CoverREV.QXD 9/13/00 2:55 PM Page 1
            United States
Office of Policy,
Planning, and
EPA 230-B-96
September 19
            A Resource Book For Protecting
            Ecosystems and Communities

Front Cover Photo Acknowledgment:
Photo at lower right, "Young Fisherman, Anacostia River
Watershed, Washington, DC", by Jamal Kadri.
   This resource book was prepared by EPA 's Office of Sustainable
   Ecosystems and Communities (OSEC), within EPA's Office of
   Policy, Planning,  and Evaluation with assistance from the Office
   of Cooperative Environmental Management (OCEM). The
   following Team members contributed to this report: Gerald Filbin
   (Team Leader), Eyvonne Harris, John Moses, Shirley Brauer,
   Holly Stallworth, Bill Painter, Lisa A. Harris, Lori Park,
   Theresa Trainor, Mark Joyce, Barbara Mandula, JacolynDziuban,
   Bob Black, Sarah Malloy, andMargo Burnham. OSEC s Resource
   Book Project Team was managed by Leonard Fleckenstein
   (Deputy Director, OSEC).  OSEC would also like to acknowledge
   the assistance of the Agency s National Advisory Committee on
   Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT) Community-
   Based Environmental Protection Subcommittee, the Local
   Governments Advisory Committee (LGAC), and the following
   individuals who contributed to this resource book: Deanna
   Mueller-Crispin, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality;
   L. Gregory  Low,  The Nature Conservancy; Megan Gallagher,
   The Center for Compatible Economic Development; Ed Hopkins,
   The Nature Conservancy; Maureen  Hart,  Hart Environmental
   Data; Linda Hixon, Friends of the North Chicamauga Greenway,
   Inc.; Lillian Kawasaki, City of Los Angeles, Environmental Affairs
   Department; Gary Machlis, U.S. Department of Agriculture/
   University of Idaho; Kathy Magruder, Queen Anne Co. (MD)
   Visitor Services; Robert Neville, U.S. Department of Agriculture;
   William Norris, Virginia Lakes and  Watersheds Association;
   J. Kathy Parker, The Oriskany Institute; Douglas Porter, Growth
   Management Institute; Luther Propst, The Sonoran Institute;
   Ted Strong,  Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission;  and
   Edward Whitelaw, University of Oregon.  Valuable editorial
   assistance was provided by Roy Popkin of EPA's Office of
   Communications,  Education, and Public Affairs.  The report was
   prepared with the support of Industrial Economics, Incorporated
   (lEc) under U.S. EPA contract 68-W4-0041.
   For additional copies of this resource book, call the National
   Center for Environmental Publications and Information at (513)
   489-8190. Written requests may be sent by fax to (513) 489-8695
   or by mail to: NCEPI, 11029 Kenwood Road, Building 5,
   Cincinnati, OH 45242.  Copies also may be obtained by contact-
   ing the Community-Based Environmental Protection
   Clearinghouse, Office of Sustainable Ecosystems and
   Communities (2184), U.S.  EPA, 401 M Street SW, Washington DC
   20460, or by e-mail:

   If you want to cite the resource book in documents you write,
   please refer to it as Community-Based Environmental
   Protection: A Resource Book for Protecting Ecosystems and
   Communities, 1997, U.S.  EPA (EPA 230-B-96-003), Washington,
   DC. Permission to copy all or part of it is not required.


The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Community-Based Environmental Protection (CBEP)
initiative is designed to help people become effective partners in protecting the environment, including the
ecosystems that support the physical and economic health of the places where they live and work. The EPA
Office of Sustainable Ecosystems and Communities has compiled this book to identify practical approaches
and tools to help communities carry out their own ecosystem protection efforts.  Mention of organizations or
products in this resource book does not constitute an endorsement by EPA, but is intended to point communi-
ties to places where  they may look to find information, resources, or assistance and then evaluate for them-
selves the appropriateness of the resource for their own situations.
                                         Printed with Soy/Canola ink on paper that
                                         contains at least 50% recycled fiber


Community-Based  Environmental
Protection:  A  Resource Book For Protecting
Ecosystems and Communities

          1.1   What Is Community-Based Environmental Protection and
                How Does It Support Ecosystem Protection?	1-1

          1.2   Community-Based Environmental Protection Goals Can Address
                Ecosystem Protection	1-2

          1.3   Basic Approaches for Developing a Local Ecosystem Protection Project —
                How to Use This Book	1-4


          2.1   Getting Everyone Involved	2-1

          2.2   Identifying Goals and Defining an Approach	2-6

                   Setting Versatile Goals	2-6
                   Using Indicators to Measure Progress Toward Goals	2-7
                   Adapting Goals	2-8
                   Making Sure the Goal-Setting Process Involves the Whole Community	2-8

          2.3   Defining Geographic Boundaries	2-8

                   Starting Small	2-9
                   Deciding What to Include	2-17

          2.4   Choosing the Best Organizational Structure	2-20


          3.1   Using Indicators	3-1

                   What Are Indicators? 	3-1
                   Why Use Indicators?	3-2
                   Choosing Indicators	3-3

          3.2   Assessing Conditions and Trends in Local Ecosystems	3-6

                   Specific Indicators of Ecosystem Health 	3-6
                   Developing an Historical Perspective 	3-9
                   Gathering Technical Data	3-11
                   Linking Stressors With Impacts	3-17

                         3.3     Assessing Links Between Ecosystems and the Local Economy	3-19

                                    Local Economies Depend on Ecosystems	3-19
                                    Evaluating the Links Between Ecosystems and Local Economies	3 -26

                         3.4     Assessing Links Between Ecosystems and Quality of Life 	3-31

                                    Healthy Ecosystems Make Life More Fulfilling	3-31
                                    Evaluating the Links Between Ecosystems and Quality of Life	3-32


                         4.1     Strategies Using Voluntary Activities	4-1

                                    Low Cost, Immediate-Result Voluntary Strategies	4-1
                                    Land Acquisition	4-3

                         4.2     Strategies Using Local Laws	4-6

                                    Zoning Ordinances	4-6
                                    Property Taxes and Municipal Fees	4-10
                                    Performance Standards	4-11
                                    Transfers of Development Rights (TDRs)	4-12
                                    Growth Planning in Local Communities 	4-12

                         4.3     Strategies Based on Federal and State Laws and Programs	4-15

                                    Federal and State Laws Affecting Ecosystems	4-15
                                    Working With Federal and State Laws	4-15


                         5.1     Initial Considerations	5-1

                         5.2     A Hypothetical Community Choosing Its Strategy	5-4

                         5.3     Analyzing the Socioeconomic Impacts of Strategies 	5-6

                                    Effects on Key Segments of the Community	5-6
                                    Ways to Present Options	5-7
                                    Techniques for Analyzing the Pros and Cons	5-9

                         5.4     Adapting Strategies to Changing Situations and New Information 	5-13

                                    Reasons for Adapting the Ecosystem Protection Plan	5-13
                                    Stakeholder Participation in Adapting the Plan	5-15
                                    Keeping Everyone Informed	5-15
                                    Staying Aware of Problem Areas 	5-15
                                    Expanding the Scope of the Project	5-17
                         Appendix A:   TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE DIRECTORY
                         Appendix B:   GLOSSARY OF TERMS
                         Appendix C:   UNDERSTANDING ECOSYSTEMS — AN ECOSYSTEM PRIMER

 Communities   In   Action
Arizona and New Mexico: The Malpai Borderlands Group's Community-Based
Ecosystem Protection in Action	1-3

Flagstaff, Arizona: Soliciting Flagstaff Citizen Involvement	2-6

Metropolitan  Washington Region: Building Community Support Through the Anacostia
Watershed Restoration Effort	2-8

Red Lodge, Montana: Small Jurisdiction Enlists Outside Help and Input from Other Small
Communities to Develop a Plan for Sustainable Community Development	2-13

Missouri River, Omaha, Nebraska: "Back to the River" Taps Stakeholder Opinions	2-14

Big Sandy Lake, Minnesota:  Broadening the Stakeholder Base and Focusing
Attention on a Problem	2-17

Southern California:  Defining Geographic Boundaries Through the California Natural
Communities and Conservation Planning Program	2-19

The Berkshires of New England:  Protective Buffer Zones Along the Westfield River	2-20

Blackfoot River Valley, Montana:  Using Existing Groups as a Springboard for
Organization	2-22

Tensas River Basin, Northeastern Louisiana:  Ensuring the Sustainability of the Basin	2-23

Neponset River Watershed, Massachusetts: Citizen Action Charts a Path for
Massachusetts River Restoration	2-24

Santa Monica Bay, California: Monitoring Ecological Stress	3-4

Seattle, Washington: Involving the Public in Selecting Indicators	3-5

North Park, Colorado:  The Owl Mountain Partnership's Ecosystem Survey	3-10

Keeping Track in Northern Vermont:  A Community Effort to Protect Wildlife Habitat	3-14

Portland, Oregon:  Analytical Tools Protect Greenspace	3-16

Upper Great Lakes: Evaluating Ecosystem Stress in the Kakagon and
Bad River Sloughs	3-21

Canaan Valley, West Virginia: Identification of Environmental Stressors Helps
Preserve Ecosystem 	3-22

Northampton  County, Virginia:  Ecosystem Protection Can Benefit Recreation and
Nature-Based Local Economies	3-23

Southwestern Washington:  Innovation in Willapa Bay Helps Community Integrate
Ecological and Economic Goals	3-24

Great Lakes:  Native American Perspectives in Great Lakes Land Management 	3-26

m un
                                           ities   In   A. cati
                          New York City:  Recognizing the Value of Central Park's Open Space  	3-28

                          Eastern Shore, Virginia: Using Easements and Other Compatible Development
                          Approaches to Protect Virginia's Barrier Islands	4-4

                          Western Massachusetts: Local River Protection Zoning Bylaws to Preserve the
                          Westfield River	4-8

                          New Jersey: Urban Forestry Improves Urban Living	4-9

                          The Philadelphia GreenSpace Alliance:  Innovative Policy Tools Preserve Open Space
                          and Concentrate Development	4-10

                          South-Central Florida: Bringing the Kissimmee River Basin Back to Life	5-2

                          Yampa River Basin Partnership of Northwest Colorado: Coordinating Community
                          Groups fora Common Vision 	5-4

                          Columbus,  Ohio:  The Darby Partners Monitor Success	5-14

                          Nevada County, California: Getting Stakeholder Feedback to Improve a Community
                          Forest Management Effort	5-16

        An  Overview  of Community-
        Based   Environmental  Protection
Over the last twenty-five years, federal and state anti-pollution laws have achieved
many notable environmental successes. Local communities often play a prominent
role in addressing many of the most pressing environmental concerns. Central to
these concerns is the need for clean and vital ecosystems. Healthy ecosystems support
human health, plants, and animals. They also provide recreational opportunities and
support local economies dependent upon fish, game, forests, and other resources. Full
protection of our nation's ecosystems requires communities and individuals to con-
serve or restore habitats and solve other environmental problems not specifically
addressed by traditional regulatory approaches.

Over many years, a number of communities in the country have initiated their own
successful community-based environmental efforts. Indeed, the first anti-pollution
laws around the turn of the century were local ones.  This publication draws on the
experiences of many different communities to provide examples of community-based
environmental programs and key approaches, information, and other tools that com-
munities are using.
1.1   What Is Community-Based Environmental Protection
      and How Does It Support Ecosystem Protection?

Community-based environmental protection is action that local individuals and groups
take to address their own environmental concerns. Ecosystem protection carries such
activity beyond localized environmental issues, such as pollution from a particular fac-
tory or lead poisoning from paint in older housing, to consider the ecological health of
the total local environment. This environment often extends beyond municipal borders.

People who work, live, and have businesses in the community ("stakeholders") have a
common interest in protecting their shared environment and quality of life. The defin-
ing element of community-based ecosystem protection is that these people work
together to develop plans and goals. Ecosystem protection plans developed in this
way can be very effective because:

    n They take into account local social, economic, and environmental conditions
      as well as community values.

    n They create a sense of local ownership of issues and solutions and encourage
      long-term community support and accountability.

                         Because most community-based efforts are initiated locally, they consider the views,
                         interests, and values of local stakeholders.  The Malpai Borderlands Group in Arizona
                         and New Mexico (see across), is an instructive example of how a core group of local
                         stakeholders undertook cooperative efforts to preserve local and regional ecological
                         resources. In some cases, communities launch ecosystem protection efforts in
                         response to specific concerns of states and federal agencies; this document also
                         reviews several such programs.

                         Human activities may create a number of different types of stressors for ecosystems
                         and the species that live within them. These stressors can be physical, such as erosion
                         or habitat destruction;  chemical, such as toxic chemicals or excessive nutrients; or
                         biological, such as the introduction of an exotic species or the removal of a predator
                         that controls pest species. Community initiatives that focus on protecting local
                         ecosystems take into consideration the complexity of natural systems and the nature of
                         human relationships with them. It may be difficult for a community to identify its
                         ecosystems and their natural boundaries  (where one ecosystem ends and the next one
                         begins). Often, ecosystems' physical boundaries don't coincide with a community's
                         political boundaries or the natural range for species, such as a migratory bird.
                         Additionally, human activities  that harm an ecosystem may be located some distance
                         away, or may be difficult to change. A community also may contain several ecosys-
                         tems. Both the relationships among components of an ecosystem, such as water,
                         plants, animals, and topography, and the interactions among neighboring ecosystems
                         are important.
                         1.2    Community-Based Environmental Protection Goals Can
                                 Address Ecosystem Protection

                         A major goal of many community-based environmental protection efforts is to ensure
                         that local ecosystems  are healthy enough to provide a range of valuable benefits, both
                         now and in the future. Ecosystem services that benefit humans include:

                              n  Moderating  Natural Events and Human Activities — Healthy ecosystems
                                 can make communities safer and more livable by tempering the effects of nat-
                                 ural events and human activity.  For example, wetlands can absorb water and
                                 thereby help  control flooding; they may also remove pollutants from waste-

                              "  Enhancing Social Well-Being — Healthy ecosystems provide services that
                                 make communities more enjoyable and rewarding. For example, a healthy
                                 ecosystem provides opportunities for outdoor recreation.  To many people,
                                 it also provides a sense of civic pride and spiritual well-being.

                              n  Supporting Local Economies — In a sustainable  economy, people meet the
                                 needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to
                                 meet their own needs. Maintaining healthy ecosystems can help ensure future
                                 generations the economic opportunities enjoyed by current residents. The
                                 interaction between ecosystems and the economy is often the most prominent
                                 issue for local decisionmakers because:

    The  Malpai Borderlands Group  is a
    non-profit   coalition    of   private
landowners and  ranchers  in the border
region of Arizona and New Mexico.  The
group provides a good illustration of com-
munity-based ecosystem protection.  The
group established a clear ecosystem-ori-
ented goal: "To restore and maintain the
natural  processes that create and protect
a  healthy,  unfragmented  landscape;  to
support a diverse, flourishing community
of human,  plant and animal life...."  To
pursue  this goal, the group developed a
5-year  plan  for management  of    the
grasslands, desert scrub,  and  mountain
forest ecosystem in the region. The  plan
targeted three major issues:  conserva-
tion and land protection, low- impact  eco-
nomic  development,  and  science  and
   The group employs an open, participatory
process to choose individual ecosystem pro-
tection projects.  Members explore options,
consider available resources,  and maintain   	   _. ^ _. _. _ ___. _ _. _ ^ _. ^ ^_	f
open communication with ranchers and agen-       '"" '"""* '""'"*'"""'''*"''" '  "'"*"r*
cies. Their guiding principle is always to consider how a project will lead them toward their objec-
tive of restoring and maintaining their ecosystem and community.
   The group members are aware that many options exist for achieving their  goals.  They adopted
a clear 10-step methodology for identifying those options and developing new projects. Board
members, staff members, and volunteers are invited to introduce new ideas. A point person dis-
cusses each new idea with the president or executive director and forms a project committee to
explore its feasibility.
   The planning process has resulted in successful initiation of projects in three major issue areas.
"Conservation and land protection" projects include conducting prescribed burns, allowing natural
fires to burn, and reintroducing natural grasses in conservation and land protection areas. In the area
of "science and education", the group funded field research to determine the effects of fire, graz-
ing, and climate change on lands. "Low-impact economic development" is addressed through
cooperative investigations with local ranchers of ways to  market local products. The group also
focuses on endangered species protection by supporting ranchers' efforts to sustain Chiricahua leop-
ard frog populations on their properties. Many of these successes can be attributed to the group's
inclusive planning process. In the words of its executive director,  "The Malpai Borderlands Group
will never do something to someone — it will be done with them or it won't be done at all."

                        Contact:  Wendy Glenn
                                 Malpai Borderlands Group
                                 6226 Geronimo Trail Road
                                 P.O. Drawer 3536
                                 Douglas, AZ 85608
                                 Phone: (520)558-2470
                                 Fax: (520)558-2314

                                    -  Many local economies depend on outdoor recreation and tourism.

                                    -  Many communities rely on resources extracted from the environment.
                                       Examples include timber, minerals, building materials, and seafood.

                                    -  Ecosystem quality affects the value of property and may influence
                                       local finances.

                         The importance of ecosystem quality to sustainability is illustrated by considering
                         how community members' economic lives are made possible by healthy ecosystems.
                         While modern technology has provided many substitutes and supplements to goods
                         produced by healthy ecosystems, such as farm-grown fish rather than wild fish, the
                         economy is still dependent upon the environment for basic raw materials like water,
                         wood, and minerals. For the economy to grow, communities must protect the under-
                         lying natural systems on which they are built. For example, if a community harvests
                         timber in a given region faster than the timber can grow back, or if a local shellfish
                         bed is over harvested, the industries that depend on these resources will fail.  Careful
                                                         management of ecosystems such as forests and
                                                         estuaries can help avoid this outcome and provide
                                                         a continuing supply of products, services, and jobs
                                                         for the next generation.
Throughout the book you will find special text sections
intended to make community-based ecosystem protection
more understandable.  These include:
                  Community Stories — A state border
                  symbol identifies summaries of real
                  community ecosystem protection efforts
                  throughout the United States. Each one
                  demonstrates a key principle or tool
                  discussed in the text.  The descriptions
                  list a contact person from whom you
                  can obtain additional information.

                  Information Boxes — These text boxes
                  are designed to enhance your understand-
                  ing of key technical concepts.
                  "To Learn More" Sections — These
                  sections provide suggestions for further
                  reading, in case you want more detail
                  on a particular topic.
                  Tool Boxes — These sections describe
                  specific databases, models, or techniques
                  that may prove useful in your ecosystem
                  protection efforts.
                                                     This publication is intended to help you understand
                                                     how healthy ecosystems benefit your community
                                                     and how recreational, economic, and other activi-
                                                     ties affect the quality of your ecosystems.  It will
                                                     show you how other communities have assessed
                                                     the interrelationships between their community
                                                     goals, such as residential development, and ecosys-
                                                     tem quality. As well, it will show you how those
                                                     assessments helped communities decide how to
                                                     focus their efforts and resources more successfully.
                                                     1.3 Basic Approaches For
                                                          A Local Ecosystem Protection
                                                          Project — How To  Use This

                                                     This publication contains four major sections:

                                                     n  Getting Started — Getting an ecosystem pro-
                                                        tection project off the ground involves setting
                                                        goals for the project and establishing an organi-
                                                        zational structure for the effort.  Chapter 2 of
                                                        this book discusses effective approaches to
                                                        these tasks.
                                 Assessing the Conditions of Local Ecosystems and Their Effects on
                                 Communities — Chapter 3 discusses assessment of the current conditions of

        local ecosystems.  The chapter lists data sources and techniques for identify-
        ing ecosystem problems and ways to trace these problems back to their root
        causes. In addition, Chapter 3 discusses assessing the linkages among
        ecosystems, the local economy, and the quality of life.

     n  Strategies to Consider for Ecosystem Protection — Chapter 4 explains
        local, state, and federal resources that may be useful to ecosystem protection

     n  Evaluating and Choosing Strategies for Ecosystem Protection Efforts —
        Chapter 5 discusses how communities have evaluated potential ecosystem
        protection activities by weighing the  potential impacts that they may have on
        local business, the local government, and the residents of the community.
        The chapter also discusses options for adapting projects as new information
        becomes available.

The bibliography at the end of certain chapters lists resources we used  in preparing
this book.

Additionally, the book contains three appendices. Appendix A lists sources of techni-
cal assistance within the U.S. EPA as well as within nonprofit organizations, other
federal government agencies, and state governments. Appendix B provides a brief
glossary of ecosystem-related terms that may be unfamiliar to some readers. Finally,
Appendix C provides an introduction to how  ecosystems work, and how human activ-
ity can affect them.  This information may prove useful in interactions  with environ-
mental professionals in government, academia, and other organizations.


           Getting   Started:   Goal-Setting  and
           Developing An  Organization
2.1    Getting Every on e In volved

Community ecosystem protection initiatives often begin at the grassroots level, when
friends and neighbors share a common interest in protecting or restoring the local
environment. These initiatives may be spurred by noticeable air or water pollution, a
development that causes ecosystem damage, some obvious ecological effect such as  a
fish kill, the gradual loss of desired species such as songbirds, or some other symptom
of an underlying ecological problem.  Alternatively,  a community might come togeth-
er to protect local ecosystems before they become threatened.

