many more wetland links available at:
www. epa.gov/O WOW/wetlands/partners/links. html
EPA's Wetlands Information Hotline—The EPA Wetlands Information Hotline
is a contractor-operated, toll-free telephone service and e-mail correspondent,
which answers requests for information about wetlands regulation, legislation, and
policy pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, wetlands values and func-
tions, and wetlands agricultural issues. Documents on various wetlands topics are
available free of charge from the Hotline. Call the Hotline For a copy the EPA
Wetlands Information Hotline Publication List, containing more than 125 publica-
tions. The Hotline frequently adds new documents to its inventory, including new
regulatory guidance, technical documents, and other specialized wetlands publications.
Wetlands Information Hotline
SC&A, Inc.
1355 Beverly Road, Suite 250
McLean, VA 22101
Phone: (800) 832-7828
Fax: (703) 525-0201
E-mail: wetlands-hotiine@epamail.epa.gov
Internet: www. epa.gov/OWOW/wetlands/wetline. html
National Service Center for Environmental Publications—The EPA's
National Service Center for Environmental Publications (NSCEP) offers more than
5,000 EPA publications available in hard copy and multimedia product, free of
charge. Check out their web site or call to order a catalog.
U.S. EPA/NSCEP
GO. Box 42419
Cincinnati, OH, USA 45242-2419
Phone: (800) 490-9198
Fax: (513) 489-8695
Internet: www.epa.gov/ncepi
ffl-4
-------
IV
Draft Core Essential
Elements of a State or
Tribal Wetlands Program
EPAs Wetland Program Development Grants have assisted states and Tribes in
developing or refining their wetland programs since 1990. Under the Wetland
Program Development Grants, funds can only support development or enhancement
of wetland programs; funds cannot support operation or implementation of wetland
programs. EPAs Wetlands Division recognizes that not being able to fund the
operation of state and Tribal programs has been problematic to states and Tribes.
To address this problem, EPA's Wetlands Division is likely to implement an
initiative in FY 2001 that will provide a limited exception to the normal competitive
process for wetland grants. In FY 2001, states and Tribes may be eligible for some
operational support of their wetlands program through their Performance Partnership
Grants (PPG). To be eligible for this funding, states and Tribes must have in place
several core essential elements for a comprehensive, effective wetland program.
This FY01 initiative is intended to provide those states and Tribes that have
worked hard to develop and establish comprehensive, effective, environmentally
sound programs that protect, manage, and restore their wetland resources with
funding to partially implement those programs. The standard is set high, but it is
attainable for states and Tribes with comprehensive wetland programs.
If a state or Tribe feels that they meet the identified core essential elements,
they should provide documentation to the appropriate EPA Regional Office (Wet-
land Coordinator). If they demonstrate that their wetland program meets all the
final core elements, and EPA (Region and Headquarters) agrees, the state or Tribe
is eligible to receive a determined level of base funding to support the operation of
its wetlands program.
A state or Tribe's wetland program must meet ALL of the following core
essential elements to qualify for operational support funding through a Performance
Partnership Grant (PPG).
State or Tribal "Vision"
The state or Tribe shall have completed an analysis or evaluation of the current
status of its wetland and wetland-related program(s). As part of this process, the
state or Tribe should develop a strategy for contributing to the national goal of no
net loss/net gain of wetlands. This evaluation could be accomplished in a number
of ways such as completion of a State/Tribal Wetland Conservation Plan, the
development of a Wetland Strategic Plan or other similar effort or initiative.
Coordination
In many states, wetland programs and/or wetland-related programs are
administered within several state agencies including the traditional water quality
agencies, natural resource agencies, fish and wildlife agencies, agriculture agencies,
IV-1
-------
Appendix TV
state planning offices, parks and recreation agencies, departments of transportation,
natural heritage programs, and others. Adding all these programs together, the state's
program may contain all the identified core elements to qualify for operational
support funding under this funding option. However, if the various agencies do not
work together, the state may not have a functioning comprehensive program.
To qualify for funding under this option, the state shall have a demonstrably
effective mechanism to assure that all the various agencies with wetland or wet-
land-related programs function together as a whole, comprehensive, coordinated
program. In addition, if only one of the state agencies is designated as the entity to
receive a PPG, that agency shall have the ability, and the willingness, to pass PPG
funds on to the other state agencies that administer wetland programs.
