EPA FUNDS
AVAILABLE FOR
FORESTRY PROJECTS
State Foresters, Landowners, and Private
Organizations Are Eligible
-------
A VARIETY OF FOREST MANAGEMENT
PROJECTS CAN BE FUNDED THROUGH EPA
Managers of State and private forests
as well as private organizations (for
example, conservation groups, water-
shed councils, and environmental
organizations) can use funding avail-
able through the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) for forest
management projects and practices
that reduce water pollution.
As part of the Nation's 747 million
acres of forested land, State and
private forests are important to the
environment, especially water
quality. Besides providing habitat for
wildlife, forests filter carbon dioxide
from the air, and help prevent soil
erosion. In addition, forest buffer
strips along streams and lakes can
.-v ^^
significantly reduce the amount of
sedimentation and pollutants
reaching waterways.
Nonpoint source (NFS) pollution has
long been recognized as a leading
cause of water pollution. To help
reduce the negative effects that non-
point source pollution has on water
quality, Congress has made funds
available to EPA. These funds are dis-
tributed to States, tribes, and territo-
ries to help achieve and maintain
beneficial uses of water, such as
swimming or fishing. Since forest
resource management and tree
planting projects can help curb NFS
pollution, they are eligible for fund-
ing. To take advantage of this fund-
ing, State foresters, private landown-
ers, and private organizations are
working together to improve water
quality. Through these partnerships,
funds authorized in the 1987
Amendments to the Clean Water
Act—the Nonpoint Source Pollution
Program (Section 319) and the Clean
Water State Revolving Fund
(CWSRF) (Section 601)— are being
applied creatively to pay for a wide
range of projects that either directly
or indirectly reduce nonpoint source
pollution and improve water quality.
#1 Cause of Water Pollution
NPS pollution is the Nation's largest source of water quality problems—the
main reason 40 percent of the surveyed water bodies in the United States are
not clean enough for basic uses such as fishing and swimming. NPS pollution
comes from many diffuse origins. Examples include excess fertilizers, herbicides,
and insecticides from agricultural lands and residential areas; oil, grease, and
toxic chemicals from urban runoff; sediment from construction runoff; and bac-
teria and nutrients from livestock, pet wastes, and faulty septic systems. As rain-
fall or snowmelt moves over and through the ground, it picks up and carries
away natural and human-made pollutants, depositing them into lakes, rivers,
wetlands, coastal waters, and aquifers. Today, the most common NPS pollutants
causing water quality impairments are nutrients and sediments.
-------
GRANTS Vs LOANS...
DECIDE WHICH Is BEST
FOR YOUR PROJECT
During the early stages of project
planning, applicants will need to
decide whether to pay for the project
using a Section 319 grant or through
a CWSRF loan. Generally most State
and local water quality officials are
more familiar with grants and may be
more comfortable with pursing
Section 319 funds to pay for a
project. However, a CWSRF loan may
be a better deal. Most grants will
require a cost share of up to 40 per-
cent while a CWSRF loan can cover
100 percent of project costs with no
upfront money. Another important
consideration is the total cost of proj-
ect funds. CWSRF loans can provide
significant cost savings over the life of
the loan. An interest-free CWSRF
loan is equivalent to receiving a 50-
percent grant (where the remaining
50 percent is financed at market
rate). In addition, it may be possible
to combine a CWSRF loan with grant
dollars from other sources.
SECTION 319 FUNDS FOR
FOREST MANAGEMENT
ACTIVITIES
Since 1990, Congress has annually
appropriated funds to help States,
tribes, and territories implement
activities detailed in their nonpoint
source pollution management
programs. During 2004, the total
Section 319 budget was approxi-
mately $238 million. Of this, $2.4
million was used to support
forestry activities.
Generally, Section 319 funds ar
monies distributed by EPA to
State, tribal, and territory water
quality agencies, which then
award grants to State foresters,
private landowners, and private
organizations. The grants do not
have to be repaid. However, the
Federal share of a 319 grant is 60
percent. The grantee must pay the
remaining 40 percent. This repay-
ment, which must be made from
non-Federal sources, can come in
the form of supplies, equipment,
funding, etc. Section 319 grants
can be used for an array of projects
that reduce NFS pollution.