A concerned citizen, local official, or other project initiator may have some idea of
desired  outcomes, or may have identified ecosystems or ecosystem components to
improve or protect. Project initiators in other communities have found it useful to
reach out early to other stakeholders - meaning, literally, people who have a stake (or
at least  an interest) in what the initiator is thinking about - to begin an exchange of
ideas about the  desired outcomes or conditions that  sparked their interest.  Identifying
possible stakeholders and sharing information stimulates their thoughts and desire to
participate Ultimately, stakeholders develop partnerships by coming to  agreement on
issues, vision, and information, leading to the development of a set of community
goals and actions.

The figure on the next page shows one potential progression of a community  ecosys
tem protection effort. The illustration begins with the topics found in this chapter -
that is, when a small group in the community alerts potential stakeholders to their con-
cerns and begins to organize. Next, the community as a whole might develop  its
vision of the ideal community and, from this vision, develop goals. Finally, the com-
munity  might assess the current problems facing ecosystems (discussed in Chapter 3)
and identify and implement strategies to achieve those goals (discussed in Chapters 4
and 5).

Who are possible stakeholders? They include anyone in the community who takes a
natural  interest in environmental protection. Groups  that might be affected by
changes in  commercial  activity resulting from  ecosystem protection strategies  are also
potential stakeholders. Examples may include  businesses or labor unions.  Local
elected  officials and community leaders can help identify potential stakeholders, in
addition to participating themselves.

                                          Figure 2-1.

                      Protection of Local Ecosystems Is An Inclusive
                                   and Evolving Process
                        Sens*? of llace
Sense nt" €]f»fidli]»»rw*
                                                           Vision r>f
                                                        Ideal llommttirity
                                                 tioalsfor    twoals for     l*oials for
                                                 NustaioahJe    l>hialrty

Potential stakeholders might include the  following organizations and individuals.

     "  Members of existing organizations that use or are concerned with the
        environment or land-use issues, such as:
           - Local environmental interest groups such as Audubon Society and
              the Sierra Club
           Hiking,  bicycling, and walking groups
           - Boating, canoeing,  and white-water rafting organizations
              Fishing or hunting clubs such as Trout Unlimited and the Izaak
              Walton League
           - Local community service organizations such as service clubs, garden
              clubs, 4-H Clubs, and Scouts
           — Public health  organizations
           - Land trust organizations such as The Nature Conservancy or local
              land trusts
           - Condominium or housing development associations
           - Church organizations
           - Parent-teacher organizations
           - Neighborhood community economic development  organizations
           Student  groups at local schools and  universities
           - Local historical  societies
           - Environmental justice  activist groups

      n  Private landowners whose property includes habitat areas  that the community
        wants to protect, including farmers, ranchers, timber companies, and private

      n  Businesses whose livelihoods depend on local environmental resources,
        directly or indirectly, including:
           - Canoe rental
           —  Fishing and hunting guides
           - Nature tour guides
           Horseback  riding stables
           -  Resorts, local hotels, bed and breakfasts, hunting lodges
           -  Commercial fishing or other industries dependent on
               renewable resources
           Landscaping  businesses
           - Real estate  agents
           Developers'  and  builders' associations
           - Utility  companies
           Businesses that  require  clean water for manufacturing
           -  Local industries with environmental discharges
           - Insurers

      «  Local  chapters of relevant national professional organizations,  including:
            -  Ecologists, biologists, and other natural scientists
            -  Physicians  (e.g., the America" or state and county medical
            -  Landscape  architects (e.g., American Institute of Architecture)
            —  Attorneys (e.g., American Bar Association)  and mediators
               (e.g.,  Society for Professionals in Dispute Resolution)

                                      - Land use, natural resource, and other planners (e.g.,  American
                                         Planning Association or International City/County Management

                                  Offices of state, local, tribal, and federal governments, including:
                                      - Local watershed organizations  and conservation districts
                                      - Local parks and recreation departments
                                      — Local planning boards
                                      - Local and  state tourism offices
                                      - County or municipal water districts  and health departments
                                      -  State departments of environmental protection, agriculture,
                                         fish  and game, transportation, and commerce
                                      - State economic development, coastal zone  management, planning, and
                                         community and urban affairs commissions
                                      - U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency
                                      -  U.S. Department of Agriculture (especially the Extension Service and
                                         the Natural Resource Conservation  Service)
                                      - U.S.  Forest Service
                                      -  U.S. Department of the Interior (especially the National Park Service,
                                         the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the  Bureau of Land Management)
                           Ways to raise community awareness include:
             " Using Existing Forums for Public Participation-Communities often have regular public meetings in
               which community members can place items for discussion on the agenda.

             "  Publishing Information in the Newspaper or Running an Ad on a Local Radio Station or on
               Community Access TV - Local newspapers can publish notices about ecosystem protection ideas and
               include either a date for an open meeting or a telephone number people can call for further information
               Alternatively, local radio stations or local cable TV channels can run similar notices.

             »  Handing Out Leaflets-A booth at a local store,  shopping mall,  library, or other well-traveled location
               can be an outlet for distributing leaflets about the local ecosystem and why people might be interested in
               joining an effort to protect it.

             n  Sending Out Mailings -Participants can drop off leaflets to people  directly at their homes or send
               brochures via  mail.

             "  Writing Op-Ed Articles Letters to the editor of the local newspaper, or  op-ed articles, can efficiently
               publicize a project.

             * Calling Local Talk Shows-Calling radio shows discussing environmental or community themes can raise
               awareness about  local ecosystem protection.

             ft Posting a Bulletin Board Notice or Developing a Home Page on the Internet The Internet can be a
               direct and very effective way of getting information to certain segments of the community, especially inter
               est group members (e.g., environmental activists and academics). Developing a home page that explains
               the project is a good way to get exposure.

           - U.S. Department of Commerce (especially the National Oceanic  and
              Atmospheric Administration and the Economic Development
           - U.S. Department of Transportation
           -  Military bases administered by the U.S.  Department of Defense or the
              Coast Guard

     n  Faculty at local schools and universities, especially those in environmental
        studies, biology, ecology, geology, and  other natural sciences as well as
        economics, urban planning, public policy, and  other social sciences

     "  Labor unions and other workers' organizations

     n  Senior citizens' organizations such as local councils on the aging or the
        Environmental Alliance for Senior Involvement (EASI).

Many diverse ethnic, religious, or other groups might be interested in sharing their
points of view and participating. In some cases,  communities must actively seek the
involvement of key groups. Stakeholders may exist outside the immediate geographic
area. Often, a community's ecosystem protection effort will interest people who live in
distant places.  For example, a land conservation effort in a rural resort area may cap
ture the interest of city-dwellers who spend summers there. Similarly, a river restora-
tion effort may affect many downstream communities. The economic interests of peo-
ple in other areas also may greatly affect communities'  efforts. The following stories
about Flagstaff's Open Spaces and Greemvays Committee and the Anacostia Watershed
Restoration Committee illustrate efforts to include new members.
Engaging people from all key stakeholder groups as soon as possible produces many
benefits.  People are much more likely to work together successfully if they  are
involved from the beginning rather than after decisions are made. For example,
developers may be more willing to discuss alternative development  schemes if they
are invited to help plan ecosystem protection  strategies. Many community members
gain a sense of well-being from volunteering their time to create a better community;
involvement in the effort can be a source of personal enrichment.
Most communities have found that
communication is vital in getting
stakeholder  involvement.  For exam-
pie, visiting some of the groups
noted above at one of their meetings
and speaking for five minutes might
successfully draw stakeholder partic-
ipation. Likewise, developing a
newsletter to document decisions
made and activities undertaken
keeps everyone engaged  and abreast
of the latest developments.
                Tfce KaiMal IwiKSnttietital Justice
                Advisory GoMeil PUJAC) recently
                developed a public participation model
                that addresses how to include historically
                disenfranchised groups in community
                efforts, Ibe description of the model is
two pages long and ean be  obtained from Marva King at
the U.S. Environmental Pmteetion Agency's Office of
Environmental Justice, phone: |202) 5644599.

                                     Flagstaff, Arizona;  Soliciting Flagstaff Citizen Involvement
                                                                        This community-based planning initiative illus-
                                                                        trates how an effort can expand and evolve as a
                                                                     result of the concerns of new members.  What began
                                                                     as a one-issue, one-agency project expanded to an
                                                                     effective multi-agency coalition with extensive citizen
                                                                       The project began with the City of Flagstaff s update
                                                                     of its general plan, Growth Management Guide 2000.
                                                                     The city brought the U.S. Forest Service and the State
                                                                     Land Department (which manage properties within the
                                                                     city boundaries) and the National Park Service (which
                                                                     was slated to expand its boundaries) to the table to dis-
                                                                     cuss the interface of open space and urban areas. One
                                                                     of the city's major problems concerned the movement
                                      of elk and other large mammals across highways and through residential areas.  This COR
                                      cern brought the Arizona Department of Game and Fish into the process.
                                        From this one concern over one area of land sprang a host of new issues:  development
                                      pressures, quality-of-life concerns, and floodplain  protection, among others. As new
                                      voices came forward and problems were clarified, the core group evolved into the Open
                                      Spaces and Greenways Committee to better  address the new and original  issues.
                                        Although local, state, and federal agencies did much of the preliminary work, the group
                                      quickly opened the process to citizens, encouraged increased city and county representation,
                                      and sought the opinions of under-represented but affected groups, such as the Native
                                      American  population.
                                        Ultimately, the committee consisted of six agency representatives and seven local com-
                                      munity members. City planners approached a limited number of organizations to encourage
                                      representatives to participate on the committee, including the Board of Realtors, the Sierra
                                      Club, the Chamber of Commerce, Northern Arizona University, the Parks and Recreation
                                      Commission, and the Beautification Commission. The final slot was offered to a represen-
                                      tative of East Flagstaff. As the group grew and opinions were voiced, the actual goals of the
                                      group evolved, incorporating a more complete set of concerns from the community.
                                  2.2     Identifying Goals and Defining An Approach

                                  Other communities have found that when they first embark on an ecosystem protec-
                                  tion  project, they do not have a clear idea of goals, other than a general concern about
                                  protecting local ecosystems. Various methods of goal-setting, such as visioning —
                                  forming a concept of what the ideal  state of the community's ecosystems should be ~
                                  can  help a community develop goals (see following tool box).

                                  Setting Versatile Goals

                                  When thinking about goals, many communities have considered  not only ecological
                                  protection, but also the ways in which the environment interacts  with quality of life and
                                  the local economy. These three endpoints can guide goal setting. For example, your
                                  primary ecological protection goal might be protecting streamside or woodland habitat.
                                  An associated "sustainable economy" goal might be working with landowners to pre-

  The committee employed a diverse set of tools to find new members and to engage local and
regional input, including:
   K Open houses in elementary schools, fire
     stations, and other community meeting
     places to review resource maps
   n Newsletters
   «  Free fact sheets on greenways initiatives
   n Open plan-review sessions
   »  Videos to be used for community meet-
     ing outreach and local cable access
   »  Project posters made available through
     participating groups and agencies
   Trivia quizzes published on the op-ed
   page of the city newspaper
   Issue presentations on a statewide game
   and fish television show
   Outreach to populations who are not
   residents of Flagstaff, but who use and
   highly value many of the natural fea-
   tures of the Flagstaff area
   Maps of the open-space categories, with
   their descriptions and applications, post-
   ed in places of high public traffic for
   review and comment
   When the Hopi Tribe heard about the Flagstaff Open Spaces and Greenways Committee's
mapping project, they became concerned. The committee was mapping significant natural,
historical, and cultural resources to classify priority areas for protection. The Hopis, howev-
er, did not want their sacred places identified precisely.  The committee therefore  simply
flagged  a region as culturally important without identifying specific locations that would
have attracted attention to the Hopi sacred sites.
Contact:     Ursula Montafio
            Long Range Planner
            City of Flagstaff Planning
            2 11W. Aspen Avenue
            Flagstaff, AZ 86001
            Phone: (520) 779-7685 ext. 255
            Fax: (520) 779-7690
Alan Ragins
Rivers, Trails and Conservation
  Assistance Program
U.S. Department of Interior
National Park Service
1220 South St. Francis Street
Santa Fe,NM 87501
Phone: (505) 988.6723
Fax: (505) 986-5225
serve their woodlands by carefully planning and selecting the timber harvest to protect
tree age, size, and species diversity, and replanting species native to the area.
Improving the quality of life might combine protecting wildlife habitat with construc-
tion of nature trails to provide hiking and walking benefits.  Goals to improve ecosys-
tems can include both present and future generations ~ that is, the ecological legacy the
community wants to leave its  children and grandchildren.

Using indicators to Measure Progress Toward Goals

Tying goals to indicators, or  specific measures of how well the community is achiev-
ing its goals, is a concrete way to determine progress. For example, measuring com-
munity progress in  protecting aquatic species might involve  counting the number of
wading birds in the area. Specifically, the community could  seek to double the wading
bird population by the year 2000. Measuring the economic health of the community
might involve tracking employment in eco-tourism businesses with a goal such as 50
percent growth in local eco-tourist business by the year 2000.

                             Metropolitan  Washington  Region:  Building Community Support
                             Through  the  Anaeostia Watershed Restoration Effort
                             "The sub-basin  coordi-
                             nators have  gained an
                             intimate familiarity
                             with the  streams, and
                             have taken this knowl-
                             edge to civic and envi-
                             ronmental organiza-
                             tions, town
                             officials,  and individ-
                             ual residents. M
    As the Anacostia restoration effort found, the most
    successful way to build community partnerships is
by reaching out to the entire community, publicizing
goals and efforts, recruiting project volunteers, and
involving citizens in the decision making process.
  The Potomac River cleanup in the 1970s drew much
attention, but the Anacostia River (the "other" major
river running through the nation's capitol) remained
largely ignored. Some residents used the Anacostia for
recreation and appreciated the beauty of the watershed.
but others ignored it, neither feeling any connection to
the river nor realizing its potential as an urban treasure.
In 1987,  a regional partnership, the Anacostia Watershed
Restoration Committee (AWRC), joined the District of
Columbia, two Maryland counties (Prince George's and
Montgomery), and the State of Maryland in a coalition to
address the basin's declining health Partnership goals
included pollution reduction, watershed restoration, out-
reach, education, and stewardship.
  The AWRC, representing local and state govern-
ment, wanted to  develop a new awareness of the
Anacostia River among the 804,500 residents of the
basin. In tarn, these residents could serve as "stream
stewards". The AWRC chose a range of education and
participation opportunities, including:

   n Newsletters
   n Subwatershed information brochures
   11 Sub-basin coordinators
   » Volunteer restoration projects
   n A citizen advisory committee
                          By stating goals in concrete, measurable terms, the community ensures that it can
                          objectively assess the project's progress. The use of indicators is discussed in more
                          detail in Chapters 3 and 5.

                          Adapting  Goals

                          As more and more stakeholders join the effort, the community may need to go
                          through the goal development process more than once. As Figure 2-1 illustrates, the
                          period after the assessment, planning, and execution of a particular ecosystem protec-
                          tion project provides an opportunity to reevaluate  whether the community is meeting
                          goals, using indicators, and whether these  goals indeed represent the priorities of the
                          community. If not, then the strategies chosen may  not be effective and the underlying

  To support these efforts, the Interstate Commission of the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB)
publishes a quarterly newsletter and subwatershed publications to inspire residents to get
involved. ICPRB packs these publications with local history, information on resources.
easy-to-understand explanations of the restoration effort, and tips for household participa-
tion. ICPRB also supports part-time paid sub-basin coordinators recruited through local
newspaper job advertisements. These people are the eyes and ears of the river,   spending
IO hours a week walking the streams, talking with neighbors, distributing newsletters.
producing stream-walk videos for local access cable channels, and making community pre
sentations.    Some take on special projects, such as watching for illegal  dumping.
Coordinators also promote citizen participation in many private and governmental steward
ship efforts.
  Many organizations have helped work toward the citizen stewardship goal. For instance,
the  Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) provided staff to publish a
handbook that provides  step-by-step instructions for planning and conducting community
restoration projects. The Maryland Department of Natural Resources Forest Service.
MWCOG, the Anacostia Watershed Society, the Earth Conservation Corps, an Americorps
group, and others have planted trees along basin tributaries and throughout the watershed.
Citizens have also planted new wetlands and picked up countless pieces of trash floating in the
  Most recently, the AWRC formed a citizen advisory committee to provide input on restora-
tion and to ensure  interactive community involvement in the restoration efforts.
contact:    Curtis M. Dalpra
           Public Information Officer
           Interstate Commission of the
             Potomac River Basin
           6110 Executive  Boulevard,
             Suite 300
           Rockville, MD 20852
           Phone: (301) 984-1908
           Fax:  (301)  984-5841
Jim Shell
Chief, Urban Watershed Planning
Metropolitan Washington Council of
777 N. Capitol Street NE, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20002-4226
Phone: (202)  962.3342
Fax: (202)  962-3201
goals may not be relevant and realistic. Ultimately, the community may want to
undertake another goals development session.

Making Sure the  Goal-Setting Process Involves  the Whole Community

Unless key community members participate in setting goals, the goals produced will
not legitimately reflect the wishes of the community as a whole. Goal-setting works
best when participants are an inclusive group.

                                                 Tools For Group Decision-Making

                                                 The Visioning Process - The visioning process involves all interested
                                                 community  members from the start. In the process, community members
                                                 gather in a meeting place and openly discuss plans for the future, similar
                                                 to the New  England town meeting. Using visioning as  a means to devel-
                                 op community goals takes advantage of the breadth and depth of ideas within the comma
                                 nity and ensures that the initial proposals are shaped by all affected members.
                                    Many communities have begun this process by scheduling a meeting that is open to all seg
                                 ments of the community  The same techniques used to interest others in the concept of envi
                                 ronmental protection can be used to publicize the meeting: newspaper advertisements, radio
                                 announcements, flyers, leaflets, and word of mouth through existing organizations such as
                                 civic, church, environmental, and other community groups, and business organizations such as
                                 the Chamber of Commerce. Holding the meetings in schools or other accessible locations
                                 enables people to attend more easily, as does choosing a time that will be convenient to many
                                 people, such as a weekday evening or a weekend morning.  Similarly, providing childcare and
                                 transportation enables parents, the elderly, and those without cars to attend.

                                 The meetings can have two phases:

1                                           Generating Ideas --  First, in a group, all of the stakeholders brainstorm and share
                                           ideas of what the community ideally would look like. This discussion incorporates a
                                           diverse set of ideas about the desire for specific resource uses (such as using a mead
                                      ow for  development of songbird habitat) as well  as personal values (for example, ensuring
                                      that development is environmentally friendly). In addition to brainstorming, the group can
                                      use role-playing exercises or other techniques to  encourage participation.

2                                           Organizing Ideas Into Goals - Members refine the ideas generated in the first
                                           phase into feasible goals using a consensus process, keeping in mind that these
                                           goals must be measurable and will be assigned indicators later. The outcome of this
                                      phase is a list of goals, both short- and long-term, and the specific activities necessary to
                                      achieve them. Goals produced in Chattanooga. Tennessee's visioning  process  are
                                      described on the opposite page (Figure 2-2). You'll notice that in the Chattanooga initia-
                                      tive, the community built very diverse goals including cleanup of distressed areas, ere
                                      ation of environmental enterprise zones, protection of wilderness areas, commitment to
                                      waste minimization, and  fostering of public awareness and education.

                                  Clearly, this process may not be completed in  one meeting or even several meetings. Based
                                  on the  number of members involved and the complexity  of problems, communities have
                                  found that they  need to schedule several meetings before completing the first round of  goal-
                                  setting. A skilled facilitator can reduce conflict and  ensure the best outcome  (see  discussion
                                  of facilitation below). The community of Red Lodge, Montana, as discussed below, used an
                                  outside group both to start the goal-setting process and to ensure that it ran smoothly.

                                  Delphi Technique - The Delphi Technique involves multiple rounds of mail surveys.
                                  The first round  asks stakeholders to describe their goals for the community's ecosystems.
                                  The second and later rounds describe the results of the earlier rounds and ask residents to
                                  respond to them in writing. Residents'  views may change as they react to new information
                                  about others' goals. An appointed  coordinator oversees the process and summarizes the
                                  information in  each survey round.

                                  Community Dispute Resolution -Differences of  opinion may emerge among participants  as
                                  they begin discussing visions and goals for local ecosystems. A variety of techniques exist  for
                                  managing conflict. Other communities have found these techniques useful to encourage people to
                                  listen with open minds and understand each other's positions. In this way, communities often find

creative solutions that satisfy multiple goals, even when such solutions are not apparent to begin

    Shared  Values-Although stakeholders' goals  may appear to differ on the surface, they
    in fact may share some common ground. For example, an  industry that uses water from
    a river or discharges permitted effluents into the river would appear to have potentially
    competing goals with a community conservation group that wants to protect or improve
    the ecological quality of the stream. But the industry also values the clean water as a
    resource for their industrial processes. The group (including representatives from the
    industries) can start working out goals by focusing on this  shared value.