[NOTE: If appropriate, this provision also applies to Tribal governments. We
anticipate that most Tribal governments are not large enough for this issue to be as
much concern as for state government]
Watershed (Ecosystem) Protection, Management and
Restoration Approach
The Watershed (Ecosystem) Protection Approach implements EPA, state, Tribal,
and local programs in a holistic, integrated manner to address natural resource
protection. The watershed approach is a coordinating framework for environmental
management that focuses public and private sector efforts to address the highest
priority problems within hydrologically defined geographic areas, taking into
consideration both ground and surface water flow. This approach recognizes
wetlands as components of larger hydrologic units that include surface and ground
water resources. In addition, these hydrologic units are part of larger aquatic and
terrestrial systems.
The Wetlands Program supports watershed approaches that work to integrate
wetlands into a Watershed (Ecosystem) Approach to protect resources, prevent
pollution, achieve sustainable environmental goals, and meet other objectives
important to the community. Although watershed approaches may vary in terms of
specific objectives, priorities, elements, timing, and resources, they should be based
on the following guiding principles taking from EPA's Watershed Approach Frame-
work (EPA840-S-96-001, June 1996).
Partnerships. Those people most affected by management decisions are involved
throughout and help shape key decisions. This ensures that environmental objectives
are well integrated with those for economic stability and social/cultural goals. It
also provides that people who depend upon the natural resources within watersheds
are well informed of and participate in planning and implementation activities.
Geographic Focus. Activities are directed within specific, defined geographic
areas, typically the areas that drain to surface water bodies or overlay ground
waters or a combination of both.
Sound Management Techniques based on Strong Science and Data.
Collectively, watershed stakeholders employ sound scientific data, tools, and
techniques in an iterative decision making process which includes:
• Assessment and characterization of the natural resources and the communi-
ties that depend upon them
• Goal setting and identification of environmental objectives based on the
condition of vulnerability of resources and the needs of the aquatic ecosys-
tem and the people within the community
rv-2
-------
Appendix IV
• Identification of priority problems
• Development of specific management options and action plans
• Implementation of such action plans
• Evaluation of effectiveness and revision of plans, as needed
Because stakeholders work together, actions are based upon shared information
and a common understanding of the roles, priorities, and responsibilities of all
involved parties. Concerns about environmental justice are addressed and, when
possible, pollution prevention techniques are adopted. The iterative nature of the
watershed approach encourages partners to set goals and targets and to make
maximum progress based on available information while continuing analysis and
verification in areas where information is incomplete.
States and Tribes shall consider and use, as appropriate, the following list of
process actions for implementing a watershed (ecosystem) approach. These actions
are from Practical Steps to Implement an Ecosystem Approach in Great Lakes
Management (USEPA/Environment Canada/IJC/Wayne State University, 1995).
• Adopt the watershed/bioregion as the primary unit for management
• Develop a partnership agreement or other mechanism for cooperative multi-
stakeholder management and ensure commitment of top leaders
• Identify and empower an "umbrella" watershed organization for coordination
• Develop a long-term vision, goals and quantitative indicators for the
"desired future state" of the ecosystem that can be understood by all partners
• Reach agreement on a set of principles to guide multi-stakeholder, decision-
making process
• Ensure all watershed planning processes acknowledge the vision, goals,
indicators, and principles
• Establish a geographic information system (CIS) and decision support
systems capability within watershed organizations
• Compile data and information for input into CIS and ensure a strong
commitment to research and monitoring to understand the ecosystem and
fill knowledge and data gaps
• Set priorities that target major causes of ecosystem health risks, evaluate
remedial and preventive options, implement preferred actions, and monitor
effectiveness in an iterative fashion
- Ensure full costs and benefits are assessed for each project in the watershed
• Consolidate capital budgets and pool resources to move high priority
projects forward
• Create the framework and conditions for private sector involvement and
capitalize on its enterprise, initiative, creativity, and capability for invest-
ment
• Use market forces and economic incentives to achieve ecosystem objectives
• Commit public, biennial, state-of-the-environment and economy reporting to
measure and celebrate ecosystem progress, and to measure stakeholder
satisfaction
L
IV-3
-------
Appendix IV
PV-4
• Ensure a strong commitment to broad-based, ecosystem education and
human resource development throughout the process
_ To qualify under this special grant provision the state or Tribe shall participate
in and encourage watershed projects that are comprehensive and that adequately
address wetlands management issues within the watershed. Projects must have a
substantial wetlands component; should address other water resource issues- should
involve various levels of government and stakeholders (federal, state, Tribal'and
local government, interest groups, and landowners); and should consider a multi-
tude of possible environmental protection techniques, programs or approaches to
identify and address the problems. These projects should focus on comprehensive
solutions that consider environmental protection and economic development needs
Public involvement is a key component in any watershed project.