States Have Flexibility Using Section 319 Funds
A wide variety of projects can be funded with monies available under Section 319. Regulatory and
nonregulatory programs that assess the success of specific nonpoint source projects are eligible for
funding. In addition, enforcement, technical assistance, financial assistance, train ng, technology
transfer, demonstration projects, and monitoring may be funded. To apply for 319 funds, State foresters,
landowners, and private organizations should:
• Consult with their State NPS coordinator (see http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/cortacts.html);
• Meet all deadlines;
• Follow applicable guidance;
• Review proposals to assure they are well written.
-------
Examples of reduction of NFS
pollution include:
• Design and implement best
management practices;
• Publish educational materials;
• Conduct training courses on
forestry practices for professionals,
landowners, and other interested
parties;
• Establish vegetative filter strips in
riparian areas;
• Install stream crossings;
• Purchase and use low-impact
logging equipment;
• Plant trees;
• Conduct integrated pest
management;
• Produce tree seedlings; and
• Carry out many other activities
aimed at improving the ability of
public and private forest managers
to protect water resources.
Application Process for
Section 319 Grants
The best way to start the application
process for Section 319 funds is to
contact your State, tribal, or territori-
al environmental or water quality
agency. See http://www.epa.gov/
owow/nps/319hfunds.html.
The Section 319 grant application
process for State foresters, private
landowners, and private organiza-
tions varies among States, tribes, and
territories. Generally, grantees must
follow a two-step process to qualify
for Section 319 funds. First, a work
plan is needed. Second, an estimated
project cost is needed.
Normally, States, tribes, and territo-
ries will request work plans once
each year from potential grantees.
The work plan should:
• Address an important or high-
priority watershed;
• Have feasible, realistic, and meas-
urable project goals addressing
water quality;
• Contain an action plan with an
implementation schedule;
• Contain on-the-ground implemen-
tation components;
• Include community involvement
(e.g., partnerships, stakeholder
input, public outreach); and
• Describe how the project will be
monitored and evaluated for
success.
Best Management Practices
Best Management Practices (BMPs) are used to control nonpoint source
pollution. Since traditional end-of-pipe pollution control methods are not
appropriate for nonpoint source pollution, an alternative concept of land man-
agement practices as pollution control tools has emerged. This concept relies
upon the use of specific BMPs identified by the State or authorized tribe as the
most effective means of preventing or reducing water pollution from nonpoint
sources such as agriculture or timber harvests. An example of a BMP is the
installation of a forest buffer strip between a stream and an agricultural field to
filter out fertilizers and other pollutants before they enter surface waters. To
be effective, BMPs must be properly installed and monitored to determine if
water quality goals are being achieved. If not, the BMPs can be modified.
-------
The estimated project cost documen-
tation should:
• Itemize a tight budget;
• Fully budget administrative costs;
• Present reasonable and appropriate
costs;
• Assure all matching requirements
for the non-Federal share are met.
THE CLEAN WATER
STATE REVOLVING FUND
The CWSRF, which operates like a
bank, is another source of funding
for forestry projects that help mini-
mize NFS and improve water quality.
The EPA has been encouraging
States to open their CWSRFs to a
wide variety of water quality projects
and to use their CWSRFs to fund
high-priority projects in targeted
watersheds. As a result, CWSRFs are
an excellent resource for funding
forest-related NFS projects.The
CWSRF provides low or no-interest
loans to State foresters, private
landowners, and private organiza-
tions that have eligible projects and
can identify a dedicated loan repay-
ment source. Repayment terms can
be up to 20 years. All 50 States and
Puerto Rico have a CWSRF.
However, each is managed individu-
ally and has its own application
process and project priority list.
Generally, the Federal Government
and the State provide seed money
each year to capitalize each respec-
tive CWSRF. In addition, repayments
from existing loans are added to the
pool of money used to fund new
projects.
AN IMPORTANT RESOURCE FOR
FORESTERS, LANDOWNERS, AND
PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS
The CWSRF can be used for virtually
any type of nonpoint source project,
including polluted run-off abate-
ment, wetlands protection and
enhancement, riparian buffers, and
-------
estuary protection. Thus, the CWSRF
is the EPA's largest water quality
financing source. This significant
source of financing allows State
foresters, landowners, and private
organizations to undertake critical
water quality projects that otherwise
might not be addressed.
The CWSRF has more than $47 bil-
lion in assets and funds over
$4 billion of water quality projects
each year. The funding of NFS proj-
ects, including forest conservation
and restoration projects and forestry
practices initiated to control NFS pol-
lution is gaining momentum. Since
1989, the CWSRF has funded more
than $1.7 billion in NFS projects. The
loans can cover 100 percent of eligi-
ble costs, depending upon State poli-
cies. No local up-front funding match
is necessary.