    Facilitators- Facilitators are neutral parties who help run meetings by calling on partici-
    pants, limiting speaking time, recording points made on a whiteboard, easel, or notepad,
    and summarizing the discussion periodically. Facilitators  help create an atmosphere of
    trust and fairness by ensuring that all groups have equal weight in the discussions. They
    keep the discussion focused on the topic at hand and
    moving forward. Finally, intense situations, a facilitator
    can maintain civility and remind participants that a possi-
    ble solution is to agree to  disagree. Facilitators include
    clergy, college faculty or teachers, judges or magistrates,
    attorneys, and organizations with a facilitation mission,
    such as the League of Women Voters. Experienced
    mediators also can serve as facilitators.  Although any-
    one can serve as a facilitator, a trained, experienced facil-
    itator will likely bring out  the best in the participants,
    produce the best outcome,  and do the most to minimize
    Mediators or Conciliators - Mediation or conciliation can
    be useful if a group arrives at a point where disagreements
    seem unresolvable. in mediation, an expert mediator or
    panel of mediators assists the disputing patties by helping
    them identify and discuss issues of mutual concern,
    explore solutions, and develop mutually acceptable settle-
    ments. The disputing parties are responsible for devising
    their own solution to the conflict with the help of a strao-
    tared process established by the mediator. Mediators are
    often listed on court rosters. In conciliation, a neutral coiv
    ciliator assists the parties to resolve their conflict by serv-
    ing as a conduit for information, either by telephone or by
    alternating meetings with each side. Community member!
    generally do  not negotiate face-to-face. Similar to media
    tion, the conciliator provides a structured process for com-
    ing to a negotiated solution.

    Arbitrators-Arbitration is a  last resort after the dis-
    putants have tried other, more consensus-oriented proce-
    dures. In arbitration, the disputants present their sides
    and the arbitrator imposes a settlement, which may be
    binding or nonbinding depending on prior agreement.
    The community can give a mediator the authority to arbi-
    trate if the mediator believes that the disputants have
    reached a true impasse.

The Back to the River effort in Omaha, Nebraska, illustrates
how one community used both facilitators and surveys to
               Figure 2-2.

Sample Goal From the Revision
   2000 Plan for Chattanooga,

GOAL:  Develop and maintain the
          greater Chattanooga area as a
          world class environmental
11 promote the cleanup of environmentally dis-
  tressed areas tbiJCHigh the creation of environ
  maitat entwi^rise lones where public and
  pro^fipicls are used to create innovative
" Strengthen commitment to clean up our
  waterways. Establish  a task force to lead,
  prioritize, and enforce mandatory clean-up
  of all polluted creeks  and other areas.
«Protect the natural wilderness areas in
  the Chattanooga vicinity, such as North
  Cfaickamauga Creek Gorge. Establish a
  task force to protect and maintain environ-
  mentally significant areas.
" Require area-wide (residential, business,
  and industrial) recycling and waste mini-
  mization programs. Establish and maintain
  eoftverrient curbside recycling and centers
  for disposal of household hazardous
n Fester pwfessiMtl education programs in
  environmental technology and engineering.
  Strengthen Chattanooga State's and the
  University of Tennessee — Chattanooga's
  solution-oriented programs.

                                 To Learn

                 Books and Videos -The following materials on visioning are
                 available from the American Planning Association at Planners
                 Bookstore,  1313 E.  Sixtieth Street, Chicago, IL, 60637-2891,
                 phone:  (312) 955-9100:
-  Ames, Stephen C., ed., A Guide to  Community ₯isiatiing» 1993, price: $25.
-  Chandler, Michael, Meeting Management: A Mock Commission Hearing,  1994,
   price: $59.95. 90-miniite VBS  video and workshop materials.
-  Klein, William, Community Visioning* 1994, price: $94.95. 12Q-minute VMS video
   and workshop materials.
-  IMessen, Anton C., Visions for  a New American Dmatn, 1994, price: $50 (paper-
   back); $65 (library edition).

Internet -The following World Wide Web sites provide information on the visioning
process, specific case studies, and  organizations involved in the process:
- The Atlanta Project:
   http://web, cc, emory. edu/BUSltfESS/earterjCenter/TAJPflistory. html
-  public Access Network, Seattle, WA: htt-p://,seattle.wa.usf
-  The Grrandnet Visioning Process: http://i$emmt:8Q/grandmt/
~  The Millennium Report to the Rockefeller Foundation:
                               -  Chattanooga Venture and the Community Vision Project:
                                                                                        or public policy tlepatt
                               Dispute Resolution
                               Fisher, Roger and William Ury, Getting to Yes, Houghton Mifflk Company, Boston,
                               MA, ISBN 0-14-00.6534-2, 1981. This book has many tips on negotiating and obtain
                               ing the best solution to a negotiation.

                               Miller, Sandra, Craig Shtan, and William Bentley, Ratal Resource Management, low a
                               State University Press, Ames, IA, 1994.

                               Northwest Renewable Resources Center, Seattle, WA. This organization assists in com-
                               munity oiganteing, specifically in eoWiiftHiMes in which tribal and non-tribal peoples
                               have trouble working together., Iw ffiOr% information, contact Betsy Reynolds, phone:
                               (206) 623-7361;
                               Patrick Fn&m$,^,,:&^^                                             fer
                               .Dispute teaiiriionv?tesb)ngte*ii ife 1991 , i>i»d»iiiptf^pS6-
Red Lodge, Montana:  Small Jurisdiction Enlists Outside Help
and Input from Other Small Communities to Develop a Plan
for Sustainable Community Development
\\ T^1611 ^ed Lodge, Montana, decided to become
 W proactive in its development strategy for the
future, it realized it faced a special challenge to be
successful. Small jurisdictions, such as Red Lodge,
often have neither the local expertise nor the budget
and staff to support a community effort aimed at
maintaining jobs and economic growth without sac-
rificing the environment. They realized that any ini-
tiative would likely result from the efforts of only a
few people in the community. Recognizing their
scarcity  of resources, Red Lodge residents decided
to draw on the experiences of other small communi-
ties and  experts to  guide their efforts.
  The Red Lodge community began with a workshop led by the Sonoran Institute, which provM
ed a forum to help residents develop a vision of the future. The workshops attracted 160 of the
town's 2,000 residents and a broad cross-section of the inhabitants of the area: ranchers, develop
ers. business people, educators, and senior citizens.
  This workshop was the first step in identifying residents' shared vision and in creating commit
tees to further explore and implement programs to make their vision a reality. Ultimately the work
shop led to the development of the Beartooth Front Community Forum (BFCF), a non-partisan,
locally-based  citizens' organization that serves as an excellent demonstration of a far-reaching,
inclusive, and long-term process for sustainable community development.
  The BFCF represents the community's diversity and brings people together to find common
ground and develop a vision of the future. The BFCF works to develop and maintain a plan to pre*
serve and enhance the quality of life in Red Lodge. The early efforts and successes of the BFCF
include development of a youth center, preservation of the post office, development of a land-use
master plan, and implementation of water quality monitoring.
  In addition to forming the BFCF, Red Lodge communicated with other small communities
around the country that had taken on similar land planning efforts. After compiling information on
others' experiences, the BFCF held a public meeting to share options with Red Lodge residents as
well as catalyze fundraising to hire a professional land-use planner to guide their ongoing efforts.
Ultimately, the BFCF came up with 40 percent of the cost of a land-use planner through fimdrais
ing, and the City Council provided the other 60 percent.
  The BFCF's success is rooted in its ability to draw on all segments of the Red Lodge citizenry,
the experience of similar communities, and the resources of other organizations in forming and
implementing  its vision.
  The Sonoran Institute has helped extensively with the planning process and was a sponsor of
workshops on sustainable jobs. In addition, the institute has been instrumental in linking this effort
with the efforts of the Corporation for the Northern Rockies. The corporation brings  people togeth
er to work toward collaborative problem- solving and to  search for ways to meet economic needs
while sustaining the environment.

                      Contact:  Gary  Ferguson
                               Beartooth Front  Community
                               P.O. Box 1490
                               Red Lodge,  MT  59068
                               Phone: (406) 446-2388

                      Missouri River, Omaha, Nebraska:
                      Stakeholder Opinions
'Back to the River" Taps
                                                                        The communities along the Omaha stretch
                                                                        of the Missouri River faced some difficult
                                                                     questions when organizing their ecosystem
                                                                     protection effort.  How do you repair a dam-
                                                                     aged river? What initiatives are top priority?
                                                                     Who is going to take part? And most difficult
                                                                     of all, how much are you willing to pay for a
                                                                     healthy river? Through Back to the River, a
                                                                     cooperative campaign to restore one section of
                                                                     the Missouri, citizens are getting an opportu-
                                                                     nity to voice  their opinions.
                                                                       The Missouri River corridor, running north
                                                                     and south through Council Bluffs, Iowa, and a
                                                                     highly  industrialized  area  of  Omaha,
                                                                     Nebraska, has seriously deteriorated. Levees,
                       dams, and channelization of the river have changed the river's hydrology and resulted in the loss
                       of wetlands and diverse fishery habitat.  Conversion of forests and wetlands to cropland and res}
                       dentiai uses  has led to accelerated habitat loss, and industrial pollution  has led to human health con-
                       cerns. Back to the River is trying to reverse these trends.
                         The Back to the River Steering Committee, made up of seven formal partners including repr&
                       sentatives of cities, local, state, and federal natural resource agencies, and a forest association,
                       established  broad restoration and education  goals. At the outset, the steering  committee deter-
                       mined that community input and support were crucial to success. How would citizens like to use
                       the river? Would the community support increased property or sales taxes to fund projects? Would
                       citizens be willing to donate time through volunteering?
                         To gauge community perceptions and values regarding the river, the committee used two meth
                       ods: surveys and guided discussion groups or focus groups. They also hired independent profes-
                       sionals who were key to the success of both techniques. Selecting  a neutral party with no stake in
                       the outcomes lent credibility to inquiries and encouraged more honest responses.
                         The steering committee conducted over 1,200 telephone surveys inquiring about the communi
                       ties' use of the river, their concerns, and their interest in enhancing  the river corridor. The com-
                       mittee then  organized four professionally facilitated discussion groups held in different communi
                       ties. Each session included an ethnically, economically, and culturally diverse set of 12 citizens
                       with no professional or personal link to the groups  cooperating in the restoration effort Attendees
                       were unaware of the nature of the discussions before they arrived, though the facilitator had pre
                       pared a predetermined set of questions and topics to be discussed.
                         While the results of the focus groups are still being compiled, community members currently are
                       enjoying a unique opportunity to express their opinions and provide a realistic basis for assessing
                       their willingness to contribute to the restoration effort.

                                             Contact:  Sandra Washington
                                                      National Park Service
                                                       1709  Jackson Street
                                                      Omaha, NE 68102
                                                      Phone: (402)  22 1-335 1
                                                      Fax: (402) 221-3465

2.3    Defining Geographic Boundaries

As part of developing goals, outlining problems, and developing solutions, commu-
nities have found that they need to consider the boundaries of the ecosystem that
they wish to protect. Determining these boundaries is not always straightforward.
In particular, it involves understanding the complex interactions between people and
their environment.

Starting  Small

The boundary-drawing exercise is complicated by the fact that most ecosystems are
not wholly self-contained. A lake, for example, may be a component of a larger nat-
ural system of rivers and streams within a watershed. Therefore, the lake may be
affected by runoff, pollutant spills, flooding, and other problems affecting related
water bodies. Some ecosystems are so complicated that it may be difficult to address
the entire system. River deltas, with their networks of fresh and saltwater marshland
and rivers and lakes,  are an example of such a system. Furthermore, ecosystems such
as forests or lakes often cross town, county, and even state boundaries.

These considerations may discourage communities from going forward with ecosys-
tem protection plans. The community may feel that its  ecosystems are so intercon-
nected with the larger environment that whatever small steps it takes locally will be
overwhelmed by events occurring in related ecosystems in other towns or states.
Alternatively, the community may keep increasing the area of interest to incorporate
as many  ecosystem features as possible, then realize that it will need to reach out to
other communities for their cooperation.

Some communities have found it useful to start small.  Considering ecosystems in the
context of the larger environment of which they are part doesn't require tackling the
entire system at once.

Sometimes, however, retaining a small geographic scope may not be feasible
Expanding the scope can help include the following;

     » A Critical Locale - For example, a project may be more effective if it
       covers an important tributary to a river or a woodland that contains a crucial
       nesting site for birds.

     » A Critical Stakeholder - For example, a large landowner may be able to
       make a significant contribution to the health of local ecosystems through land
       management techniques.

     n  Special Skills or Resources - The community may want to expand bound-
       aries, for example, to make the project relevant to a nearby university or to
        include endangered species habitat that will capture the interest of federal

     »  Special Constituencies - The community may want to expand boundaries in
        an explicit effort to include, for example, groups who historically have been
        overburdened by environmental degradation or have been systematically left
        out of other community decisions.

                           The Big Sandy Lake Association, discussed on the next page, shows how one commu-
                           nity expanded its ecosystem protection effort.

                           A community  can use the boundary-drawing exercise to help in thinking about other
                           towns, counties,  or even states with which to cooperate. If a community is consider-
                           ing making a river swimmable, for example, the effort will be affected by what goes
                           on upstream.  For this reason,  communities often work closely with the watershed
                           association and state entities, and may also involve other towns.
                            Obtaining Maps

                            Organizations from which you can obtain current maps of a particular area include the

             » Local Town Hall, County Office, or Planning Board
                    Local land-use maps that show whether land is used for housing, commercial enterprises,
                    agriculture, or open space
                 -  Tax maps that show private or public ownership of land
                 - Flood insurance maps

             n State Environmental  Agency
                    Wetland delineation maps that show wetland boundaries
                 -  Watershed maps that show the water bodies, wetlands, and other components of a local watershed
                 - Land-use maps
                    Aerial photo maps that show the location of different ecosystems
                 Aquifer delineation  maps

             n State Conservation or  Land Acquisition Group (within the  state  department of natural resources
                or environmental protection)
                 - Land-use maps

             n State Wildlife and Fisheries Department or Department of Natural Resources
                    Maps of state  and local recreation areas
                    Maps showing the distribution of different plants and animals throughout the state, including rare
                    and endangered  species, non-native species, and crucial habitats

             ft Federal Government (Appendix A of this handbook lists the telephone numbers and addresses of
                these agencies)
                 -  U.S. Geological  Survey (part of the US. Department of the Interior)has maps showing natural
                    features of all parts of the United States.
                    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA, part of the U.S. Department of
                    Commerce) has  maps of coastlines and ocean waters.
                 -  The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has maps of floodways and flood
                    hazard  areas

             « Geographic Information Systems (GIS)- At a greater level of sophistication, CIS software packages
                are available that allow you to model ecosystems on a personal computer. These computerized maps can
                show the political and geographic features of your ecosystems. As discussed in Chapter 3, GIS is also a
                powerful tool for evaluating ecosystem health and identifying sources of stress on the ecosystem,
                although in most instances citizen groups will have to rely on a state or local agency or academic institu
                tion to help with the analysis.

Big Sandy Lake, Minnesota;  Broadening the Stakeholder
Base and Focusing Attention on  a Problem
                                                  Begun as a small organization of citizens,
                                                  the Big Sandy Lake Association has been
                                               remarkably successful in identifying and
                                               working with stakeholders. In a relatively
                                               short time, the organization formed a partner-
                                               ship with federal, state, and local agencies
                                               that works to improve and maintain the Big
                                               Sandy Lake Watershed.
                                                 In the late 1980s, local residents began to
                                               see increasing development, ditching, wet-
                                               lands alterations, poor timber harvesting prac-
                                               tices, and livestock grazing along lakes and
                                               streams as a serious threat to water quality in
                                               the 400- square-mile  watershed. Recognizing
                                               the need to protect the ecosystem and its
 important fishery and tourism benefits, they formed the Big Sandy Lake Association and
 approached county and state agencies for help.
   The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MFCA), responsible for the state's surface-water
 quality, in cooperation with the lake association,  conducted a study of Big Sandy Lake's water quaJ
 ity. MPCA's report confirmed citizens' concerns and identified the expanded scale of the problem
 at the watershed level. Approaching the problem at the watershed level necessitated the participa-
 tion of a variety of additional stakeholders: private landowners; the Army Corps of Engineers,
 which manages water levels on Big Sandy Lake; and the State Department of Natural Resources,
 which has large, local landholdings and manages fisheries and wildlife.
   The Army, concerned about water quality and interested in forming local partnerships, began
 monthly water  quality  testing in 1990. Concerns about timber harvest,  livestock practices, and
 compatible development attracted the attention of the Soil and Water  Conservation Districts.
 Additionally, state agency personnel from  several different departments became involved in the
 project when wetlands and erosion control became part of the lake's management plan. Soon COUH
 ty-level planning and zoning offices became the subject of scrutiny for not enforcing the state
 shoreland development standards
   The combined effort of interested state agencies, county departments, and citizens' groups led
 county planners to address declining watershed health as they realized its potential negative effects
 on tourism.  Similarly, these organizations' concerns focused attention on the need for alternative
 lakeshore landscaping. In  response, a local agent of the University of Minnesota is seeking the
 involvement of landscape architecture students to design ecologically sound lakeshore lawns.
   The Big Sandy Lake Association has been remarkably successful in attracting the attention and
 resources of government agencies. It also has identified support from the McKnight Foundation,
 an organization that funds  Mississippi Corridor environmental projects. Yet another measure of its
 success  is that the State Department of Natural Resources offered a project coordinator to the steer-
 ing committee and designated the watershed as one of five ecosystem management pilot projects.

                      Contact: Chris Freiburger
                                Project  Coordinator
                                Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
                                 1201 East Highway No. 2
                                Grand Rapids, MN 55744
                                Phone:  (218) 327-4353
                                Fax: (218)  327.4263

                          A Watershed Is One Way to
                          Define "Natural** Ecosystem
              A watershed is an area where rain and other water
            drains to a common location such as a river, lake, or
            wetland (see figure). This collection of water may
            occur naturally (as with rain running down a hillside)
            or with the influence of drainage infrastructure such as
            ditches and storm sewers. Watersheds range in size
            from a few acres that drain to a farm pond-to thou-
            sands of square miles. Landscapes such as watersheds
            may contain many different and interrelated eebsp>
            terns (such as forests, streams, wetlands).
              Ecosystem managers often use watersheds as  a
            meaningful way to define areas of concern.
            Watersheds typically cut across political boundaries
            like neighborhoods, subdivisions, town lines, and even
            state lines. Thus, watershed management often
            requires coordination among different governments
            and organizations. While such coordination can prove
            challenging, watershed-based efforts can ultimately
            establish a seamless network of environmental protee-
            tion across large regions, a result that is difficult for
            traditional government organizations to achieve.
Deciding What to  Include

Communities often  start with the most obvious
ecosystem unit and  enlarge the area of interest
by considering related ecosystems. If a com-
munity is focusing on a small pond, for exam-
ple, it may also consider including wetlands,
marsh, or wooded areas around the pond.
Outlining the area on maps clearly shows
topography (for example,  elevation, water bod-
ies, and other features) as well as political fea-
tures  (for example, roads and state, county, and
city boundary lines). The  California Natural
Communities and Conservation Planning
Program illustrates  one group's efforts to
define the boundaries of a local ecosystem
(see across).

In drawing boundaries, many  projects have
considered whether to  include a buffer zone
around the ecosystem. Such  a  zone  absorbs
the effects of human activity around the core of
the ecosystem, preventing damage to the sys
tern itself. For example, for a seacoast, a zone
of non-marsh, non-sandy  terrain between the
water's edge and development can prevent ero-
sion and protect delicate tidal ecosystems. A
project conducted by a citizens' group in The
Berkshires of New England (see below) is an
example  of the successful implementation of a
buffer zone around  a river.
                                                               2.4     Choosing The Best
                                                                       Organizational  Structure

                                                               Many communities function well as an ad hoc
                                                               collection of members with shared responsibili-
                                                               ties, each participating in tasks or responsible
                                                               for implementing a part of the plan. Other
                                                               communities decide to implement a formal
                                                               organizational structure. Elements of such a
                                                               structure might include:
                                   Steering Committee - The steering committee assumes the day-to-day
                                   responsibilities of the organization, delegates tasks, and may be responsible
                                   for outreach to other organizations.  The Blackjoot Challenge and Tensas
                                   River Basin stories, on the following pages, provide examples  of groups that
                                   exchanged ad-hoc structures for steering committees.

Southern  California:  Defining Geographic Boundaries
Through the California Natural Communities and
Conservation  Planning Program
    The Natural Communities and Conserva-
    tion Planning Program (NCCP) has
worked to delineate the  geographic boundaries
of critical lands within  Southern California's
coastal sage scrub ecosystem. The NCCP is a
voluntary,   collaborative    effort   among
landowners, local governments, and state and
federal agencies to preserve endangered habi-
tats. The program's first goal is the preserva-
tion of the coastal sage scrub habitat in the 1.5
million acre  planning area south  of Los
   The range of California's coastal sage scrub
habitat, home of the threatened California
gnatcatcher and approximately 90 other poten-
tially threatened or endangered species, has declined to 18 percent of its historical acreage. This
fragmented habitat is scattered over more than 6,000 square miles and encompasses large parts of
three counties (Orange,  San Diego, and Riverside) and smaller portions of two others (Los Angeles
and San Bernardino).
   Designing a reserve system in the midst of this vast and substantially urbanized area required a
systematic approach that focused on four specific tasks. First, project scientists identified the
remaining  undisturbed habitat areas needed to ensure the existence of two birds, the California gnat
catcher and cactus wren, and one reptile, the orange-throated whiptail lizard. These three animals
are considered to be the coastal sage scrub ecosystem's most endangered organisms. Second, pro
ject scientists identified landscape areas within the urbanized zones that can provide connections
between the critical habitat areas. These "corridors" allow populations to interact with each other,
increasing their chances for survival. Third, scientists identified plant species that are endangered
but not yet protected in the reserve areas and corridor zones. The habitat of these plant species also
was incorporated into the reserve's design. Lastly, the scientists made sure to include a range of
soils, terrain, slopes, and other landscape features to accommodate a wide variety of species. They
did so by  dividing the landscape areas into subunits defined by elevation, slope, latitude, distance
from the coast, and soils. Subunits that were under-represented in the reserve were incorporated by
adjusting the boundaries of the reserve and corridors.
   These guidelines have allowed for the design of a viable ecosystem management area that lies in
the midst  of a highly urbanized region.  Over one million acres have been voluntarily enrolled in
the NCCP. This land includes 31 local jurisdictions,  37 private landowners/developers, and 53
percent of the known coastal sage scrub habitat within the planning area. Enrolled landowners have
guaranteed that they will not disturb the scrub habitat and, under the guidance of the NCCP, the
entire planning region has effectively begun work on a habitat conservation plan.