Regulatory (Permit) Program
Geographic scope. The state or Tribe shall have a comprehensive wetland
regulatory (permit) program that is similar to the Clean Water Action section 404
program. The program must be statewide (reservation-wide) and not just within a
limited area within the total jurisdiction of the state or Tribe. For example a
regulatory program just within the coastal (tidal) zone or that exempts large areas
from regulation would not qualify.
Delineation. The state or Tribe's program shall be consistent/equivalent with or
more stnngentthan the federal program. The state/Tribe must use a delineation
method that is equivalent to the federal methodology. The state or Tribal scope of
geographic jurisdiction must be at least that of the federal program. Use of the
state or Tribal delineation methodology should arrive at the same "line" as the
federal delineation method.
Activities regulated. The state or Tribe's program shall regulate at least the
same activities that the federal program regulates—discharges of dredged or fill
material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. A number of activi-
ties may result in a discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U S
These can include, but are not limited to, industrial, recreational and commercial
construction; building of intake and outfall structures, utility lines or impound-
ments; building of causeways or roads, dams, dikes, groins, sea walls, breakwa-
ters, levees, or artificial islands; mining; disposal of dredged material- beach
nourishment; and ditching or mechanized land clearing activities. In addition to the
activities regulated under the federal program, the state or Tribe could choose to
regulate wetland impacts caused by activities other than filling.
A state or Tribal program that regulates only a subset of the activities regulated by
the federal program will not qualify for this funding option.
404(b)(l) Guidelines. The state or Tribe's program shall use environmental
review criteria that are in compliance with the 404(b) (1) Guidelines. The premise
of the Guidelines is that no discharge of dredged or fill material will be permitted
if a practicable alternative exists that is less damaging to the aquatic environment
or if the nation's waters would be significantly degraded. The Guidelines establish a
sequential permit review process in which the applicant must first demonstrate that
impacts to wetlands and other aquatic resources have been avoided to the maxi-
mum extent practicable. Next, the Guidelines require the applicant to minimize
unavoidable impacts to wetlands and other aquatic resources. Finally, the applicant
must provide compensation to the extent appropriate and practicable for any
remaining unavoidable impacts. In addition to these sequential requirements the
Guidelines also prohibit projects which would violate other applicable laws such as
-------
Appendix IV
state or Tribal water quality standards, toxic effluent standards, or which would
result in jeopardy to threatened or endangered species or adverse modification to
critical habitat. Finally, no discharge can be permitted if it would cause or contrib-
ute to significant degradation of the waters of the United States.
While it is unlikely that any state or Tribe will adopt the Guidelines word-for-word,
the state or Tribe shall have environmental review criteria that contain the basic
principles included in the Guidelines.
Enforcement. The state or Tribe shall have a demonstrably effective enforcement
program that serves to deter violations of the state or Tribal program while also
having direct punitive value when there is a violation. The enforcement program
must allow the state or Tribe to conduct compliance or oversight of activities that
impact wetlands and pursue corrective actions through either administrative or
penalty processes. The program shall have the authority to assess both civil and
criminal penalties.
[NOTE: A state or tribe does not have to have an assumed section 404 program to
fulfill the components identified above.]
Monitoring and Assessment Approach
States and Tribes shall be working to develop comprehensive programs to monitor
and assess the biological, physical, and chemical conditions of their wetlands or to
integrate wetlands into existing surface water monitoring programs. While the
states, Tribes, and EPA are working to achieve the short-term goal of "no net loss"
of wetlands, wetland programs also need to focus on the longer-term goal of
increasing the quantity and quality of the Nation's wetlands.