States are required to match the EPA
funds received for CWSRF. However,
this match requirement is not passed
on to loan recipients. There is also an
opportunity to leverage other fund-
ing sources such as Section 319
grants and USDA cost-share pro-
grams. Check with your State for
details. See http://ww.epa.gov/owm/
cwfinance/cwsrf/ and
http: //www. epa.gov/owow/nps/
319hfunds.html.
Sources of Loan Repayment
Many users of the CWSRF have
demonstrated creativity in identifying
sources of loan repayment. While the
ultimate source of repayment for
CWSRF loans may often be the loan
recipient, the repayment source can,
and often is, entirely independent
from the recipient and the water
quality project. Possible sources
include:
• Recreational activity fees;
• Park entrance fees;
• Storm water management fees;
• Monies received from plant sales;
• Landowner income;
• Donations received by non-profit
groups;
• Fees paid by developers of the land;
and
• Dedicated portions of local, county,
and State fees or taxes.
Use Internet To Start
Application Process
Since the CWSRF is managed by
each State and Puerto Rico, project
funding priorities may vary. The EPA
encourages its program administra-
tors to use watershed planning and
develop integrated priority setting
systems to choose projects that
address the highest priority environ-
mental challenges.
If you are interested in protecting
forest resources or reducing polluted
runoff using forestry practices like
-------
riparian buffers, contact your State
CWSRF programs, learn how the
program works, and participate in
the annual process that determines
which projects are funded. The list of
CWSRF State representatives can be
found at http://www.epa gov/owm/
cwfinance/cwsrf/contacts.htm
CWSRF Application Process
Each State and Puerto Rico has a
similar process for selecting projects
to receive CWSRF financing. In
general, the CWSRF loan process
consists of these steps:
• Discuss the project with a CWSRF
representative and obtain an
application if appropriate.
• Complete an application form. This
may require applicants to:
- Identify the environmental needs
and cost of the project.
- Describe the proposed project and
complete project-specific docu-
ments, such as design documents,
engineering plans, permits, State
agency approvals, and contract
documentation.
- Identify a dedicated revenue
source to repay the loan.
- Include project financial
information such as project capital
and operating and maintenance
costs.
-------
EXAMPLES OF FORESTRY PRACTICES AND
PROJECTS FUNDED THROUGH SECTION
319 AND CWSRF
The Section 319 and CWSRF programs have been used to support a number
of forest management efforts and could potentially support many more.
SECTION 319 CASE STUDIES
Vermont
The Vermont Department of Forests,
Parks and Recreation has received
Section 319 funding for preparation of
booklets that describe the Acceptable
Management Practices (AMPs). The
information provided by the AMPs book-
lets is considered crucial to improving
logging practices as they relate to water
quality protection. The booklets, distrib-
uted to the logging and land-owning
communities, serve as a benchmark for
protecting surface waters before, during,
and after logging operations.
Washington
An innovative coalition in central Washington State has used Section
319 funds to manage and protect resources on forest lands while
maintaining a viable forest products industry. This coalition, the Yakima
Resource Management Cooperative, is a voluntary group of private
forest landowners, government agencies, representatives from environ-
mental groups, and the Yakima Indian Nation. After identifying sedi-
ment from logging roads as the single largest threat to water quality, the
cooperative initiated corrective actions that included reconstructing and
improving roads, obliterating more than 50 miles of road, adopting for-
est practices to reduce sediment, and using erosion control matting. In
addition, Section 319
funds have helped
provide technical
support staff and
ongoing training for
area loggers.
-------
Illinois
The Cache River Reforestation Project was implemented using Section 319
funds in a cooperative effort by the Illinois EPA, the Illiniois Department of
Natural Resources and the Shawnee Resource Conservation Development
Area. This project accelerated the conversion of environmentally sensitive
croplands to forest by planting native hardwoods. Fields that were
designated "prior converted cropland" or "farmed wetland" were targeted,
with an emphasis on plantings in riparian corridors that provide stream-
bank stability and connect fragmented habitats. Technical assistance was
also provided for the improvement of already existing timber stands, along
with an information/ education program.