                      Contact: Mark Luesebrink
                                California Resources  Agency
                                1416 Ninth Street
                                Sacramento,  CA 95814
                                Phone:  (916) 653-5656
                                Fax:  (916) 653-8102

                    The Berkshires of New England:  Protective Buffer Zones
                    Along the Westfleld River
                                                          T\ ushing through the  foothills of the Berkshire
                                                          J\JMountams in western Massachusetts, the Westfield
                                                          River traverses one of New England's most pristine
                                                          wildernesses.    Encroaching development catalyzed
                                                          local citizens to initiate a grassroots river protection
                                                          effort that delineated 100-foot "buffer" zones to pre-
                                                          serve the natural character of the river. The land with
                                                          in the buffer zones would be protected by restrictions
                                                          on the development of new structures, septic systems,
                                                          sand and gravel  removal, and  commercial timber
                                                            The Westfield River Greenway Plan's buffer zones
                                                          are designed to:

                                                           n  Preserve the aesthetic appeal of the river environ-
                                                              ment for the enjoyment of current and future gei>
                                                           »  Provide feeding, nesting, and cover for a wide
                                                              variety of wildlife
                                                           «  Protect the river's water quality by maintaining a
                                                              natural vegetative filter to prevent erosion, sedi-
                        	      m entation, and nutrient and pollutant runoff into
                                                              the river and by shading the river to prevent
                                                              water temperatures from rising to higher than
                                                              optimal for fish survival and reproduction
                        Help protect the free-flowing condition of the river
                        Help protect human life and property from flood damage.

                                         Contact: Chris Curtis
                                                 Project Manager
                                                 Pioneer Valley Planning  Commission
                                                 26 Central Street
                                                 West  Springfield, MA 01089
                                                 Phone: (413) 781-6045
                                                 Fax: (413)  732-2593
 "The primary objective...
is the establishment of a
protective  river corridor  or
- Westfield River Greenway Plan
                                  Task Forces and Work Groups-Task forces within the organization each
                                  address a specific goal, and work groups within the task forces each imple-
                                  ment an aspect of that goal.

                                  Fundraising - Community members often pay for small expenses related to
                                  the project, but communities sometimes need to seek outside funding to avoid
                                  unduly burdening the personal finances of individual community members.
                                  Fundraising may take the form of obtaining grants or in-kind services from
                                  governments or private philanthropies, organizing fairs and festivals, or
                                  becoming part of a larger fund-raising organization, such as the United Way.

                                  Budgeting - Faced with competing demands for funds, organizations some-
                                  times feel the need to develop a formal budget to ensure funds are spent fairly
                                  and effectively.

     «  Legal Incorporation - Becoming a legal non-profit entity has  advantages for
        some organizations. They include tax exempt status, access  to  certain grants,
        and protection from personal liability for group members.  Incorporation
        involves establishing a board of directors and organization bylaws; an attor-
        ney generally handles the incorporation  process.

To summarize, the following story about the Neponset River Watershed Association illus-
trates many of the elements involved in initiating a community ecosystem protection plan.
       To Learn
                 Other Local, State, or National Environmental Organizations — Many of these
                 groups have been through some or all of these procedures and can provide valuable
                 information on incorporation, budgeting, and funding sources.

                 Attorneys Familiar With Nonprofit Tax Law-An attorney develops bylaws and
                 may be able to assist with other legal issues. Some attorneys donate their time for
free to non-profit groups.

Grants From Private Philanthropies: Foundation Clearinghouses - The Foundation Center, located
in New York, New York, phone: (212) 620-4230, and the Grantsmanship Center, located in Los Angeles,
California, phone:  (213) 482-9860, both provide information on how to find and obtain grants from pri
vate philanthropies, as well as a listing of thousaiidspf Igpntspawiling organizations.
    Environmental Financing Information Network ^BOTJj- SPIN provides information on government
    and private financing soirees for environmental programs run by eemnitrniy groups, states, and munici
    pal  governments. The EFIH Center maintains an online database containing abstracts of publications,
    case studies, and contacts and operates a hotline.  EPIN is managed by Vertt fitanigan of the U.S.
    Environmental Protectio'n Agency, and is located in Room 3304,401 M Street SW, Washington, DC
    20460, phone:   (202) 260-0420, e-mail:,

    The Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance-This publication,  put out by the federal  government,
    lists sources of grants from federal agencies and programs.

    Publications -Many books defiling with running a non-profit corporation and navigating the tax laws are
    available at local libraries. These include:

          « Formalizing  an Organization
               - Balling, David M., How to Save a River: A Handbook for Citizen Action, Island Press,
                 Washington, DC, ISBN 1-5500-249-6, 1994. SMS book has a number of suggestions on
                 fundraising and organizing y&r effort.
               - Cook, Christine M., C(3) or C(4)? Choosing a TeK^Bxempt Status, River Network,
                 Portland, OR, 1991.
               - Hummel, Joan, Starting and Running a Non-Proflt Organization, University of Minnesota
                 Press, Minneapolis, MN,  1980.
               - ManeusQ, Anthony, How to Form a Nonprofit Corporation, Nolo Press, Berkeley, CA, 1990.

          " Fundraising
               - Flanagan, Joan, The Grassroots Fundraisiisg Book: How I© Raise Money in Your
                 Community, VOLUNTEER: Tie National ©enter for Citizen Involvement, Boulder, CO
               - Gurin, Mauri* G., What VaimteersSfmii^jow for Successful Ftmtttaising, VOLUN-
                 TEER The National Center for Citizen Involvement, Boulder, CO.

                    Blackfoot River  Valley, Montana:  Using Existing Groups as a
                    Springboard for Organization
                                                                   The  Blackfoot  Challenge,  a  cooperative
                                                                   resource  management  initiative  in the
                                                                Blackfoot River Valley of Montana, has made the
                                                                transition from a group of concerned individuals
                                                                to a formalized, community-based working group
                                                                focused on long-term ecosystem and economic
                                                                viability in the valley. A key step  in this transition
                                                                was the development of a formal organizational
                                                                structure that allows for and promotes representa-
                                                                tion of all interests in the valley.
                                                                  The  Blackfoot Challenge traces its roots to a
                                                                meeting sponsored by the Big Blackfoot Chapter
                                                                of Trout Unlimited. The  meeting brought
                                                                together government agencies, industry,  conser-
                     vation groups, and landowners to discuss concerns and ideas for the future of the Blackfoot River
                     Valley. Many local citizens concerned with the long-term environmental and  economic health of
                     the area were interested in finding a forum  in which they could address these issues. Response to
                     the initial meeting was overwhelmingly positive, and attendees decided that a formal organization
                     should be created.  At a follow-up meeting, the group formed the Blackfoot Challenge, and in the
                     subsequent year the group reached consensus on a mission statement, goals, and an organization
                     al structure,
                       Members of the Blackfoot Challenge designed the group to involve all stakeholder groups at all
                     levels of decision making. The community group established bylaws that mandated a balanced rep
                     resentation of stakeholders on all committees. Prescribing equity in interest group representation on
                     the committees gave the Blackfoot Challenge the credibility needed to attract diverse interests in the
                     valley and ensure that no group was excluded from  the process. Members of the Blackfoot
                     Challenge note that during the early periods of the initiative, it was especially important to comma
                     nicate to valley residents that the initiative included all stakeholders in the valley  and was not led
                     purely by environmental or industry groups.
                       The Blackfoot Challenge's organizational structure includes an executive committee that sets
                     policies for the group and a steering committee that makes decisions on projects.  Other com-
                     mittees address specific  issue areas such  as private lands, information, public relations, and

                                          Contact: Jack Thomas
                                                    Executive Director
                                                    Blackfoot Challenge
                                                    P.O. Box 307
                                                    Lincoln, MT 59639
                                                    Phone/Fax:  (406) 443-8577

 Tensas River Basin, Northeastern Louisiana:  Ensuring the
 Sustainability of the Basin
    Ethe Tensas (pronounced "ten-saw") River Basin, a group
   f citizens and agencies has analyzed the sources of envi-
ronmental conflicts between farmers and conservationists
and identified potential solutions.   The resulting strategy
addresses how to  improve water quality, restore wetlands
and wildlife habitats, and  implement  agricultural  and
forestry best management practices. The study also provides
a detailed analysis  of how proposed solutions affect the costs
and profitability of farming in the region.
   Spreading through the northeast corner of Louisiana, the
bottomland hardwoods of the Tensas  River Basin support
some of the richest, most diverse, and most productive
ecosystems in the country. This resource also creates  conflicts between traditional row crop agri
culture and resource conservation goals.
   In 1991, the Tensas Basin Technical Steering Committee formed at a meeting of local, state, and
federal officials, landowners,  and conservation organizations to discuss a Soil Conservation Service
river basin study. At the meeting, a core group decided to establish a model demonstration project to
remedy the conflicts  between traditional row crop farmers  and resource conservationists through
ecosystem restoration that considers economic viability.
   Working by  consensus so that any one member holds veto power, the 19-member committee
(made up of a true cross-section of basin interests, including the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,
the local Levee District, The Nature Conservancy,  six farmers, the Louisiana Department of
Agriculture and Forestry, and many others) identified seven major watershed problems. Each major
problem was broken down into component problems. These served as the driving forces behind the
three recommended treatment options: best management practices, engineering methods, and hot
tomland hardwood restoration.
   Best management practices refer to a set of land-use practices that reduce off-site damages while main
taining or improving productivity on cropland or forestland. According to one representative, "Only those
[practices] deemed  to be effective, efficient and acceptable to residents of the basin were considered."
   The Tensas Basin Technical Steering Committee developed a list of seven best management prac-
tices and their effectiveness in solving the watershed's problems (see sample below). Implementation
of the options presented in the study depends heavily on voluntary efforts of local landowners, and
technical and financial assistance.
  Selected  Best
  Management Practices
Recovery From Loss or    Improvement of Wate
Fragmentation of Habitat^. Quanta. JmDairment
Mitigation ol deduced
Species Div
  Conservation Cropping  Sequence
  Crop Residue Use
  Filter Strip
  Grade  Stabilization Structure
  Grassed Waterway
  Structure for Water Control
  Tree Planting
                      Contact: Mike Adcock
                                Northeast Delta Resource
                                Conservation and Development Council, P.O. Box 848
                                Wmnsboro, LA 70295
                                Phone:  (318) 435-7328
                                Fax:  (318)  435-7436

                     Neponset River Watershed, Massachusetts:  Citizen Action
                     Charts a Path  for Massachusetts River Restoration
                                                                     Working to protect natural resources in a
                                                                     watershed that covers parts of 14 different
                                                                Massachusetts cities and towns,  including
                                                                Boston, may seem like a huge task for a commu-
                                                                nity-based effort. But that is exactly what the
                                                                Neponset  River   Watershed    Association
                                                                (NepRWA) is doing and, by most accounts.
                                                                doing very well.   The association's efforts
                                                                demonstrate how  clear goals and  inclusive,
                                                                cooperative management and planning can bring
                                                                together individuals,  businesses,  and govern
                                                                ment to  support  ecosystem restoration and
                                                                  To collect data and monitor conditions  in the
                      123- square-mile watershed, NepRWA depends on volunteer "stream teams". These local citizen
                      groups document both the problem areas and positive aspects of streams and stretches of river
                      within their own communities. Based on the information they gather, stream teams develop real
                      istic action plans with both short- and long-term goals. Stream teams bring problems to the alien
                      tion of officials within their cities and towns and work with them to address issues such as
                      degraded habitat, illegal sewer hookups, erosion, dumping, and lack of access to the river for
                      recreational use. NepRWA combines the observations of the stream teams with those of state and
                      federal agencies to help develop overall management plans that are  consistent with concerns
                      throughout the watershed.
                        Although the stream teams work independently, NepRWA supports them by providing training
                      and forums for communication with experts and with each other. NepRWA trains all the teams to
                      use shoreline survey techniques developed by the state Department of Fisheries and Environmental
                      Law Enforcement. When teams encounter especially difficult problems, they can turn to technical
                      advisory groups (made up of industry experts and government officials) and members of other
                      stream teams.
                        NepRWA also works at a broader level to make municipal governments  and businesses aware of
                      the value of restoring and preserving the watershed. The greater the awareness of watershed
                      restoration and protection benefits, the greater the willingness to support the effort Benefits
                      include protection of a local aquifer that provides 150,000 area residents with drinking water,
                      preservation of wetlands that slow and disperse the flow of flood waters and protect private prop
                      erty, and improvement of local property values resulting from maintaining a healthy river system.
                        NepRWA is piloting a process of community-based watershed management that will be repli
                      cated in 27 other river systems throughout Massachusetts. By including residents and businesses
                      at the local level, and governments at the state, regional, and local levels, NepRWA achieves con
                      sensus in developing management plans while attracting resources and volunteers. The commum
                      ty focus  of the watershed initiative is helping its residents learn their "ecological address" and
                      increase  their awareness that they are all connected by the waterways around them.

                                           Contact:  Ian Cooke
                                                    Neponset River Watershed Association
                                                    2438 Washington Street
                                                    Canton, MA 02021
                                                    Phone: (617) 575-0354
                                                    Fax:  (617) 575-9971
                                                    E-mail: NepRWA@aoI.coni

         Assessing the Conditions of
         Local  Ecosystems  and  Their
         Effects  on  Communities:
         Tools  and  Techniques
A doctor uses blood pressure, body temperature, and other data to monitor a person's
health. In the same way, communities can assess and monitor the health of their
ecosystems by collecting and analyzing various kinds of "indicator" data.  A wide
variety of indicators might be used. The kinds of indicators that are important depend
on the characteristics of a community and its priorities.

This chapter describes what indicators are and explains their relevance to community
ecosystem protection. Most communities have considered three types of baseline

    n Assessing the health of local ecosystems and identifying factors ("stressors")
     affecting their quality

    n Assessing links between local ecosystems and the local economy

    n Assessing links between local ecosystems and the community's quality of life.

Note that while this chapter is divided into three types of assessments to simplify the
presentation, there is substantial overlap among the three types. Ecosystem stressors
discussed in the first section may be directly related to economic or quality-of-life
indicators discussed later.  The boundary between economic and non-economic quali-
ty-of-life measures is often fuzzy.
3.1   Using Indicators

What Are Indicators?

Indicators are measures that help you assess the health of local ecosystems, under-
stand what factors are affecting ecosystem quality, and assess the effects of ecosystem
quality on life in your community. Indicators provide insights into the condition,
qualities, interrelationships, or problems of a complex system, such as an ecosystem
or the local economy. Over time, tracking an indicator helps to measure progress
toward a desired goal.

                           Most indicators are quantitative: they are numeric data based on actual measurement
                           of the factor being monitored. Qualitative indicators generally attempt to describe a
                           factor of interest, rather than measure it with precision. An example of a qualitative
                           indicator would be a description of a local lakefront as "moderately polluted" or "very
                           polluted".  Qualitative indicators are valuable because they can describe situations that
                           cannot be measured with a single data series.

                           The accuracy and reliability of qualitative indicators depends on the knowledge and
                           biases of the people providing information. Qualitative indicators can be difficult to
                           interpret and may mean different things to different people.  In contrast, quantitative
                           indicators are less subject to conflicting interpretations.

                           Three general kinds of indicators are discussed in this chapter:
                                                         n  Indicators That Characterize Environmental
                                                           Health — For example, the number and variety of
                                                           grass species is an indicator of a prairie's ecological
                                                           health. Because people are part of the ecosystem too,
                                                           indicators of their health and safety are also useful.

                                                         n  Indicators That Reflect the State of the Local
                                                           Economy — These indicators track the economy as
                                                           it is affected by the quality of ecosystem resources
                                                           and services; for example, the number of people
                                                           employed in commercial fishing or in industries that
                                                           depend on a clean water supply (such as breweries
                                                           and food processing).

                                                         n  Indicators That Reflect the Community's Quality
                                                           of Life —These indicators track quality of life as it
                                                           depends on ecosystem quality, such as the number
                                                           of visitors to a public beach or levels of traffic con-
                                                           gestion and vehicle miles traveled.

                                                         Why Use Indicators?

                                                         Using indicators is a shorthand method  for obtaining
                                                         representative information  on the overall system.
                                                         Each single indicator reflects only a part of the com-
                                                         plex system.  When indicators that measure key
                                                      .   aspects of the system are looked at as a set, however,
                                                         they reveal trends and interrelationships that might
                           not otherwise be apparent.  For example, declines in  bird populations on a lake shore-
                           line in combination with data showing increased boating activity on the lake might
                           suggest a cause for the reduced bird counts. Note, however, that comparing two data
                           series does not prove a cause-and-effect relationship between them.

                           Indicators provide a relatively objective basis for discussion, planning, setting goals,
                           and measuring progress.  They help  avoid the misdirected  effort that might result
              Why is species
              biodiversity impor-
  Ecologists often emphasize the concept of
species biodiversity — that is, the number and
variety of different species of plants and ani-
mals that naturally populate a given place.
Because of the interdependence among these
organisms, the loss of natural diversity can
throw an ecosystem out of balance. For exam-
ple, destruction of bat colonies can result in
huge increases of insect-caused crop damage.
Bats are one of nature's most efficient insect
predators.  When bat populations are eliminat-
ed, insect populations soar and often overrun
crops, forests, and other types of groundcover
(such as suburban vegetable gardens). Natural
biodiversity is often considered as a measure of
an ecosystem's sustainability, as well as its cur-
rent health. In addition, species diversity is
important because of the potential commercial
value of rare species, such as drugs derived
from rainforest plants. Finally, many people
agree that biodiversity is intrinsically valuable,
regardless of human uses for the species.

from simply reacting to the most obvious trends or relying on a few people's untested
opinions about what actions should be taken.

Choosing Indicators

Some indicators address  the community as a whole system — ecological, social,
and economic.  For example, while the amount offish taken by a commercial or
sports fishery may be of interest, this indicator may say little about the health of the
aquatic  ecosystem.  Some more targeted indicators would include information on
the presence of tumors in fish, the numbers offish within age classes in the popula-
tion, and the availability of their food resources —  as overall indicators of the fish-
ery's health. These indicators help to measure the sustainability of the local fishery,
thus measuring both economic security and ecosystem stability and quality. For the
Santa Monica Bay Restoration Program (see story on following page), citizens
developed a list of potential indicators when evaluating what types of data were
needed to create a comprehensive monitoring system for the bay. Their list illus-
trates the many characteristics different people considered when they thought about
the health of one specific ecosystem.

Often, indicators need to be understandable and useful to a range of audiences, includ-
ing the general public, public officials, and scientists.  In communicating with the gen-
eral public, less technical measures are often preferable.  On the other hand, commu-
nications with public officials or scientists, perhaps when seeking future funding,
often benefit from the use of more technical language. The difference may simply be
in the wording of the indicator.  For example, scientists wanting to protect water qual-
ity might find it useful to know specific bacteria levels in water. The general public,
however, may find more useful the percentage and location of rivers and streams con-
sidered unsafe for swimming because of high bacteria levels.

One way to select indicators is by brainstorming with all interested parties to identify
an ideal set, keeping in mind what  is being measured. Ways to narrow down a list of
possible indicators include looking at data sources, investigating sources of help, and
deciding what information is most useful. Generally, monitoring a few key indicators
well provides more useful information than monitoring a wide variety of indicators
poorly.  For example, a community may want to measure the recovery of an aquatic
ecosystem by sampling the number of different types of benthic organisms (bottom-
dwelling species such as worms and shellfish). Such a field survey may require a large
budget, however.  Instead, the community could track fish abundance or water quality
as a proxy for ecosystem recovery.  Also, data may already be available for developing
certain  indicators but not others; a less than perfect indicator supported by available
data may be more practical than an ideal one that requires extensive data gathering.

In summary, good indicators will reflect stakeholder concerns, be readily understand-
able to their audience, be responsive to change in the ecosystem or community, and be
appropriate for highlighting emerging ecosystem problems before they become irre-
versible. The Sustainable Seattle Program below provides a good example of effec-
tive community involvement in indicator development and selection.