Inventory- States and Tribes shall develop and manage an inventory of wetland
acreage within their boundaries. This inventory shall follow standards set by the
Federal Geographic Data Committee to allow for comparison of data. This inven-
tory shall be maintained and updated on a regular basis.
Classification system. States and Tribes shall adopt a wetland classification
system that is based on landscape position, hydrology, and vegetation. States and
Tribes can adopt existing classification system, such as the HGM
(hydrogeomorphic) classification system or the Cowardin classification system, or
can develop their own based on similar principles.
Permit and Restoration Tracking System. State and Tribal programs shall
manage an up-to-date system to track wetlands information, including Clean Water
Act section 401 water quality certifications, wetlands permits, and other relevant
information. The purpose of this tracking system is to know the location of wetland
losses. Such a georeferenced permit tracking system can be as simple as a map
with numbered pins referenced to files in filing cabinets or as complex as a com-
puter database tied to. a geographic information system. At a minimum, the system
shall include information on the location of the impacts to a wetland(s), the size of
the impact, a map of the site, and a description of the impact. Summaries of permit
activities shall be included in the 305 (b) Reports. The tracking system shall be
maintained and updated on a regular basis.
In addition to tracking permit actions, the state or Tribal programs shall manage
an up-to-date system to track wetland restoration activities on state or Tribal and
private lands within their boundaries. Summaries of restoration activities shall be
included in the 305 (b) Reports. Individual restoration projects should be reported
into a national restoration database.
W-5
-------
Appendix IV
IV-6
[Note: For projects funded by the federal government, information can be obtained
by contacting relevant agencies such as county or state NRCS offices, regional FWS
offices, BLM offices, and others.]
Biological Monitoring and Assessment Programs. While states and Tribes
have not yet developed and implemented biological monitoring and assessment
programs for wetlands, they should be working to develop these programs. States
or Tribes do not need to have an effective monitoring program in place to initially
qualify for operational support funding through a PPG. However, they must cur-
rently be developing a wetland bio-monitoring program and EPA must determine
that they are making significant progress, each year following initial qualification,
toward such a program. After five years, a state or Tribe shall at least monitor the'
majority of wetlands in targeted, priority wetlands and should be making progress
towards monitoring wetlands throughout their jurisdiction. Also in five years, a
state or Tribe shall have calibrated and tested bioassessment methods for at least
one wetland type (e.g., depressional, riverine) and shall be making significant
progress towards developing or calibrating existing methods for use in other types
of wetlands in their jurisdiction. If after five years, states or Tribes no longer qualify
for this funding option until EPA agrees that the monitoring program is "opera-
tional." Volunteer monitoring programs can supplement state bioassessment
programs, but should never replace them. Volunteer monitoring programs are
encouraged, but will not be considered for this requirement.
Recommended components of a comprehensive bioassessment program include:
• Identified study area(s) boundaries. The study areas could be either an
entire state/reservation; a set of key watersheds, ecoregions, hydrogeomorphic
classes; or other geographically targeted areas. Pilot studies in key water-
sheds would be good links to watershed protection projects.
• Classification of wetlands to account for the variability in biological
communities in different wetland types. Remember that, in this case, the
endpoint is not a classification method. The purpose of classifying wetlands
is to better understand how biological communities are degraded by human
activities. Traditional classification systems (e.g., HGM, Cowardin) maybe
good starting points, but the wetland types should ultimately be based on
the biological communities. This is important for conducting
bioassessments because we do not want to compare biological communities
that are naturally different.
• Identification of a set of minimally impaired reference wetlands for the
study area. Permanent sampling plots should be established in reference
wetlands. In addition to minimally impaired sites, a set of degraded wet-
lands should be identified to determine the range of potential conditions.
Reference wetlands should be sampled at least once a year.
• A random sample design or a targeted sample design based on the monitor-
ing program's purpose. Targeted sampling is recommended while develop-
ing the assessment protocols because it is necessary to have sites across a
gradient of conditions. When implementing a program to monitor biologi-
cal conditions of wetlands, a random sampling design is recommended.
• The state or Tribe should identify at least two potential indicator assem-
blages, which could include assemblages such as vascular plants, algae,
birds, amphibians, fish, or macroinvertebrates.