Guam
Section 319 funds are helping to finance an interagency Water Planning
Committee (WPC). The work group is comprised of representatives from 11
agencies and interested organizations. The WPC pooled its resources and
completed a unified watershed assessment for Guam. Once completed, the
WPC then developed restoration strategies for the Northern and Ugum
watersheds. These strategies identified measurable project goals, sources of
water pollution, planned restoration actions, monitoring and evaluation
plans, funding sources, and a process for public involvement. One specific
action plan targeted soil erosion in the Ugum watershed, which is a key
drinking water resource. To minimize soil erosion the WPC encouraged
actions that maximize vegetative cover, particularly forest. Goals were to
conserve and protect the ravine forest, revegetate badlands with the
savanna grasslands, minimize fires, and increase public involvement and
education. To
achieve this, 319
funds were used to
plant approximately
50,000 trees in a 50-
acre area within the
Ugum watershed.
-------
Texas
The Texas Forest Service, working in cooperation with the Texas State
Soil and Water Conservation Board and the Texas Commission on
Water Quality, has used Section 319 funding together with State match-
ing funds to implement a successful voluntary Best Management
Practices program involving local foresters, landowners, and silvicultural
contractors. The success of this voluntary program is based on educa-
tion. The Texas Forest Service and these cooperators have implemented
this education program through television and radio appearances, news-
paper articles, brochures, newsletters, meetings, workshops, and special
events to promote the importance of using forestry Best Management
Practices
to control NPS pollution. The Texas educational program has already
reached over 20,000 foresters, landowners, loggers, silverculture
contractors, and citizens. Program efforts are continuing with six
primary objectives:
1. Educate the forestry community.
2. Integrate Best Management Practices into all relevant Texas forestry
management programs.
3. Demonstrate various Best Management
Practices using two demonstration areas devel-
oped as educational tools.
4. Foster cooperation between agencies and the
forestry community for a coordinated, effective
program.
5. Evaluate the program and revise as needed.
6. Monitor Best Management Practice implemen-
tation and effectiveness through on-site inspec-
tions of silvicultural activities.
-------
CWSRF CASE STUDIES
Ohio
The Ohio EPA and Ohio Department of Natural
Resources-Division of Forestry are using Ohio's
CWSRF to finance low-interest loans to qualifying
Master Loggers and Certified Foresters for the
<_K_J
purchase of logging and tree planting equipment.
The intent of this program is to create a voluntary,
financial incentive for the use of Best Management
Practices (BMPs) on logging operations, and to support
successful, ongoing silvicultural NPS strategies—all
directed toward preventing nonpoint source pollution
from logging operations. The type of equipment
financed can include equipment used in the implementation of BMPs
such as bulldozers or tractors; new technology,
such as tracked forwarders and hydro-bunchers that will lead to less
sedimentation; and specialized equipment designed particularly for BMP
construction or use, such as timber bridges and mulching machines.
California
California CWSRF provided funds to implement the Tahoe Re-Green
Project. This project was part of the Tahoe Basin-wide effort to reduce
the risk of catastrophic fire. Huge numbers of dead and dying trees
were located on public and private land throughout the Tahoe Basin.
While public managers had
accelerated efforts to address fuel
loads on public lands, Tahoe Re-
Green addressed private lands.
CWSRF funds provided financial
assistance to private landowners
in the Tahoe Basin to facilitate
the removal of dead and dying
fuels in a manner that
minimized erosion and fully
protected water quality.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
Susan Stein, Private Forest Study Coordinator of the
Forest Service Cooperative Forestry Staff in Washington,
DC, coordinated the development of this brochure.
Chris Solloway and Stephanie Vonfeck, EPA, and Karen
Solari, Forest Service, provided detailed technical review
of material.
Except for those listed below, the USDA Forest Service
and USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
provided all photos.
American Toad on page 6—Jason Osenkowski
Mallards on page 7—Gary Armstrong
Logging road on page 8—Bill Baron, Vermont
Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation
Guam reforestation on page 9—Michael Lee
Beavers on page 9—Margaret St. Claire
Photos for case study on page 10—Ronald F. Billings,
Texas Forest Service
Harvesting photo on page 5 and case study photo on
page 11—Mark Ervin, Ohio Department of Natural
Resources
USDA
United States
Department of
Agriculture
Forest Service
0
mj
r
United States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
FS-765 July 2004
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimina-
tion in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, National ori-
gin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and
marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.)
Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication
of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact
USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).
To file a compliant of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence
Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (202) 720-5964
(voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
------- |