                                                          nphe Santa Monica Bay Restoration Program (SMBRP)
                                                           JL proposes a comprehensive monitoring system to mea-
                                                          sure the  ecological effects on the bay  and its human,
                                                          wildlife, and plant populations.  In 1988, concerned about
                                                          the condition of the bay, local  citizens joined with state
                                                          and federal agencies to form the SMBRP.  This coalition
                                                          took on the responsibility of assessing the bay's problems,
                                                          developing solutions, and putting them into action. The
                                                          SMBRP has developed a plan  of action that involves a
                                                          diverse group of citizens and members of the government,
                                                          scientific, and industrial communities.
                                                             One component of the  SMBRP's  activities is coordi-
                                                          nating and integrating the existing monitoring programs
                                                          in the bay and its watershed. As part of this program, the
                                                          SMBRP  has  prepared  a "Comprehensive Monitoring
                                                          Framework" that suggests what types of data should be
                                                          compiled.  The following list groups  SMBRP's potential
                                                          measurements under   headings that correspond to the
                                                          three main public concerns:
                    Natural Stressors and Processes
                    n Chlorophyll a
                    n Salinity and temperature
                    n Water clarity
                    n Currents and hydrology
                    n Precipitation
                    n Storm duration, location, severity
                    n Regional sediment characteristics
                    n Site-specific sediment characteristics

                    Human Stressors and Processes
                    n Outfall effluent characteristics
                    n Storm-drain/river effluent characteristics
                    n Contaminant mass loadings
                    n Regional sediment contamination
                    n Site-specific sediment contamination
                    n Regional water quality
                    n Dredging location, timing, characteristics
                    n Shoreline habitat loss and modification
                    n Sport fishing locations and catch
                    n Kelp harvesting
                    n Oil spill location, timing, characteristics
                    n Human swimming patterns
                    n Human seafood consumption patterns
                    n Beach warnings and closings
                    n Sewage spills
Human and Biotic Response Indicators
n  Catch per unit of effort (by species)
n  Fish abundance (by species)
n  Fish egg and larval abundance (by species)
n  Fish contaminant burdens (by species)
n  Fish diseases
n  Benthic invertebrate contaminant burdens
n  Beached bird survey
n  Bird survey in coastal habitats
n  Bird counts and nesting success
n  Migrant bird counts
n  Bird birth defects
n  Return of one-year-old birds and fish
n  Wetland habitat type maps
n  Exotic vs. native species
n  Kelp bed location and extent
n  Mammal abundance (by species)
n  Number and cause  of mammal beachings

Contact:   Marianne Yamaguchi
          Program Manager
          101 Centre Plaza Drive
          Monterey Park, CA 91754
          Phone:  (213)266-7572
          Fax:  (213)266-7626

   Sustainable Seattle began in 1990 as a multiyear effort
   to make the greater Seattle region into a more eco-
logically  and economically  sustainable  community.
Project  organizers recognized that the well-being  of
Seattle residents would play a key role in making sound
policy choices. Therefore, the organizers placed a major
emphasis on development of indicators  that could mea-
sure community well-being.
  The Sustainable Seattle group used a multistep process
that  emphasized  community  involvement to develop
indicators.  A core group of 25 trustees defined the scope
of the project and served as advisors in the indicator-
development process.  A task team then was formed to generate an initial set of draft indicators in
preparation for community participation. A final set of indicators was chosen at a series of civic
forums where over 250 members of the  community participated.  At the first meeting, community
members were introduced to the project, reviewed the task team's initial indicator suggestions, and
identified additional indicators. Four more meetings were held over a period of five months, lead-
ing to the identification of nearly 100 sustainability indicators.  Of these, 40 have been selected for
publication in two groups.  The  first set of 20 indicators, published in Indicators of Sustainable
Community (1993), included:
n Wild salmon runs through local streams
n Number of good air quality days per year
n Percentage of streets meeting
  "pedestrian-friendly" criteria

Population and Resources
n Total population of King County
n Gallons of water consumed per capita
n Tons of solid waste generated and
  recycled per capita
n Vehicle miles traveled and gasoline
  consumption per capita
n Renewable and nonrenewable energy  (Btus)
  consumed per capita

n Percentage of employment by top 10  employ-
n Percentage of children living in poverty
n Housing affordability for medium- and
  low-income households
n Per capita  health expenditures
Culture and Society
n Percentage of infants born with low
  birth weight
n Juvenile crime rate
n Percent of youths participating in some form
  of community service
n Percent of population voting in local
  primary elections
n Adult literacy rate
n Library and community center
  usage rates
n Participation in the arts

Each indicator was classified as moving
toward, away from, or neither toward nor away
from sustainability.  Sustainable Seattle is now
using the indicators and the development
process to influence  urban planning and imple-
ment programs that promote sustainable homes
and businesses.

Contacts:    Richard Conlin or
            Kara Palmer
            Sustainable Seattle
            c/o Metrocenter YMCA
            909 Fourth Avenue
            Seattle, WA 98104
            Phone: (206)382-5013
            Fax: (206)382-7894

                           Florida State University, State Environmental Goals and Indicators Project, in cooperative
                           agreement with U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, August 1995, available from the U.S. EPA
                           Community-Based Ecosystem Protection Clearinghouse, phone: (202) 260-5339 (see
                           Appendix A).  This report describes prospective environmental indicators that could be used
                           in agreements that U.S. EPA negotiates with state environmental agencies. It is written for a
                           technical audience, but contains a large number of indicators (with data sources) that could
           be useful for communities interested in assessing local environmental conditions.

           Hart, Maureen, Guide to Sustainable Community Indicators, QLF/Atlantic Center for the Environment, Ipswich,
           MA 01938, May 1995, phone: (508) 356-0038, fax:  (508) 356-7322, e-mail:, price:
           $12.50 (includes postage).  This user-friendly guidebook is an excellent resource for those interested in assess-
           ing the ecological/environmental and socioeconomic quality of their community. The guidebook describes the
           process of developing, evaluating, and using indicators at the community level in a step-by-step approach. It
           contains a set of sample indicators, evaluated by the author, as well as a list of other community sustainability
           projects, potential data sources, and references.

           Hren, Ben, Nick Bartolomeo, and Michael Singer, Monitoring Sustainability in Your Community, The Carrying
           Capacity Project, The Izaak Walton League of America, 707 Conservation Lane, Gaithersburg,  MD  20878,
           1995, phone: (301) 548-0150,  e-mail:, price: $2.00 (includes postage).  This brief, easy-to-
                                 3.2    Assessing Conditions and Trends in Local

                                 Your community may have begun its ecosystem protection effort in response
                                 to some actual or potential threat. Perhaps you have observed a decline in the
                                 number or diversity of birds that inhabit a local forest, or have grown con-
                                 cerned that open space in your town is disappearing due to sprawling residen-
                                 tial development.  This section describes some processes and tools for under-
                                 standing and communicating information on the health of ecosystems.

                                 Indicators of ecosystem health serve two purposes.  First, they define the
                                 problems you are trying to address.  Second, they track progress over time
                                 from a starting point or "baseline".  Collecting consistent data over time and
                                 comparing them to the baseline data enables an evaluation of whether the
                                 actions  taken to  protect ecosystems  are actually working.

                                 Specific Indicators of Ecosystem Health

                                 Community characteristics (such as urban vs. rural, coastal vs. inland) and
                                 environmental problems  affect the choice of ecosystem health measures.  For
                                 example, a community may be interested in determining the  degree of biodi-
                                 versity in local ecosystems.  A specific indicator would be the number of bird
                                 species found in an annual bird count. This number could be compared to
                                 counts from previous years to evaluate the trend in biodiversity. The first two
                                 columns in Table 3-1 provide several examples of broad ecosystem assess-
                                 ment objectives  and some specific indicators that could be used to address
                                 these objectives.

use handbook presents 12 indicators, compiled from projects across the nation, to assess a community's qual-
ity of life, consumption of natural resources, and the condition of local ecosystems. Each indicator is
described, including reasons for selection and ways to obtain and use source data.

MacLaren, Virginia, Developing Indicators of Urban Sustainability, Intergovernmental Committee in Urban
and Regional Research (ICURR), 150 Eglinton Avenue East, Suite 301, Toronto, ON M4P 1E8, Canada,
May 1995, phone: (416) 973-1376, fax: (416) 973-1375, price: $31.75 Canadian (approx. $25.00 US).  This
report is a comprehensive review of indicator characteristics, frameworks (including state-of-the-environ-
ment, quality of life, and healthy city reporting), and selection criteria. It is well-illustrated with examples of
community indicators used throughout the United States and Canada.

U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency, Process for Selecting Indicators and Data and Filling Information
Gaps - Final Report, Washington, DC, July 1994, available from the U.S. EPA Community-Based Ecosystem
Protection Clearinghouse, phone:  (202) 260-5339 (see Appendix A).  This report presents a process for
selecting indicators and data sets to measure the current status, patterns, or trends of environmental quality.
It is written for technical managers within EPA who are responsible for specifying and quantifying such indi-
To start defining ecosystem assessment objectives, it
might be useful to consider the physical, biological, or
chemical changes the system has undergone.  Relevant
questions may include:

      n  Physical Changes to the Ecosystem — How
        has the structure of the system changed? Has
        the number and/or kind of habitat types in the
        area changed? Has the size of a forest area
        declined? Has the amount of water flowing
        through a river changed? Are wetland areas
        shrinking?  How much low-density develop-
        ment of "greenfields" (such as farmland,
        forests, meadows, open space) is occurring?
        How much development is occurring on
        parcels of land not adjacent to existing urban
        areas? How much habitat remains of the origi-
        nal area? Is the remaining habitat fragmented?
  Many species of wildlife require habitat of
certain minimum size to survive. Residential or
commercial development, forestry, farming,
road building, and other land use practices can
break up continuous habitat into smaller sec-
tions less capable of supporting the species.
For example, if patches of unharvested natural
forest are small or isolated, some species may
disappear, threatening the long-term sustain-
ability of the overall forest ecosystem
(Freedman, 1995). Many land conservation
efforts attempt to protect large areas, avoiding
fragmentation, or to provide corridors connect-
ing separate areas to allow wildlife to move
among them.
       Presence of Harmful Chemicals — Are toxic  	
        chemicals, excessive nutrients, or other pollutants present in the soil, air, or
        water, or in the plants and animals living in the ecosystem?

       Biological Damage to the Ecosystem — Physical and chemical changes to
        the ecosystem are likely to produce changes in the plants and animals that are

                                                              Table 3-1
       t Objective
                     Possible Sources of Information
        changes in
Number of species
in an annual bird

Ratio of abundant
species to those
classified as
Local chapter of National Audubon Society
The Nature Conservancy and state governments have developed Natural Heritage Programs
that collect and record site-specific information on the location of rare, endangered, and
threatened species (see Appendix A)
State fish and wildlife agencies (see Appendix A)
Biology/ecology departments at state colleges and universities
Gordon, Rue E., ed., 1996 Conservation Directory, National Wildlife Federation, 1400
Sixteenth Street NW, Washington, DC, 1996, ISBN 0-945051-60-3, phone: (202) 797-6800,
Internet Website:
        Assess trends
        in abundance
        of various
        and habitat
Acreage of
State environmental agencies (see Appendix A), conservation division
Agencies with photomaps and computerized land-use data include the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, phone:  (202) 720-2791, and the U.S. Geological Survey, phone: (703) 648-4000
Acreage of
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory,  documents developed for each
state; see Internet Website: more  information
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating
Jurisdictional Wetlands, Washington, DC, 1989
The Association of State Floodplain Managers, Madison, WI, phone:  (608) 274-0123
        Assess air
        (current and
Number of days
each year that air
quality standards
are met
State environmental and public health agencies (see Appendix A)
EPA's Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) contains data from stations across
the country.  U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation, AIRS Database, Internet Website:
http://www. epa. gov/airs/airs, html
        of toxic
        pollutants in
        various media
        (current and
Soil: Percentage of
samples above U.S.
EPA/state standards
for health and
ecological risk
Property Inspections: Many states require that commercial property owners perform environ-
mental assessments before selling property. These assessments generally include sampling
for toxic chemicals in soil and ground water. Contacts include state environmental agencies
(see Appendix A) and local  real estate boards. - Natural Resource Conservation Service (for-
merly the Soil Conservation Service), National Resources Inventory, phone: (202) 720-4530
Ground water:
Percentage of
samples above U.S.
EPA/state standards
for health risk
State and local municipal public works departments
U.S. Geological Survey, phone: (703) 648-4000 and state geological surveys
Regional water supply authority
U.S. EPA, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, Federal Reporting Database System,
phone: (202)260-7276
Property inspections (see above)
                       Drinking water:
                       Location and
                       condition of drink-
                       ing water wells
                       State office responsible for wellhead protection programs
        Assess trends
        in surface
        water quality
Percentage of
samples from
surface waters
meeting U.S. EPA/
state water quality
State 305(b) Reports on Water Quality - U.S. Geological Survey, National Water Information
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Water Quality Information, phone:  (202) 426-9000
EPA's Storage and Retrieval database (STORET) contains information on surface water,
ground water, soil, and fish tissue quality. U.S. EPA, STORET, phone: (202) 260-7030
U.S. Geological Survey maintains the National Stream Quality Accounting Network
(NASQAN), collecting data at specified sites across the country. U.S. Geological Survey,
NASQAN, phone:  (703) 648-6870
Citizens' monitoring program (see text); U.S. EPA, Office of Water, National Directory of
Voluntary Environmental Programs, phone:  (202) 260-7018; listing of citizen-based water
monitoring programs by state at Internet Website:
                       Percentage of tissue
                       samples from fish
                       or shellfish showing
                       unsafe toxics
                       State public health agencies  - State fish and wildlife agencies
                       National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Shellfish Register, phone:
                       (703) 487-4650
                       U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Contaminant Biomonitoring Program, phone:  (703)
                       Number of health
                       warnings issued
                       to anglers and
                       U.S. EPA, Office of Water, National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Consumption Advisories,
                       phone: (513) 489-8190, Internet Website:
                       Consumption advisories and data on beach closures from state fish and wildlife agencies
                       Swimming advisories from state public health agencies

        part of the ecosystem. Among the questions these changes raise are:  Has the
        number or type of species inhabiting the ecosystem changed? Are the species
        present healthy and flourishing?  Are the types of species present typical of a
        healthy ecosystem? Are there any rare or endangered species present and at
        risk? Are there any invader or exotic species present? The ecosystem survey
        conducted by the Owl Mountain Partnership in North Park, Colorado (see
        following page) is a good example of how resources can be pooled to develop
        an inventory of species present in a given ecosystem.
Developing an Historical Perspective

Analyzing the historical condition of an ecosystem
helps assess its current health. Identifying man-made
and naturally occurring forces that have affected the
ecosystem also can help set sensible project goals, pro-
viding reference points for measuring progress.

For example, publicizing that a severely degraded local
ecosystem once supported a large number and variety
of birds and other wildlife can act as an incentive for
local officials, business people, environmentalists, and
the general public to restore it.  Moreover, by under-
standing the system's history and the ways  in which it
was exposed to different stressors, communities can
help evaluate the relative impact posed by these stres-
sors.  For example, a decline in wildlife populations
may be caused more by a dam placed on a major river
than by pollution associated with industrial activity.
Understanding how events led to the current condition
helps communities weigh alternative actions for restor-
ing and protecting the ecosystem.

Other communities have found the following informa-
tion sources useful in seeking out historical information
on local ecosystems:
              Erosion and Its
  Agriculture, timber harvesting, real estate or
other land development, and other land-clear-
ing activities are often the source of physical
stress on ecosystems. The most visible conse-
quence is often erosion, which occurs when
trees and other vegetation that hold soil in
place are removed, letting wind, waves, rain-
fall, and other forces eat away at the topsoil.
Erosion may prevent regrowth of plants and
may threaten the stability of houses, roads, and
other construction.
  One of the major ecological problems asso-
ciated with erosion is siltation. Siltation
results when excess soil is deposited in slow
moving streams and rivers, smothering plants
and bottom-dwelling organisms and covering
important fish habitat. Some fish, such as
salmon, require clean gravel streambeds in
which to spawn. For these fish, siltation could
result in the loss of critical breeding habitat.
       Surveys of the Community and Anecdotal Information — Other communi-
       ties have found a survey of the community to be very valuable.  A survey not
       only will gather the public's ideas on how the quality of the ecosystem has
       declined, but will help publicize your project. In addition, informal conversa-
       tions with  older residents can be an excellent source of anecdotal historical

       Local Historical Information — Depending on the size and location of the
       community, a number of institutions may be able to provide information on the
       community's history and the evolution of the ecosystem. Possible examples
       include the local library, town or regional historical societies, colleges and uni-
       versities, and local non-profit organizations such as land trusts.  If useful local
       histories do not already exist, a local high school or college student may be able
       to develop a project on ecosystem history. Deeds and maps from the county
       registry of deeds or municipal offices also may provide historical information.

                                                                       The Owl Mountain Partnership in north-central
                                                                       Colorado  has undertaken  a comprehensive
                                                                   survey of the area's natural resources.  The inven-
                                                                   tory is being used to define the desired future con-
                                                                   dition of the area and to support the establishment
                                                                   of resource management plans in the region.
                                                                     Local citizens formed  the Owl Mountain
                                                                   Partnership to address natural  resource manage-
                                                                   ment issues in the North Park area of north-central
                                                                   Colorado.  The partnership is composed of local
                                                                   citizens, landowners, associations,  and federal,
                                                                   state, and local government agencies.  Its goal is to
                                                                   serve  the economic, cultural, and social needs of
                                                                   the  community while developing adaptive long-
                                                                   term landscape management programs, policies,
                               and practices that ensure ecosystem sustainability.
                                 During the first three years of the partnership,  the partners conducted a comprehensive
                               inventory of the area.  An inventory of vegetation, soils, wildlife (including large mammals
                               and neotropical birds), and aquatic systems began in 1994.  Members of the  Partnership,
                               including the U.S. Forest Service,  the Bureau of Land Management, and other interested
                               groups and agencies, conducted the inventory. The Partnership relied on grants, in-kind ser-
                               vices, and  borrowed materials, such as vehicles and equipment, to complete portions of the
                               survey.   Before the inventory began, existing information from all agencies in the area was
                                   Newspaper Archives — Old newspaper articles, often accessible through
                                    microfiche or online services available at the local library, can provide a great
                                    deal of historical information about an ecosystem.

                                   Local, State, and Federal Land Management Agencies — Agriculture,
                                    forestry, mining, fish and wildlife, grazing (such as the U.S. Bureau of  Land
                                    Management), and biological agencies (such as the U.S. Biological Service)
                                    may have historical maps or other descriptions of the numbers, types, and
                                    range of native flora and fauna for the area.  For other sources of information
                                    (for example, hunting/fishing records,  homestead records), you can contact
                                    the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, railroad archives, the Library of Congress,
                                    the U.S. National Archives, and the Smithsonian Institution.

                                   Natural Heritage Programs — The Natural Heritage Programs operated by
                                    the states may have information on the characteristics of unspoiled natural
                                    areas in your region; these areas may serve as useful "reference points" that
                                    show the former condition of the  ecosystem. Appendix A provides a phone
                                    listing for the Natural Heritage Programs.

                                   GIS Maps — A geographic information system (GIS) is a computer technolo-
                                    gy that develops maps of a specific geographic area. These maps can depict a

compiled and analyzed for gaps in data.  These gaps became the focus of the inventory, so
that the result would be a comprehensive inventory of the area.
  A major challenge  of the project was to have the different agencies adopt a standard
method of surveying vegetation.  The Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management
typically use different methods, yet it was important to survey the region employing a com-
mon technique so that data would be consistent and easily shared. Several meetings with the
involved parties were held and a single vegetation inventory method was developed.
  The survey provided a comprehensive inventory of federal, state, and private lands. While
some land owners remain wary of the project, several ranchers realized a benefit from open-
ing their gates to the survey. As part of their participation, they received assistance from the
partnership to improve their land management practices.
  The survey is now complete, and the partners are using the results to develop  individual
and small-group management plans that integrate the partnership's landscape approach to
managing the area's resources on a sustainable basis.

                     Contact:  Steve Porter
                              Owl Mountain Project
                              Colorado Division of Wildlife
                              P.O. Box 737
                              Walden,CO  80480
                              Phone: (970)723-0020
                              Fax:  (970)723-0021
        range of both man-made and natural features. The information box on the
        next page provides information on GIS analysis.

Gathering Technical Data

Once you have a good idea of how the ecosystem arrived at its current state, you can
assemble a more detailed and rigorous evaluation of current conditions.  This assess-
ment will allow your community to identify those components of local ecosystems
that currently are degraded or at risk and evaluate the extent of the problem. This will
provide a baseline  "snapshot" of ecosystem health against which protection measures
can be evaluated.

Local, state, and national agencies collect an enormous amount of environmental
data.  The information ranges from observations about the general appearance of an
ecosystem to detailed analyses  of emissions of toxic compounds from industrial
sources. Table 3-1 (on a preceding page) presents suggestions for data sources that
may help in assessing the health of an ecosystem. Appendix A to this resource book
provides additional phone and Internet listings for many relevant organizations.  The
information in Table 3-1 and Appendix A is by no means intended as an exhaustive
list; rather, the  sources identified are provided as potential starting points for your
data search.

                            Many of the data sources suggested in Table 3-1 can be difficult to use and understand
                            without proper training.  Many databases require special technical knowledge and are
                            not especially "user-friendly".  A private consultant or a faculty member or student
                            volunteer from a local college or university can provide expertise needed to help iden-
                            tify, collect, and interpret the desired information.

                            Many of the information sources will fall into one of several categories: government
                            agencies; non-governmental organizations; local resources; and reports, databases, and
                            computer models.