• The state or Tribe should develop and test biological monitoring and
assessment protocols for at least two assemblages. The assessments should
-------
Appendix IV
be based on an index of biological integrity, multivariate statistics, or some
combination. During the development phase, chemical and physical mea-
surements of wetlands (e.g., hydrology, pH, water chemistry) help refine the
classification scheme and identify types of stressors degrading biological
communities. During the implementation phase, bioassessments provide a
way to screen wetlands for signs of degradation. If a wetland shows signs of
degradation, then wetland professionals can return and then conduct
additional tests and measurements to determine the extent of the problem
and how to fix it.
• Ultimately, the state or Tribe can conduct bioassessments and compile a
database of results to test and refine the sampling protocols and biological
indicators. This database can also provide information from which to
prioritize restoration, evaluate the success of mitigation and restoration
projects, protect high quality or outstanding waters, and derive narrative
and numeric biological criteria for water quality standards. In addition,
states and Tribes should then define and/or determine the attainment of
designated uses in their wetlands for inclusion in the Clean Water Act
section 305 (b) reports.
Section 305(b) Reporting. Tribes are encouraged to submit comprehensive
sections on wetlands in their Clean Water Act section 305(b) reports. The content of
the wetland section of the report should respond to the content and format direc-
tions specified in Guidelines for Preparation of the Comprehensive State Water
Quality Assessments (305(b)) Reports) and Electronic Updates: Report Contents
(EPA-841-B-97-002A) and Guidelines for Preparation of the Comprehensive State
Water Quality Assessments (305(b)) Reports) and Electronic Updates: Supplement
(EPA-841-B-97-002B). In general, a state must assess the effectiveness of its wetland
program(s) and must report on the current status (quality and quantity) of wetlands
within the state.
Water Quality Standards
Inclusion of wetlands in water quality standards is necessary to ensure that, under
provisions of the Clean Water Act, wetlands are afforded the same level of protec-
tion as other waters. Water quality standards provide a programmatic basis for a
variety of water quality management activities including, but not limited to,
monitoring and assessment under section 305(b), permitting under section 402 and
section 404 water quality certification under section 401, and control of nonpomt
source pollution under section 319. Wetlands should be incorporated into existing
water quality standards and criteria should be refined, when appropriate (e.g.,
dissolved oxygen, pH, biological criteria), to reflect conditions found in wetlands.
To qualify for funding, the state or Tribal wetland program shall contain the
following essential elements for water quality standards programs:
Definition of state or Tribal waters. The state or Tribe shall explicitly
incorporate the term "wetlands" into their definition of state or Tribal waters . This
definition should be included in regulations for both water quality standards and
the Clean Water Act section 401 water quality certification program.
Designated uses. The state or Tribe shall establish and assign designated uses to
their wetlands (e.g., aquatic life use support).
Refined criteria. The state or Tribe shall refine criteria or water quality stan-
dards, where appropriate, to reflect conditions found in wetlands (e.g., pH,
dissolved oxygen, biological criteria).
IV-7
-------
Appendix JV
Biological criteria. The state or Tribe shall establish or be in the process of
developing biological assessment methods and biological criteria (narrative and
numeric) for wetlands.
Anti-degradation policy. The state or Tribe shall specifically incorporate
wetlands into their anti-degradation policy.
Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality
Certification Program
To qualify for funding, the state or Tribe's wetland program shall contain the
following essential elements of a Clean Water Act section 401 water quality
certification program:
• The state or Tribe shall actively implement a section 401 water quality
certification program by actively reviewing federal section 404 and other
appropriate federal permits.
• The state or Tribe shall develop or modify their regulations and guidelines
for section 401 certification and water quality standards to clarify their
programs, codify their decision process, and incorporate special wetlands
considerations into the more traditional water quality approaches.
• The state or Tribe shall have a system to track their section 401 water
quality certification actions. This system should be maintained and updated
on a regular basis.
Wetlands Restoration Program
The state or Tribe shall have a program which encourages and supports wetland
restoration and enhancement. Mitigation required under a regulatory program does
not fulfill this requirement. A state or Tribal wetland restoration/enhancement
program may include:
• Direct state or Tribal funding of wetland restoration projects
• An active program of wetland restoration on state or Tribal owned land
• Provisions for technical assistance to landowners or organizations carrying
out wetland restoration projects
• Active research regarding effective wetland restoration projects and methods
to measure the effectiveness of restoration activities
Partnerships
State and Tribal governments cannot comprehensively protect, manage, and restore
their wetlands by themselves. To qualify for funding:
• States and Tribes shall demonstrate ongoing partnerships with federal, state,
Tribal, local, and/or public/private organizations for the specific purpose of
wetlands protection, management, and/or restoration.
• States and Tribes shall develop a partnership strategy to outline specific
activities to be taken to increase the state or Tribe's involvement in working
with all levels of government as well as other public/private sector entities
IV-8
-------
Appendix IV
Outreach Program
A public that understands the reasons for wetland protection can make the job of
wetlands regulation and management easier. The state or Tribe shall maintain an
outreach/public education program to provide information about the importance of
wetlands, such as their function and values, as well as information about the state
or Tribe's wetland protection (regulatory) and other wetland-related programs.
Other Non-Regulatory Programs
• The state or Tribe shall have an active, funded wetland acquisition pro-
gram.
• The state or Tribe shall have a program which actively encourages protec-
tion of private wetlands through a conservation easement program, the
purchase of development rights, or similar programs.
• The state or Tribe shall administer a tax incentive program designed to
encourage protection of privately owned wetlands.
Possible Alternative Approach
If a state or Tribe can provide documentation that they measure wetland gain and
loss on a watershed-by-watershed basis, and can document a significant increase of
wetland acreage each year, EPA's Wetlands Division will consider that the state or
Tribe has met the core essential elements.
IV-9
-------
Appendix IV
IV-10
-------
Comment Form
Please photocopy this page and send us your comments.
1 .You are also invited to include information about your Tribal wetland program or projects.
;* '-,"';' ,"' ' •'' ; '-':" '"•'" ' ":" Mail forms to; . ." . * -.__., .... , . .,..., '
Kathleen Kutschenreuter, US EPA,"l200 Pennsylvania Ave./N.W. (4502F), Washington, DC 20460
Kutschenreuter.Kathken@epa.gov or 202-260-5356, x2356 (fax)
What did you find most useful about this document
and/or taow can it be improved?
What is your Tribe or Native organization doing to protect wetlands?
Other comments:
-------
, . . ,
iiiiliii';Lf ir:-l' .•, ' "'Jjif "-(f" "• . ii ' 'Till," • "i, -i,-1 ,3",. i",", i3 >•'•'* x^f-i1";' ; .:v*i. '•',";,•'*'>y
I ;c:!i; ; ,i - ;, ;.:. ,. .1 rsiils 'l:1!:.: * .•: ;™! i. .i: : .: ^ . • ,
"f,t ," i, f ,\ i l / 'j'1,1, , ; iji" .. '( , ' , ,!',• 5. .(.Piii-i ..,: r i,.-!.!, i, ...j. H. . •,
SPSsS^'Jri'.f ,•'."*?; "SpT: ^•••"•'-':;'-":'-«'t''"i(-:"*J'i?;;'::?'=^,5f: 5jr;^^^ Si| S.,"^ -::; i'-iW*'-™ S-;;," i;iT4
•f j -I---,!; '• i- i •-, ., > ; i-it -: 4 :. - 1 ,'! - • rn --1 1 -i- iiiiB. If I,;-;! ! ,;•! :;i -j tfei, ,!"p-4l '** ': *'-* * W1 i'- »•»*"«! K, IIK:'-*, ••> J~«" Ilii" - -i •, j ',-P !« *•,. •« J • 'i l> Hi i •' '•«
v#:i;1111'""'"i;.• ": - "" ; :l ;" : -r,""«f :: ;'; : .- " •"""'' p:? : ••• wwiv-epa-sov/owow/weuands
«!*{!;" i'1;;:111! ! !.; 3 ;;; J; -'i ', T 1*1 i s11 "'•;••'•••';;"ij ! -;; «;*; :i;::;:':?v !'!*':"?;'-' •?**?! tr !»r lit"'t»:'«« ! ("J1 "*' "f -91!"" "IW*-!')r;>:•-;'ft * S«;': - ': ! p*-"• -> KY; v ."iV!r! > ir «n i ;« t
: He.r. * J : • ..::"""::...'': • ::!l r '! ' :!;:T..' :i:'•:.: :::::::.:":::'.;:-!,. jirfji : ?iSfi-: l::':'1"::www-epa.gov/indian ' .
------- |