                            Government Agencies
                            State or federal environmental agencies can help locate data to assess ecosystem health.
                            While the workings of the agencies devoted to environmental protection may be unfa-
                                               Geographic Information
                                                 A geographic information system (GIS) is a technology that
                                               stores, analyzes, visually displays, and maps data about a geographic
                                               area. GIS can be used to define ecosystem boundaries, assess
                               ecosystem health, and identify sources of ecosystem stress. A GIS analysis can graphi-
                               cally display different types of information, such as soils and habitat types, locations
                               and concentrations of different species, roads, industrial facilities, and other man-made
                               features. For example, a GIS analysis might show where industrial facilities discharg-
                               ing toxic compounds are located relative to contaminated sections of streams and
                               rivers.  In this way, a GIS can help link sources of ecosystem stress with observed
                               impacts, and help develop strategies to alleviate those impacts. Some commercial GIS
                               programs are simple enough to run on a personal computer; however, then- use often
                               requires special training and expertise. GIS consultants or GIS services available
                               through state or local planning authorities can provide assistance. The most expensive
                               and difficult part of a GIS analysis is obtaining data in "digitized" form so it can be
                               used with GIS software; therefore, it's helpful to locate data before embarking on
                               an analysis.

                                 For more information, you may want to consult the following sources of GIS

                                   -  U.S. Geological Survey, National Mapping Program, phone: (800) USA-
                                      MAPS, Internet Website:
                                   -  URISA, GIS: World Source Book, 1996, phone: (800) 447-9753
                                   -  American Planners Association, GIS: Assessing Your Needs and Choosing a
                                      System, APA No. 433
                                   -  U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, National Conference on
                                      Problem Solving with Geographic Information Systems, Cincinnati, Ohio,
                                      September 21-23, 1994, EPA/625/R-95/004, September 1995
                                   -  U.S. EPA, National GIS Program, Internet Website:
                                   -  Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC), Internet Website:
                                      http://Jgdc. er.
                                   -  Your state department of environmental protection (see Appendix A) or plan-
                                      ning agency.

miliar, a few strategic phone calls may take you far. State environmental agencies often
have published reports on statewide environmental conditions. These "environmental
indicators" or "state of the environment" reports provide a useful overview of trends in
the state and may point to other data sources. The state agency is also likely to be famil-
iar with the local area and should be able to offer guidance on other regulatory agencies
(such as federal organizations or other state and local agencies) that can help further.

As reflected in Table 3-1, the choice of other governmental agencies to contact
depends on the type of ecosystems you are assessing.  For example, for investigating
pollution effects on waterfowl, state or federal departments of fish and wildlife may
be helpful. Likewise, surface water quality issues are addressed by a variety of orga-
nizations, including state environmental protection agencies, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. Geological
Survey. Addresses and phone numbers for many of the major federal organizations
are included in Appendix A.

Non-Governmental Organizations
In addition to government agencies, a large number of non-government organizations
provide information to assess ecosystem quality.  For example, conservation groups
such as The Nature Conservancy and the National Audubon Society and state
Audubon  societies may be useful in assessing the quantity and quality of local
wildlife habitat. Grant programs administered through universities may also be an
important source of information.

While Table 3-1 offers a few examples of relevant non-governmental organizations,
the general information directories in the "To  Learn More" listings provided at the
end of this section give more general listings.

Local Resources
A variety  of local resources also may prove helpful in searching for ecosystem assess-
ment information.  For example, local public health agencies may have information
on swimming advisories associated with local beaches, and may even keep more
detailed water quality data.  Data on soil and/or ground-water quality may be  avail-
able through real estate transaction
records that require environmental
inspections prior to property sales.
The results of such inspections may
be available from the local registrar
of deeds or real estate board.
Likewise, the local Audubon chapter
may conduct bird counts.

In addition, the community can gath-
er its own data. Numerous citizen-
based monitoring programs exist
throughout the United States.  For
example, some groups gather water
samples and submit them to central-
ized testing facilities operated by the
state or federal government. As dis-
cussed in the story, Keeping Track in
                Monitor Your Own  Ecosystem
                  Communities can collect data to evaluate
                their own ecosystems. Many volunteer orga-
                nizations monitor physical, biological, or
chemical conditions in the environment.  Many of these groups
also provide assistance to others who want to learn how to con-
duct their own ecosystem monitoring programs. For example,
communities monitor water quality through programs such as the
Izaak Walton League of America's Save Our Streams Program,
phone:  (301)548-0150. Likewise, you can contact EPA's Office
of Water and ask for the National Directory of Voluntary
Environmental Monitoring Programs, phone: (202) 260-7011.
EPA's Internet home page also lists existing citizen monitoring
programs by state; for information see Internet Website
http:// www. epa,gov/O WO W/sec5/dir. html.

                                                                    If you find yourself hiking in northern Vermont,
                                                                    don't be surprised if you see teams of curious
                                                                  people searching the countryside for  clues.
                                                                  They're citizen volunteers, dispatched by commu-
                                                                  nity conservation groups to look for tracks, fecal
                                                                  matter, and other evidence (referred to collective-
                                                                  ly as "sign") of wild animals in the area.
                                                                    By gathering data on where animals live and the
                                                                  routes along which they travel, these trackers are
                                                                  helping their communities make  informed deci-
                                                                  sions about ecosystem protection, land-use plan-
                                                                  ning, and development. Trackers report their find-
                                                                  ings back to local conservation commissions that
                                                                  analyze the data to determine habitat areas that
                                                                  require protection — especially narrow corridors
                              of land through which the animals travel from one large block of habitat to another.
                                To ensure that the volunteers possess all the required skills and knowledge to do the job,
                              the eight townships involved in the process have called on Keeping Track, a Vermont-based,
                              non-profit organization that provides training and support. Volunteers must complete a train-
                              ing program that consists of six days of instruction in the field and two evening "classroom"
                              sessions.  After completing the training program, citizen-volunteers perform track and sign
                           Northern Vermont, citizens there and elsewhere track wildlife populations and other
                           aspects of environmental quality.

                           In addition to formal monitoring organizations, communities have assembled informa-
                           tion on ecosystem quality by enlisting the help of local schools or youth programs
                           such as AmeriCorps.

                           Reports, Databases, and Computer Models
                           All of the organizations discussed above may have materials that can be of use in a
                           community's ecosystem assessment effort. These materials may include reports,
                           databases, or computer models that already contain information on the ecosystems
                           you are trying to evaluate.  For example, the  U.S.  EPA requires that each state
                           develop a biannual report on water quality. These reports — referred to as "305(b)"
                           reports for the section of the federal Clean Water Act which mandates them — char-
                           acterize water quality statewide and classify individual water bodies according vari-
                           ous use categories such as "swimmable" and "fishable".  You can obtain your state's
                           305(b) report through the water quality office in the state environmental protection

                           Numerous environmental assessment databases are available on diskette and often via
                           the Internet.  Table 3-1 provides just a few examples. For instance, environmental
                           agencies have developed numerous databases  reporting the results of environmental
                           monitoring for various media (air, water, soil). Likewise,  the Natural Heritage
                           Programs have compiled data on the location of rare and endangered species.  The
                           "To Learn More" references at the end of this section provide listings of available

surveys — a scientific observation method that ensures accurate data collection.
  Part of the Keeping Track program is helping community groups choose which species to
track. In northern Vermont, the program gathers data on five area-sensitive species: bobcat,
black bear, fisher, river otter, and mink.  Protecting these animals is important because they
are particularly susceptible to habitat loss and degradation. Furthermore, safeguarding the
habitat of these species ensures that habitat is protected for myriad plant and animal species
within the ecosystem.
  Citizen involvement in the process has brought together people from diverse backgrounds,
including birders, hunters, anglers, farmers, and foresters.  The diversity within these volun-
teer groups has helped to build a broad base of support for ecosystem protection among
northern Vermonters.

                     Contact:  Susan Morse
                              Wolfmn, RFD 1 Box 263
                              Jericho, VT  05465
                              Phone: (802)899-2023

Keeping Track is active across the United States in consulting and advocating for commu-
nity-based habitat protection. It currently is working on projects in Arizona,  California,
and throughout northern New England.
databases. An Internet search on concepts relevant to your ecosystems (for example,
"Alabama wetlands") may also provide information on databases.

Geographic information may be especially helpful in ecosystem assessment.  Many
state and county governments collect information and aggregate it by ecosystem or
other geographic indicator.  In addition, many federal agencies, including the U.S.
EPA, U.S.  Forest Service, and the U.S. Geological Survey, have developed comput-
erized geographic information systems to display various types of information
(including  ecological information) on  electronic maps.  The Metropolitan
Greenspaces Program in Portland, Oregon used aerial photography and GIS tech-
nology to inventory open space in and around the city (see following page).

Finally, more sophisticated tools are available for assessing ecosystem health.
Government officials and academic researchers have developed computer models that
evaluate whether ecosystems are functioning properly.  Local university researchers
can help in performing these types of analyses. Examples include:

     n Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) — This model, designed by the U.S.
        Fish and Wildlife  Service (FWS), allows the user to assess habitat quality
        based on the habitat's  ability to support a specific species or group of species.
        The model typically is used to  evaluate proposed projects and determine miti-
        gation steps needed following oil spills or other pollution events.  For more
        information, contact FWS's National Ecology Center, 2627 Redwing Road,
        Fort Collins, CO 80526-2899.

                                Mam,  -S£» m. ft * Jf«
    The  Metropolitan  Greenspaces  Program
    (encompassing the Portland,  Oregon, and
Vancouver, Washington, metropolitan region) has
a well-defined vision:  "To maintain the urban
region as a place where nature is valued  as an
important element of livability."   The program
planners (non-profit organizations and local agen-
cies working on greenspace and wildlife protec-
tion) joined together to address a critical next step
in translating that vision into a visual analytical
tool — a single greenspace map covering the four-
county, bi-state metropolitan region. Making the
map required a thorough inventory  and analysis of
natural areas that could be woven together to form
a single greenspace portrayal.
   Just what are  natural areas?   The inventory
team had to define "natural areas"  before making
the maps.   They recognized that  a natural area
may be viewed  as a self-sustaining area that
would not change dramatically if all human influ-
ences were removed.  For this inventory, howev-
er, they needed a clearer definition  and decided on
the following:  "a landscape unit (a) composed of
plant and animal communities, water bodies, soil,
and rock, (b) largely devoid of man-made struc-
tures, and (c) maintained and managed in such a
way as to  promote or enhance populations of
wildlife." This eliminated landscapes such as golf
courses and agricultural land.
   The geography department of  Portland State
University  carried  out  the inventory,  which
                                    Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET) — The WET model provides a broad
                                    assessment of ecosystem health and can be applied to a wide variety of wet-
                                    land assessment needs.  It provides replicable, consistent results describing the
                                    ecological functions supported by a wetlands area.  This information can be
                                    used to inform planners about the local, regional, and national significance of
                                    the area. For more information, contact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
                                    phone:  (202) 761-0660.

                                    Gap Analysis — Gap analysis is a method for identifying high priority areas
                                    for conservation efforts. It uses maps to compare ecosystem types with current
                                    land ownership and management status. Where important landscape types  or
                                    species habitats currently are not included in protected areas (such as parks,
                                    refuges, or preserves), areas representing those landscapes or species might be
                                    selected as targets for conservation efforts.  The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
                                    is conducting a large-scale state-by-state Gap Analysis Project using satellite
                                    imagery, other data on vegetation, and GIS  mapping. This project is described

        n Obtaining aerial photographs at a cost of $109,000, paid for by contributors
         who received discounts when purchasing aerial photos
        n Using color infrared aerial photographs to identify and map natural areas, and
         collecting onsite data through field surveys for a sample cross-section of
         natural areas
        n Digitizing maps and entering field data into a geographic information system
         (GIS) spatial database.

   Once the maps were complete, analysis of the data established criteria for evaluating the
ecological functions of, and connections between, these natural areas.  Human values (such
as access or distance from residential populations), as well as wildlife values (such as the
interconnectedness of sites by stream or ridge line corridors), were considered in develop-
ing criteria. The analysis relied heavily on  the GIS as a tool to relate natural area patterns
to land uses, zoning, utility rights-of-way, and soil and slope information. This type of eval-
uation helped to focus the program on priority land acquisition sites.

                      Contact:  Ron Klein
                               Public Affairs Specialist
                               Metro Regional Parks & Greenspaces
                               600 Northeast Grand Avenue
                               Portland, OR  97232-2736
                               Phone: (503)797-1774
                               Fax: (503)797-1849
        in Noss, Reed F. and Allen Y. Cooperrider, Saving Nature's Legacy, Defenders
        of Wildlife and Island Press, Washington, DC, 1994.

Linking  Stressors With Impacts

After characterizing the current state of the system and noting areas of concern (such as
wetland loss, decline in plant or wildlife species), it is possible to identify the sources of
those problems. For example, natural fish populations may be in decline, but why?  Is it
due to chemicals from industrial dischargers, over-fishing, or the damming or channel-
ization of the river? Stress on an ecosystem can come from a wide range of sources,
including industrial and municipal sources discharging toxic chemicals, agriculture and
livestock  feedlots, petroleum and chemical storage tanks, mining (for instance, acid
mine drainage), recreational activities (such as stream bank erosion caused by boats and
jet skis), water withdrawal by industry and utilities, septic tanks and other development
impacts, and waste management. Appendix C of this resource book discusses stressors
in more detail.

                              Gale Research, Inc., Encyclopedia of Environmental Information Sources, Gale
                              Environmental Library, Detroit, MI, ISBN 0-8103-8568-6, price:  $125.  Arranged by subject
                              matter, this reference guide provides listings of relevant agencies, online databases, and
                              research centers.
                              Gordon, Rue, E., ed., 1996 Conservation Directory, National Wildlife Federation, 1400
             Sixteenth Street NW, Washington, DC 20036-2266, ISBN 0-945051-60-3, 1996, phone: (202) 797-6800,
             Internet Website:

             Harker, Donald, and Elizabeth Ungar Natter, Where We Live: A Citizen's Guide to Conducting a Community
             Environmental Inventory, Island Press, Covelo, CA, ISBN 1-55963-377-8, 1994. This guide describes sources
             and effects of contamination in simple terms, and suggests methods for collecting and mapping local environ-
             mental information. It includes definitions of technical terms and useful worksheets for organizing your data.

             U.S. EPA, Access EPA, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402-9328, ISBN 0-16-037989-X,
             Internet Website: Developed for citizens and other EPA partners, this guide provides a
             roadmap to EPA information services, contacts, and products.
                            Proving precise cause-and-effect relationships can be difficult when identifying stres-
                            sors and their sources. You can identify stressors using scientific data or even comput-
                            er modeling techniques, but these options may be beyond your resources or technical
                            capabilities.  Often, careful observation of local land-use conditions, and interviews
                           	   with experts or those in other com-
                                                                             munities that have faced problems
                                                                             similar to yours,  are all that's need-
                           Pert! I izers and Eutrofication                ed   You can men verify y°ur initial
                                                                             hypotheses using more precise data.

                                                                             Both localized sources (e.g., a spe-
                                                                             cific pollution source or local activi-
                                                                             ty) and broader area- or region-wide
                                                                             trends may affect local  ecosystems.
                                                                             Some stressors come from outside
                                                                             the local area — such as long-range
                                                                             transport of air pollutants.  State
                                                                             officials involved in the voluntary
                                                                             Ozone Transport Assessment Group
                                                                             can provide information about these
                                                                             sources. In addition, data on
                                                                             regional and local trends in popula-
                                                                             tion, vehicle use, business activity,
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^~^^^^^^^^^^^^^~   home construction, and power gen-
                            eration provide useful background that may point to stressors, which then might be
                            investigated through more direct data sources such as those  identified in Table 3-2.

                            Reviewing the  stressors identified by other community efforts gives  an idea of what
                            stressors might exist in your community.  General publications on environmental pro-
                            tection programs also provide useful lists of potential stressors. (See, for example,
                            U.S. EPA Office of Water, Wellhead Protection Program: Tools for Local
                            Governments, EPA 440/6-89-002, April 1989.)
  Fertilizers used on residential lawns in agriculture, home garden-
ing, and golf course maintenance are often washed by rain to rivers
and lakes. Once in the water, the fertilizer can cause algae to grow
quickly. This growth can prevent sun from reaching water plants
that are an important part of the aquatic ecosystem.  Furthermore,
the algae can use up the available oxygen in the river or lake, caus-
ing unpleasant odors and killing animals that need oxygen to live.
Ultimately, the ecosystem will be undermined and the population of
fish and other species will dwindle.  This entire process is called
eutrophication. For example, runoff to Chesapeake Bay has caused
eutrophication, damaging shellfish beds and eelgrass meadows that
young fish use as nurseries. In turn, commercial fin-fishing and
shellfishing revenues have declined.

U.S. EPA, National Center for Environmental Publications and Information, 11029 Kenwood Road,
Cincinnati, OH 45242, phone: (513) 489-8190,

U.S. EPA also has developed outreach and assistance materials designed to help communities learn about and
analyze the local environment. In conjunction with Purdue University, EPA Region 5 has developed software
packages for use on personal computers. These software packages allow users to analyze a variety of topics.
For example, one program helps users understand and assess water pollution risks from local livestock
management. Another program discusses how toxic pollutants affect fish and explains fish collection
and survey methods. In all, a total of 43 programs are offered on disk from Karen Reshkin, U.S. EPA
Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604-3590, phone: (312) 353-6353, e-mail:, Internet Website:
Two communities that have performed comprehensive stressor evaluations are
discussed in the stories on the Upper Great Lakes and West Virginia (see
following pages).
3.3   Assessing Links Between Ecosystems and the Local

Local Economies Depend on Ecosystems

The Federal Interagency Ecosystem Management Task Force has said that sustaining
the health, productivity, and biological diversity of ecosystems, "is essential to main-
tain the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat, and to sustain natural
resources for future populations." As this quote indicates, our lives are greatly influ-
enced by the healthy functioning of ecosystems.

Ecosystem Components May Have Direct Commercial Value
Much of our country's wealth is the result of an abundant supply of natural resources
and the ecosystems that sustain them. The link between ecosystems and the economy is
clearest in communities that extract renewable resources from the environment.  For
example, the economy of many communities in southeast Louisiana is highly dependent
upon shellfish beds and the larger system of wetlands that surrounds and protects them.

The issue of "jobs versus  the environment" often arises when discussing ecosystem
protection. Controversies such as limiting forestry to protect endangered species
have led many people to believe that black-and-white choices must be made between
resource extraction or land development and ecosystem protection.  In fact, ecosys-
tem protection is often pursued when a community is looking for ways to manage its
resources and sustain local industries. While this may sometimes result in short-term
reductions in economic activity (such as limitations on the commercial fishing catch),
the resource may be maintained for the long run, making the local economy more

                                                               Table 3-2
           Data Item
      Potential Information Source
           Data on septic
           tanks and other
Information on location and failure of septic and
other underground storage tanks can help identify
sources of nutrients and toxic pollutants.
n Local land-use planning offices and health
n State underground storage tank offices
           Residential and
Development can have direct impacts on an
ecosystem, such as eliminating or fragmenting
habitat, but can also have less obvious effects,
such as contributing to non-point source pollution.
n Local land-use planning office
n U.S. Census of Population and County Business
 Patterns data
           discharges from
           industrial and
           municipal point
Data on volume and characteristics of discharges
from local treatment facilities can provide infor-
mation on discharges of metals or other toxic pol-
lutants, nutrients, biological oxygen demand, pH,
and pathogens that pose risks to humans, plants,
and animals and affect surface water quality.
 Municipal public works departments
 State department of environmental protection (water
 U.S. EPA's Office of Water Enforcement and
 Permits, Permit Compliance System Database,
 phone:  (202)475-8323
           Data on
           pesticide use
Pesticide use data can help pinpoint the causes of
non-point source pollution and ground-water con-
n Agricultural Extension Service, U.S. Department of
n U.S. EPA Drinking Water Hotline, National
 Pesticide Survey, phone: (800) 426-7491
n U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
 Service, Agricultural Chemical Usage Database,
 phone: (800) 999-6779
n State department of agriculture, state management
           of toxic
EPA maintains a database containing information
on toxic emissions from certain industrial facili-
ties to air, land, and water.
 U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory Database, avail-
 able through National Library of Medicines
 TOXNET System, phone:  (301) 496-6531 or the
 Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-
 Know Information Hotline, phone: (800) 535-
 0202, Internet Website:
 ro/html/ef_home. html
 State department of environmental protection
           and other
Maps enable you to get a comprehensive look at
the ecosystem. A geographic information system
can generate these maps. Data available from
remote sensing operations and other sources can
also help provide an overview of the ecosystem
and the stressors affecting it.
 State department of environmental protection
 U.S. Geological Survey, National Mapping Program,
 phone:  (800) USA-MAPS, Internet Website:
 http://www-nmd. usgs. gov/
 Local planning/zoning departments
           Data on solid
           and hazardous
Waste storage, treatment, and disposal sites
(active or inactive) may fragment habitat and con-
taminate local wildlife, air, soil, surface water,  or
ground water.
n U.S. EPA, RCRA/Superfund Hotline, phone:
 (800) 424-9346
n State agencies in charge of permitting hazardous
 waste management facilities (branch of environmen-
 tal protection department)
n U.S. EPA's Envirofacts website provides access to
 data on abandoned and active hazardous waste sites,
 Internet Website:
 ef_home. html
           Data on mine
           location and
Acid mine drainage from active or abandoned
mines can be transported to surface water and
harm aquatic ecosystems.
n U.S. Department of Interior, Office of Surface
 Mining, phone: (202) 208-2553, Internet Website:

I    he Wisconsin Chapter  of The Nature
    Conservancy  (TNC) and the  Bad River
Band of the Lake  Superior Tribe of Chippewa
Indians are cooperating on a watershed project
funded by the U.S. EPA.  The Kakagon and
Bad River Sloughs are the largest, healthiest,
fully-functioning estuarine systems remaining
in the upper Great Lakes Basin. The sloughs
(swamps or stagnant waters along the river)
are  located on the Bad River Reservation in
northwestern Wisconsin and are the  ancestral
home and cultural base of the Bad River Band
of Lake Superior  Chippewa.  The Bad River
watershed and its swamp lands are  home to
rare species such as  lake sturgeon, wood tur-
tle,  bald eagles, nesting goshawks, ram's-head lady slippers, and black tern. They also support sig-
nificant wild rice  beds, which produce 20,000 pounds of green rice annually.  The tribe is com-
mitted to maintaining the nearly pristine nature of these freshwater wetlands.
  The health of the area has been affected by environmental stresses throughout the 1,421 -square-mile
watershed. The stressors include logging, farming, mining, and recreational activities. Effects in the
watershed include excessive erosion  and sedimentation, hydrologic changes, toxic contamination,
habitat loss and fragmentation, excessive nutrient runoff, and displacement of native species by exot-
ic species. The decline in upstream water quality could eventually degrade the downstream wetlands.
  The cooperative watershed project focuses on identifying ecological stressors and working with
a variety of stakeholders to mitigate and prevent negative impacts. Activities include conducting
inventories to determine the current level of knowledge  about the  ecosystem, setting future
research priorities,   developing   management and protection plans, promoting sustainable eco-
nomic activity that is compatible with the natural environment through education and public rela-
tions, and building partnerships for cooperation on all these activities.
  The Bad River Band and the Wisconsin Chapter of TNC are cooperating to address the health
of the entire Bad River watershed and wetland ecosystem, with help from the Great Lakes National
Program Office of the U.S. EPA.
Contacts:  Maria Lavey
          Watershed Project Coordinator
          Bad River Band of Lake Superior
          Tribe of Chippewa Indians
          P.O. Box 39
          Odanah, WI 54861
          Phone:  (715)682-7123
          Fax:  (715)682-7118
                                                Matt Dallman
                                                Watershed Conservation Coordinator
                                                The Nature Conservancy
                                                618 Main Street West, Suite B
                                                Ashland, WI 54806
                                                Phone:  (715)682-5789
                                                Fax: (715)682-5832

                                                Karen Holland
                                                Great Lakes National Program Office
                                                U.S. EPA, G-9J
                                                77 W. Jackson Boulevard
                                                Chicago, IL 60604-3590
                                                Phone:  (312)353-2690

                                                                           An early inventory of environmental stres-
                                                                           sors in Canaan Valley jump-started efforts
                                                                       to preserve the integrity of this ecosystem.
                                                                         Canaan Valley, in West Virginia, is a popu-
                                                                       lar destination for Washington, DC, and
                                                                       Baltimore vacationers. The valley, approxi-
                                                                       mately 14 miles long and five miles wide, is
                                                                       one of the best examples of a northern, conif-
                                                                       erous ecosystem in the United States.
                                                                         The Canaan  Valley Task Force, a private
                                                                       sector-government  partnership  created  by
                                                                       EPA Region 3 in July  1990, promotes long-
                                                                       term environmental protection of the  valley
                                                                       while  allowing for reasonable and sustainable
                                                                       economic vitality.  As a first step in guiding
                        protection efforts, the partnership produced an inventory of environmental stressors (see the table
                        below) by identifying ecosystem problems and their associated causes, determining  whether the
                        problems are getting worse, and developing solutions.
                          The task force identified two priorities:  advancing the delineation of wetlands, and developing
                        a geographic information system (GIS) of land use/land cover  and property boundaries. As a result
                        of this early identification of stressors, three Department of the Army permits were suspended and
                        the surveillance of illegal wetland fills was increased.  The task force also produced and  dissemi-
                        nated  a series of fact sheets and informational brochures; completed a study of off-road vehicle
                        impacts; studied ground-water, surface-water, and wildlife habitats; and initiated the first  phase of
                        an economic impact analysis of a proposed wildlife refuge.
                          Canaan Valley Environmental Stressors
Brook trout
GIS, Observed land-
use change, Photo
GIS, Photo
West Virginia, USGS
GIS, Habitat survey
Loss of acreage
Loss of
Loss of
natural views
Power generation, Second home develop-
ment, Recreation, Highway,
Off-road vehicles
Off-road vehicles, Recreation, Second
home development, Power generation
Off-road vehicles, Septic, Acid mine
Second home development, Power
generation, Off-road vehicles, Recreation
Wind power, Second home development,
                                              Contact:  John Forren
                                                        Environmental Assessment Branch
                                                        U.S. EPA Region 3
                                                        841 Chestnut Street
                                                        Philadelphia, PA 24210
                                                        Phone: (215)566-2705
                                                        Fax: (215)566-2782

    Citizens in Northampton County, Virginia, recog-
    nize the value of their natural assets to their eco-
nomic future.  Northampton County is located at the
southern tip of the Delmarva peninsula and occupies
the southern half of Virginia's Eastern Shore.   The
county is bounded by 225 miles of shoreline, enclos-
ing some 134,000 acres of prime cropland, saltmarsh,
and forest.
   Despite its natural gifts,  Northampton  has severe
problems. Historically, it has been the poorest county
in the Commonwealth  of Virginia, with a declining
population and steep job losses resulting from rever-
sals in its dominant seafood and agricultural indus-
tries.   In  1993, Northampton  County  formed  a
Sustainable  Development Task Force composed of
Northampton citizens to address these challenges.
Development of "heritage tourism" is a direct expres-
sion of the community's collective determination to
ensure a more prosperous and hopeful future for all its
   Promising opportunities exist for Northampton
County to develop  new industries and reinvigorate   III-S.
existing industries,  such as heritage tourism, which
provide well-paying jobs and a diversified tax base,
improve the quality  of life of the county' s people, and retain its young people as they enter the work
force. Heritage tourism is defined as "recreation travel activities which depend on the appreciation,
interpretation and protection of the community's authentic natural, scenic, recreation, historical, and
cultural assets."  Fishing and boating on the Chesapeake Bay are the primary attractions for tourists
and recreationists visiting Northampton County.
   The First Annual Eastern Shore  Birding Festival, held in October 1993  during the  peak of fall
migration, demonstrated the potential of birding tourism to the county. Heritage trails are also being
planned to meet the sustainability objectives of the community.
   In the past, Northampton industries have failed when they chose an unsustainable course. In the
most notable instance several years ago, Northampton's fishing and canning industry collapsed as a
result of overfishing.  Citizens of Northampton recognize that no industry or development activity
can be considered sustainable in and of itself.  Even heritage  tourism must account for long-term
preservation goals along with near-term financial reward. Citizens of Northampton are convinced
they can achieve both.
   Ultimately, the community is taking responsibility for wise development and stewardship of its
assets. County leaders are committed to sustainable development, but the community's dedication
to active participation through town meetings, community task forces, and non-profit grassroots
organizations ensures continued success.

                       Contact:  Tim Hayes
                                 Sustainable Development, Coordinator
                                 Northampton County
                                 P.O. Box 66
                                 Eastville, VA 23347
                                 Phone: (804)678-0477
                                 Fax:  (804)678-0483

                             sustainable. Northampton County, Virginia provides one example of how ecosystem
                             protection can support nature-based business as a source of jobs and economic activi-
                             ty in an economically depressed area. Ecosystem management efforts in Willapa
                             Bay,  Washington (see below) focus on coordinating ecological and economic goals
                             where the regional economy depends heavily on natural resource extraction.
                             Similarly, the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission (see following pages)
                             helps Native Americans in the Midwest preserve resources that support commercial
                             fishing and wild rice harvesting.

                             If properly managed, ecosystems may support recreation-based businesses.
                             Many local economies in the United States, particularly those in more rural areas,
                             depend on the commercial activity generated by outdoor recreation.  Expenditures by
                             tourists, anglers, hunters, birdwatchers, boaters, hikers, and other recreational  enthusi-
                             asts contribute significantly to the regional economy and support jobs in the commu-
                             nity. These expenditures include not only the purchase of recreational equipment and
                                     illapa Bay,  in  the  southwestern  corner  of
                                     Washington State, has long been considered one of
                               the cleanest coastal ecosystems in the nation. The natur-
                               al richness of the bay is maintained through the creativi-
                               ty of local businesses, citizens, and government officials.
                               Communities and businesses  in Willapa Bay know that
                               their ecological and economic goals are interdependent.
                               Ecosystem management efforts  have engaged  local and
                               county governments,  private non-profit organizations,
                               and regional public agencies.
                                 One collaborative effort, spearheaded by a non-profit
                               conservation organization  called Ecotrust,  was estab-
                               lished to address troubling new issues,  including declin-
                               ing timber yields, fish populations, and job opportunities.
                               In  a unique partnership, Ecotrust and a development
                               bank  in Chicago began  to offer capital and  technical
                               assistance to environmentally  responsible businesses that
                               integrate ecological and economic goals.
                                 To begin, Ecotrust went  to  the  local community.
                               Members convened a small group of residents to  discuss
                               environmental  protection through economic  develop-
^^^^^^^^_^^^^^^^^  ment. The group — farmers,  oyster growers, fishermen,
                               Native Americans, and small business owners —  formed
the Willapa Alliance.  One of the alliance's activities is to  sponsor studies examining the
region's natural resources and economic opportunities.  Right away, the group  discovered
that some of its economic problems were based on a pattern of exporting unprocessed natur-
al resources.  In addition, ecologically friendly businesses were not familiar with  how to
reach expanding and profitable "green markets".  The trick was providing resources and
expertise to this community in need.
   Ecotrust approached the Shore Bank Corporation of Chicago for help, and the two groups
decided to  collaborate.  The partnership evolved into the locally based ShoreTrust Trading
Group, which provides management services, marketing strategies, and financial support to
local businesses focusing on sustainable practices such as the following:

supplies (such as boats, fishing rods, bait), but also spending at local hotels and
restaurants. If ecosystems break down and populations of key wildlife species dwin-
dle, many local economies would be undermined.

Ecosystems May Influence Property Values and Local Finance
We 11-functioning ecosystems also help communities avoid expenditures on projects
needed to replace the services that the ecosystems  naturally provide.   Examples
include the following:

      n Storm Protection — Wetlands may reduce wave action, slow winds, and
        absorb water.  Preservation  of wetlands can help communities avoid spending
        money on such expensive structural protection as levees and sea walls.

      n Filtration and Purification — Wetlands and forested areas are capable of
    n Owners of a family-owned lumber mill business knew there was a demand for tim-
      ber grown from sustainably managed forests. The local North American red alder
      is a hardwood species that regenerates rapidly on its own and can easily be man-
      aged as a renewable resource. Nevertheless, many landowners kill the plants with
      herbicides to grow conifers instead.  The ShoreTrust Trading Group helped the fam-
      ily develop a market for the alder and expand its business.

    n The Trading Group introduced a local oyster fisherman to a natural foods grocery
      chain with strict health and environmental standards. These stores are willing to pay
      a premium for oysters harvested in the clean Willapa Bay.  This has provided an
      incentive to protect the local environment that sustains  the oysters. In the fisher-
      man's words, "It would only be ourselves we would be hurting if we lose the bay."

    n A cranberry farmer runs a small business that processes local cranberries into rel-
      ishes, mustards, and scone mixes. The Trading Group introduced the owner to new
      markets and helped her redesign her jars to emphasize the products' natural quali-

  By helping resource  managers meet their economic goals,  local groups are ensuring that
ecologically responsible businesses can continue to thrive and protect Willapa Bay. Further
analysis of the bay may be needed to monitor environmental  change.
  In addition, the collaboration with Shore Bank has entered a new phase, with creation of
ShoreTrust Bank, the first commercial bank in the country designed to focus primarily on
loans to environmentally  responsible businesses.
Contacts:    Alana Probst
            Vice President
            1200 Northwest Front Avenue
            Suite  470
            Portland, OR 97209
            Phone:  (503)227-6225
            Fax:  (503)222-1517
John Berdes
Managing Director
ShoreTrust Trading Group
P.O. Box 826
Ilwaco, WA 98624
Phone: (360)642-4265
Fax: (360)642-4078

                                          istorically, the tribes of the Great Lakes area
                                          -depended on fishing, hunting, and harvesting
                                      wild rice for their subsistence.  Currently, these
                                      activities  are  still  economically  significant
                                      because  the tribes engage in commercial fishing
                                      and the sale of wild rice.
                                        The  Great  Lakes  Indian Fish and  Wildlife
                                      Commission (GLIFWC), formed in  1984, is an
                                      intertribal, natural resource management organiza-
                                      tion representing the concepts and interests of 11
                                      Chippewa Bands in Michigan, Minnesota,  and
                                      Wisconsin.   GLIFWC's primary mission is to
                                      assist members in implementing treaty rights and
                                      in managing  resources in the  off-reservation,
                                      ceded territories.
  The natural resources of primary concern to the member bands include fisheries, wildlife,
wild rice, and waterfowl.  Jon Gilbert, a GLIFWC wildlife biologist,  was involved in a project
with state and federal agencies to study the survival  rate and habitat  use of re-introduced pine
martens and fishers. According to Gilbert, "These are animals that are part of the natural
                           Practical  Benefits  From Open
                           Space Preservation
       treating municipal or industrial wastewater and filtering runoff from city
       streets and farmland. Plants absorb nutrients that might otherwise stimulate
      	  algal blooms, while toxic pollu-
                                               tants settle to the bottom of wet-
                                               land areas where some may
                                               decompose. While not a replace-
                                               ment for man-made wastewater
                                               treatment capacity, these filtration
                                               services may, to a limited degree,
                                               reduce the need for towns to build
                                               additional treatment capacity.
                                               Wetlands and forests may also help
                                               protect drinking water supplies.
                                               Many  communities have instituted
                                               wellhead  or watershed protection
                                               programs that avoid the costs of
                                               additional water treatment and the
               Economic studies have shown that some kinds of development
             impose greater costs on local communities than others. An analysis
             of the costs of sprawl (Frank, 1989) revealed that lower-density
             developments built on former farms, forests, wetlands, or unoccu-
             pied lands away from existing urban areas cost considerably more in
             local taxes than higher-density developments built within or adjacent
             to existing urban areas.  For instance, each house built in a medium-
             density development (seven to eight residences per acre) will cost an
             average of $12,000 more in local government expenditures than it
             will contribute, while each  house built in a low-density development
             (one residence for every four to five acres) will cost $92,000 more in
             local government expenditures.
               In contrast, another study showed that for every dollar of tax rev-
             enue  collected from residential land, $1.25 is spent on public ser-
             vices. For each dollar generated from an open space tax, 19 cents is
             spent on services (Vance, 1988).
               Of course, these are examples only.  Cost and tax differences for
             low-  and high-density development will depend on the unique ser-
             vice costs and tax structure of your community, and on how devel-
             opment is designed.
                                               cost of cleaning up contaminated
                                               ground water by protecting the
                                               areas around water sources.

                                               Finally, open space may create
                                               economic benefits in urban and
                                               suburban communities.  For exam-
                                               ple, research shows that real estate
                                               values increase if property is near
                                               open spaces, waterways, and other

ecosystem.  The tribes are interested in seeing that the ecosystems are preserved, protected,
and enhanced."  GLIFWC also works on conservation enforcement in cooperation with
Wisconsin wardens
  The Chippewa Bands rely on the fish resources of Lake Superior, as they have for genera-
tions.   Therefore, GLIFWC undertakes numerous activities to  protect and enhance this
resource. These activities include harvest management, controlling foreign species that threat-
en the ecosystem, research and development, enhancement of resources, and technical assis-
tance to members.
  The participation of GLIFWC in state and federal ecosystem management projects ensures
that tribal members' historical perspectives and values about land are represented and that
important economic resources are sustained.

                     Contact:  James Schlender
                              Executive Administrator
                              Great Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife Commission
                              P.O. Box 9
                              Odanah, WI 54861
                              Phone: (715)682-6619
                              Fax: (715)682-9242
natural areas. This is illustrated in the story about New York City's Central Park (see
below). These increases bring more property tax revenues to municipalities. In addi-
tion, both real estate developers and local governments have found that the costs of
clustered housing, including land clearing, road building, providing water and sewer
service, and other costs, are significantly less than those of sprawling developments.

Evaluating the Links Between Ecosystems and Local Economies

As with ecosystem assessment, specific indicators can track the relationship between
ecosystems and the economy. Table 3-3 provides several examples of specific eco-
nomic indicators.  For instance,  a local economy may be dependent upon a resource-
based industry such as commercial fishing.  A relevant indicator in this case would be
employment in each of these economic sectors as a percentage of employment in all
local industries. Alternatively, a community that wants to assess how ecosystems
influence tax revenues could investigate total tax collections through park and beach
admission fees.

The following sources may be able to provide information on how ecosystems influ-
ence the local economy:

     n State and Community Planning Documents — Many states have published
        statewide plans or growth strategy documents that address a range of econom-
        ic and environmental  issues. Some states (such as Florida) require that com-
        munities prepare comprehensive planning documents, as well.  These sources
        provide useful background on the major economic trends  in your area that
        may be affecting or affected by local ecosystems.

                                                                   Developers  and city governments have discov-
                                                                   ered that  urban open-space  preservation can
                                                               have a positive effect  on property values,  urban
                                                               economies, and the general quality of life.   As a
                                                               result, cities around the country have initiated open-
                                                               space preservation programs. One of the earliest and
                                                               most dramatic examples of the economic benefits of
                                                               urban parks  and open  space  is New York  City's
                                                               famous Central Park.
                                                                 An 1860 census of New York City's population
                                                               indicated an increase from 4,302 to 814,524 inhabi-
                                                               tants in 60 years.  In response to this rapid urbaniza-
                                                               tion, Frederick Law Olmsted and  Calvert Vaux pre-
                                                               pared a design for Central Park and attached a report
                      which suggested that, "The whole of the island of New York would, but for such a reservation,
                      before many years be occupied by buildings and paved streets...[and]  all its inhabitants would
                      assuredly suffer, in greater or less degree, according to their occupations and the degree of their con-
                      finement to it, from influences engendered by these conditions."
                         Much of the park was purchased by 1859, but the Board of Commissioners, worried about excess
                      valuation,  was reluctant to purchase additional acres. Olmsted responded  to  cost  concerns  by
                      tracking the increase in the value of properties adjacent to the park. In an 1875 report to the board,
                      he detailed the total cost of Central Park and then calculated the increase in tax revenue from the
                      surrounding properties.
                         Olmsted's report noted that property not directly adjacent to the park  had appreciated only 100
                      percent over the previous 20 years.  However the three wards adjacent to the park had appreciated
                      500 percent. While the City had spent $13.9 million to acquire  and build the park,  the land sur-
                      rounding the park was worth $180 million more because of the purchase. In  1873 alone, the city's
                      property tax income was $3,746,880 more than the tax that the city would have received if the park
                      had not been established.  In effect, New York City's Central Park paid for itself just three years
                      after park construction was completed.

                                            Contact:   Dave Lutz
                                                      The Neighborhood Open Space Coalition
                                                      72 Reade  Street
                                                      New York, NY 10007
                                                      hone:  (212)513-7555
                                                      Fax:  (212)385-6095
                                    Local Merchants — Local business owners may be able to provide informa-
                                    tion on the importance of certain ecosystem-based activities to their business.
                                    For example, recreational fishing may be critical to a local boat rental busi-

                                    Local Parks and Recreation Departments — These local agencies may have
                                    information on the revenue collected from parks, beaches, and other city- or
                                    county-operated areas.

                                    Chamber of Commerce — The local Chamber of Commerce may be able to
                                    provide information about economic uses of ecosystems, whether for recre-
                                    ation, research, commercial fishing, forestry, or other uses.

Table 3-3
dependence of
local tax revenues
on ecosystems
of local economy
on nature-based
Assess need for
clean water for
industrial use
Assess impact of
ecosystem health
on residential
Assess trends in
commercial and
residential devel-
Assess local
dependence on
"extractive" natur-
al resource-based
sustainability of
local resource-
Sample Indicators
n Annual revenue from fees for use of
parks and beaches
n Annual revenues and/or employment in
local outdoor recreational businesses
(e.g., boat rentals, nature tour guides,
birdwatching, and cross-country ski cen-
n Annual number of fishing or hunting
licenses issued in the county
n Annual number of "activity days" for
various categories of outdoor recreation
(e.g., fishing, hunting)
n Use of water by food processors, brew-
eries, etc.
n Relative cost of otherwise similar hous-
es located near and several blocks away
from a local park
n Qualitative indicator based on home buyer
and realtor opinions on premium paid for
properties located near environmental
amenities (e.g., clean rivers, parks)
n Urban Sprawl Index: rate of conversion
of open land to suburban/urban develop-
" Percentage of building permits in down-
town/urban core vs. non-urban or subur-
ban areas
n Revenues of local forest products indus-
try relative to revenue in all industries
n Employment in local forest products
industry relative to employment in all
.tvtiiuta ui njuai uuiiimtiuiai usiiti^
relative to revenue in all industries
n Employment in local commercial
fishery relative to employment in all
n Ratio of the amount, heal ill, and diveisi-
ty of timber regrowth to timber cut
young-of-year in fish population over time.
Possible Sources of Information
n Local parks and recreation department, local revenue department
n Local merchants
n Local Chamber of Commerce
n State fish and wildlife department
n State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans (contact state
tourism and recreation agency)
n U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Survey of Fishing, Hunting,
and Wildlife Associated Recreation, published every six years
n Local Chamber of Commerce
n Local water authority
n Local Chamber of Commerce
n Local business leaders or representatives of relevant companies
n Local registry of deeds
n Survey of recent home buyers in the area
n Local realtors
"Municipal/county/ state land-use planning offices
n Local building and permits office
n U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, County
Business Patterns, phone: (301) 457-4100
n U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis,
Regional Economic Information System, phone: (202) 606-9900
n U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Statistics,
by state
n U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, County
Business Patterns, phone: (301) 457-4100
n U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis,
Regional Economic Information System, phone: (202) 606-9900
n National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in the U.S. Department
of Commerce maintains county-level data on landings and value of
n Local Chamber of Commerce
n U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Statistics,
by state
n NMFS data (see above)

                            The Ecosystem Approach: Healthy Ecosystems and Sustainable Economies, Report of the
                            Interageney Ecosystem Management Task Force, June 1995. Prepared by representatives of
                            several federal agencies, this report uses information from several case studies to define the
                            "ecosystem approach" for protecting the environment and how this approach helps ensure
                            healthy, sustainable economies.

            Fox, Tom, Urban Open Space: An Investment That Pays, Neighborhood Open  Space Coalition, 72 Reade
            Street, New York, NY 10007, 1990.  This report describes the contribution that open space makes to the
            economies of large cities, highlighting impacts on real estate values, public health, city image, and other factors.

            Hustedde, Ronald, et al, Community Economic Analysis: A How To Manual, North Central Regional Center for
            Rural Development, Iowa State University, Iowa State University Printing Services, Ames, IA, August 1995,
            phone: (515)294-8321.

            National Park Service, Economic Impact of Protecting Rivers, Trails, and Greenvay Corridors: A Resource
            Book, National Park Service, Department of the Interior, Washington, DC, 1995.  This resource book provides
                                n Local Realtors — Realtors often understand what people value about a commu-
                                  nity and can help you understand how healthy ecosystems influence home prices.

                           Sources of Technical Information
                           Apart from local sources, more general data sources may prove useful in characteriz-
                           ing how the local economy is tied to ecosystem quality. One set of resources includes
                           economic data gathered by economic research organizations in the federal govern-
                           ment, including:

                                n County Business Patterns Data — Compiled by the U.S. Department of
                                  Commerce, Bureau of the Census, these data cover revenues and employment
                                  associated with various industries in each county.  The data are summarized in
                                  a series of documents (one for each state), but also can be obtained in elec-
                                  tronic form.  Contact the Bureau of the Census, County Business Patterns
                                  Branch, phone: (301) 457-4100, or check the library at a local university.

                                n Regional Economic Information System — This data system contains coun-
                                  ty-based employment and income information similar to the County Business
                                  Patterns, but at a greater level of detail and across multiple years. Therefore,
                                  the data may be useful for assessing trends in various resource-dependent
                                  industries.  The data are available on CD-ROM and can be obtained through
                                  the Bureau of Economic Analysis in the U.S. Department of Commerce,
                                  phone: (202)606-9900.

                           While technical in nature, these data sources may prove helpful in characterizing the
                           amount of commercial activity dependent upon ecosystem quality. These data are the
                           basis for more sophisticated regional  economic modeling that you may explore when
                           you implement ecosystem protection  strategies (see Chapter 5). An economist in the
                           community or at a local university can help acquire and analyze these data.

                           In addition to general economic information, numerous databases and reports  exist
                           for assessing  the local importance of specific industries. For example, detailed infor-

examples of how greenways and parks benefit local economies and gives practical guidance on how to esti-
mate these benefits in your community.

The Nature Conservancy Center for Compatible Economic Development, A Citizen's Guide to Achieving a
Healthy Community, Economy and Environment, The Nature Conservancy, Leesburg, VA, May 1996. This
guidebook provides a comprehensive framework for understanding links among community, economy, and the
environment, and illustrates the concepts using Virginia's Eastern Shore as an example.

Niemi, E. and E. Whitelaw, Integrating Economics and Resource Conservation Strategies, ECONorthwest,
Eugene, OR, May 1995.

The Wilderness Society, Measuring Change in Rural Communities: A Workbook for Determining
Demographic, Economic, and Fiscal Trends, The Wilderness Society, 900 Seventeenth Street NW,
Washington, DC 20006-2596.
mation on commercial fishing activity is available from both state and federal agen-
cies. Typically, state natural resource agencies maintain records on shellfishing in
local estuaries.  These data may include information on annual shellfish harvests by
location as well as information on the number of commercial shellfishing licenses
issued to area residents.  Similarly, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
maintains data on annual fmfish landings by county and by major port.

The economic development agency in your state government may be able to assist you
in locating key data, and may also know of regional studies that already have been
performed for ecosystem-related sectors  of the economy.
Assessing Links Between Ecosystems and Quality of
Healthy Ecosystems Make Life More Fulfilling

Healthy ecosystems make our communities more rewarding places to live in ways that
are unrelated to economic conditions.  Many of these benefits are subtle, and different
communities may emphasize different aspects of well-functioning ecosystems depend-
ing on their values. They include:

     n Natural Beauty — Natural areas provide a sense of well-being for the com-
       munity. In particular, protecting habitats in urban areas gives citizens an
       opportunity to "leave the city behind", view  local animal and plant life with-
       out having to travel, and gain a sense of inspiration and renewal.

     n Protection of Human Health  and Safety — Clean air and water and healthy
       ecosystems ensure that the community is free from health problems associated
       with pollution.  In addition, community members have the peace of mind of
       knowing that they are safe from these threats.

                                n Sense of Community — A healthy natural environment enhances feelings of
                                  civic pride and may instill a stronger sense of kinship among residents.
                                                           Natural spaces can be used for community gather-
                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^=  ings such as annual festivals, picnics, graduation
                                                           ceremonies, and community gardens. The collec-
                                                           tive action necessary to protect ecosystems can
                                                           itself be a bonding force and source of pride to res-
                                                           idents who share a common goal and work togeth-
                                                           er to make their community a better place to live.
Community Gardens
              Community gardens are an effective and sus-
            tainable way of building community involvement
            while at the same time transforming unused space
            into something productive.  More than 300
            vacant, and in some cases littered and desolate,
            spaces in Newark, New Jersey, have been convert-
            ed into 2,000 lively and productive neighborhood
            gardens through the Rutgers Urban Gardening
            Program.  The program is a state and federally
            funded project of Rutgers University Cooperative
            Extension. Gardeners benefit in many ways, such
            as improved nutrition, savings on grocery bills,
            increased sense of self-reliance, and relaxation.
            Gardens also can become settings for social inter-
            action and discussion of local problems.
                                   Spiritual Value — Many people feel spiritually
                                   connected with the ecosystems around them. The
                                   beauty of nature gives them an opportunity to con-
                                   template their relationship with the world. Many
                                   religious denominations have organizations (see
                                   Appendix A) that promote environmental steward-
                                   ship because of the belief that humans have a spe-
                                   cial responsibility to protect and pass on a healthy
                                   world.  Many of these groups see the principle of
                                   sustaining the health and benefits of the natural
                                   world for future generations as a moral obligation.
                                   Native American cultures have often been identi-
                                   fied as placing a particular spiritual and religious
                                   significance on nature and the harmony in natural
                                   systems.  Many people in the United States share
                                   these values.
                                n Educational Value — Rivers, wetlands, forests, and other elements of com-
                                  munity ecosystems all provide learning opportunities.  Certain areas may be
                                  designated public learning centers by the town or by conservation groups.
                                  Local colleges and universities also may use ecosystems for teaching and  sci-
                                  entific research. For schoolchildren, healthy ecosystems may provide a sense
                                  of wonder and encourage further learning. Many parks and forests make
                                  learning easy by posting illustrations and names of local plants and animals at
                                  park entrances or on placards along trails.

                                n Recreational Opportunities —  Healthy ecosystems support wildlife and
                                  other natural resources that are often central to outdoor recreational activity.
                                  For example, wetlands may provide breeding and spawning areas for fish
                                  sought by recreational anglers and may support bird species popular with
                                  birdwatchers or hunters. In addition to the commercial value of recreational
                                  resources, the  intrinsic value of the recreational experience is an important
                                  part of life in many communities.

                           Evaluating the Links Between Ecosystems and Quality of Life

                           Table 3-4 provides some examples of indicators that characterize the link between
                           ecosystems and quality of life.  For example, your community may be interested in
                           measuring the extent to which development has  reduced the availability of open land.

 Alternatively, you may want to characterize the importance of ecosystems to education
 by reporting the number of visitors to a local arboretum or the number of school field
 trips to local nature areas.

 Local sources are often most relevant in assessing the link between ecosystems and
 quality of life.  Table 3-4 provides several examples of information sources that may
 prove useful.  These information sources include local, state, and federal

 Community members often have opinions about the value of different ecological
 resources.  Surveys can be conducted to  ask community members what resources are
 important to them.  They can serve as a way to set priorities among different
 resources that need attention. However, surveys sometimes do not indicate why peo-
 ple care about one ecological resource or other community characteristic more than
                                                 Table 3-4
          Sample Indicators
     Possible Sources of Information
importance of
ecosystem to
local education
n Number of school field trips to natural areas
n Local schoolteachers
n Number of visitors to local arboretum, bird
 sanctuary, or state and national parks
n Management office of relevant organization (e.j
flood control
provided by
local wetlands
n Qualitative indicator based on flooding history
 of area with wetlands and similar areas where
 wetlands have been lost to development
n Newspaper archives
n Local land-use officials
n Local emergency management officials
dependence of
town on local
surface and
ground water
n Percent of household water supply from local
 Local public works department
 Regional water supply authority
of land for
n Acres of land/open space available for recre-
 ation per 1,000 people in the community
n Local land use officials
n Local or state parks and recreation officials
level of
dependent upon
n Annual number of "activity days" for various
 categories of outdoor recreation (e.g., rafting
 and kayaking, fishing, hunting, and visitor days
 to local resorts and campgrounds)
n Trends in beach closures or fishing advisories
n Fate and effects of sanitary waste and refuse on
n U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Survey of
 Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Associated
 Recreation, published every six years
n State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans,
 contact state tourism and recreation agency
n County or municipal records for sanitary treatment
 and waste removal from recreation site

                           another.  Reasons may include concerns about effects on the local economy, desire to
                           preserve one's own recreational resources, or a desire to be a good steward of the
                           earth's resources for the benefit of future generations. While not precise and perhaps
                           difficult to interpret, surveys do provide insight into what issues are most important
                           to the community.
                                             Corson, Walter H,, Defining Progress: An Inventory of Programs
                                             Using Goals and Indicators to Assess Quality of Life, Performance,
                                             and Sustainahility at the Community and Regional Level, George
                                             Washington University, Washington, DC, October 1995, phone:
                                             (703) 683-5730. This report provides a useful overview of quality
                                             of life indicators, some of which are related to local ecosystem char-
                              acteristics, as well as descriptions of community efforts to compile and track these

                              Engel, J.R. and P. Bakken, Ecology, Justice and the Christian Faith: A Guide to
                              Literature 1960-1990,  Center for the Scientific Study of Religion, Chicago, IL, 1990.

                              Kempton, Willett, et al., Environmental Values in American Culture, The MIT Press,
                              Cambridge, MA, ISBN 0-262-11191-8, 1995. Written by a team of anthropologists,
                              this book relies on surveys of American citizens to help people understand how
                              Americans view environmental issues.

                              Salant, Priscilla and Don A. Dillman, Haw to Conduct Your Own Survey, John Wiley
                              & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 1994.

                           Caputo, Darryl F. Open Space Pays: The Socioenvironomics of Open Space
                           Preservation, New Jersey Conservation Foundation.

                           Community Environmental Council, Sustainable Community Indicators:  Guideposts
                           for Local Planning, CEC, 1995.

                           Fox, Thomas, Urban Open  Space: An Investment That Pays, Neighborhood Open
                           Space Coalition, New York, NY, 1990.

                           Frank, James E., The Costs of Alternative Development Patterns: A Review of the
                           Literature, the Urban Land  Institute, ISBN 0-87420-695-2, 1989.

                           Freedman, Bill, Environmental Ecology: The Ecological Effects  of Pollution,
                           Disturbance, and Other Stresses, Academic Press, San Diego, CA, ISBN 0-12-
                           266542-2, 1995.

                           Hart, Maureen, Guide to Sustainable  Community Indicators,  QLF/ Atlantic Center for
                           the Environment, Ipswich, MA, May 1995.

                           Interagency Ecosystem Management  Task Force, The Ecosystem Approach: Healthy
                           Ecosystems  and Sustainable Economies, Report of The Interagency Ecosystem
                           Management Task Force, Volume 1, June 1995.

Kempton, Willett, et al. Environmental Values in American Culture, The MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA, ISBN 0-262-11191-8, 1995.

Kline, Elizabeth, Sustainable Community Characteristics, Consortium for Regional
Sustainability, Tufts University, Medford, MA, 1993.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Planning for Small
Communities: A Guide for Local Decisionmakers, EPA/625/R-94/009, Washington,
DC, September  1994.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Guidance on Use of Habitat Evaluation Procedures
and Suitability Index Models for CERCLA Application, Report Number PB88-100151,
June 1987.

Vance, Tamara A. and Arthur B. Larson, Fiscal Impact of Major Land Uses in
Culpeper County, Virginia, Piedmont Environmental Council, 1988.

Wilson, E.O., Biodiversity, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, ISBN 0-309-
03739-5, 1994.


          Strategies  To  Consider  For
          Ecosystem   Protection
Strategies for protecting the ecosystem likely will affect all other segments of the
community — businesses, residents, tourists, and others. As a result, the strategies
produce positive results not only for the ecosystem, but also for the local economy
and the community's quality of life. For most communities, a wide range of ecosys-
tem protection strategies is available. For example, should a local effort to protect
endangered plant species proceed by regulating development? Buying conservation
easements? Curbing off-road vehicles? Encouraging better land management prac-

Because it is likely that most of the projects the community undertakes will concen-
trate on local activities, strategies that call upon volunteers to protect or restore the
ecosystems are potentially useful. Working through the laws and programs that affect
the ecosystem and are administered by the city, town, county, or other local govern-
ment is another option. Finally, certain programs and laws administered by the state
and federal governments provide ecosystem protection and may provide a basis for a
local protection effort.
4.1    Strategies Using Voluntary Activities

Many communities have found voluntary non-regulatory ecosystem protection strate-
gies, including volunteer cleanups, land acquisition, and public education efforts, to be
useful.  Other voluntary strategies involving financial incentives require changes in
tax policies, and are discussed in Section 4.2.

Low Cost, Immediate-Result Voluntary  Strategies

A number of simple voluntary activities are available to achieve ecosystem protection
goals (Greenfield and LeCouteur, 1994). These activities encourage community pride
and may produce immediate, visible results. These activities include:

     n Tree, Grassland, or Wetland Planting or Reforestation — These activities
       involve planting trees, shrubs, or flowers in urban areas to improve aesthetics,
       or undertaking a reforestation or wetland planting program in more rural areas
       to improve forests that have been clear-cut or wetlands that have been dam-
       aged. These activities produce additional benefits such as lowering urban
       temperatures, purifying air, and controlling storm-water runoff.

                              n  Stream, Beach, or River Cleanups — Many communities have organized
                                efforts to pick up trash and debris from rivers, beaches, or streams, either once
                                or on an ongoing basis.

                              n  Storm Drain Stenciling — Many people do not realize that runoff collected by
                                storm drains may pass untreated into a river or harbor.  Stenciling "Do Not
                                Dump" or other instructions on storm drains alerts community members that they
                                should not use storm drains to dispose of used oil or other hazardous liquids.

                              n  Pollution Prevention — Recycling programs, car pooling networks, and pub-
                                lic transportation improvements all reduce pollution at its source.

                              n  Education — Seminars at local schools  can educate students about their
                                local environment  and encourage stewardship. Pamphlets encouraging
                                recycling and explaining proper disposal of household hazardous materials
                                or showing maps of local greenways and bike paths can increase interest
                                in local natural resources.  Some groups, such as farmers, may benefit
                                from information on ecosystem issues specific to their occupations (for
                                example, the importance of not filling in wetlands or benefits from reduc-
                                ing  pesticide runoff). Community organizations and individuals also can
                                find out more about the presence of hazardous materials in their neighbor-
                                hoods through the community-right-to-know  provisions that are part of
                                the  Superfund remediation program.

                              n  Amending Covenants Governing Condominium and Homeowners'
                                Associations —  Covenants governing condominium or homeowners' associ-
                                ations can address items like reducing the  use of fertilizer and pesticides on
                                lawns or prohibiting the removal of native vegetation.

                              n  Instituting Integrated Pest Management (IPM) on Farms and in Gardens
                                — IPM minimizes pesticide use in favor of natural forms of pest control.
                                These include introducing insects and animals that prey on the pests, rotating
                                crops, planting two or more crops in the same field (making it harder for pests
                                to find their targets), and many other techniques.

                              n  Encouraging and Assisting Businesses to Conduct Environmental Audits
                                — Audits involve examining business practices to see if they are environmen-
                                tally friendly (for instance, does the business recycle paper and other waste
                                products). Often, programs to reduce waste also improve business efficiency
                                and cost effectiveness.  Small businesses may be able to get assistance
                                through the EPA Information Hotlines listed at the end of this section or
                                through their EPA regional office.

                         Land Acquisition

                         Land acquisition, which involves the purchase of land or a land easement, can be one
                         of the most  effective ways to preserve an ecosystem. Land conservation encompasses
                         a number of activities, not all of which involve purchasing property outright.

                         Who Is Involved in Land Purchases?
                         The state or local government can purchase land or easements (defined below) from

voluntary sellers (as opposed to exercising eminent
domain) to be set aside for conservation purposes.
However, many communities also have formed land
trusts for this purpose.  Land trusts are private non-
profit corporations that acquire land or easements.
They often can move more quickly than governments,
and also can interact more freely with private
landowners who might be wary of working with a
government agency.  Large land trusts that already are
established, such as The Nature Conservancy, usually
focus their efforts on acquiring land with rare or highly
valued species and habitat.

Local governments and land trusts may have programs
to make local landowners aware of these options.
Landowners may not realize that they can sell some of
their property rights as easements without forfeiting
the land itself.  Similarly, developers may not be aware
of land banking (see below)  or other tools for mitigat-
ing ecosystem damage.

Tools for Land Acquisition
One way to ensure that land  is protected or developed
according to conservation principles is to purchase it
outright (called fee simple acquisition).  However, this
is often very expensive. There are a number of other
ways to acquire an interest in or influence over the
management of a tract of land without making an out-
right purchase (Mantell, etal., 1990).
     n Easements — Through an easement, a landowner voluntarily gives up or sells
        specific land-use or development rights but continues to hold title to the land.
        The easement "runs with the land", meaning that it remains in force even
        when the property changes hands. Generally, the  local, state, or federal gov-
        ernment or private land trust buys the right to build on the land, which it will
        never exercise, thereby preventing development.  Purchases of development
        rights are often made in areas adjacent to urban areas, where the pressure to
        develop land is greatest. The government or land trust also can purchase the
        rights to use the land for a conservation-related purpose, such as for hiking
        trails.  In both cases, the owner retains the rights to use the land for other pur-
        poses consistent with the easement, such as for agriculture.

     n Options and Rights-of-First-Refusal — Both of these  tools allow  a purchaser
        to gain time before buying  land or an easement. A potential buyer  can pur-
        chase an option that allows the purchase of land for a specific price within a
        specified period of time, during which the current landholder cannot accept
        any other offers to buy. Similarly, a  buyer can purchase a right-of-first-refusal
        to a tract of land, which requires the  current landholder to notify the rights-
        holder of any other offers made.  The potential buyer then has the option of
        matching that offer and buying the land.
              Virginia Beach's
              Agricultural  Reserve
  The economy of the coastal community of
Virginia Beach, Virginia is based on tourism,
agriculture, and military installations. As a
result of recent urban growth, farms in the area
face increased pressure to sell land for develop-
ment. To protect the agricultural base of the
area against urban sprawl, the municipality
developed the Agricultural Reserve Program
(ARP), Under the ARP, the municipal govern-
ment purchases the development rights to work-
ing farms and holds them in a public trust.  Not
only do the proceeds from the sale of develop-
ment rights enable farmers to reinvest in their
farms, the purchase ensures that  the farm is no
longer a potential development site. In addi-
tion, the program provides for resale of the
development rights back to the farmer after a
minimum period of 25 years, if circumstances
at that time indicate that the land should no
longer be held back from development.
(Southern Watersheds Committee,  1994)

                                 n Leases and Cooperative Management Agreements — These tools allow a
                                   government or land trust to exercise control over the land without purchasing
                                   anything.  Landowners either lease the land for a specified time and purpose
                                   or manage it under certain terms and conditions.  The federal Conservation
                                   Reserve Program and the Wetland Reserve Program use this technique to
                                   allow farmlands to lie fallow for a period of years (usually five).

                            Landowners may also donate easements, options, and rights-of-first-refusal to land
                            trusts or federal, state, or municipal governments. Such donations can improve a
                            landowner's tax position and can be a good estate planning strategy. The Virginia
                            Coast Reserve illustrates the use  of land acquisition and conservation easements in
                            protecting ecosystems (see below).
                                                                         Working with current and future landowners,
                                                                         The Nature Conservancy (TNC) has suc-
                                                                   cessfully combined conservation easements with
                                                                   other ecosystem preservation tools to protect part
                                                                   of Virginia's Eastern Shore and the Virginia Coast
                                                                   Reserve, the last intact coastal wilderness on the
                                                                   Atlantic  coastline.  Although federal and  state
                                                                   agencies and TNC protect the barrier islands of
                                                                   Virginia's eastern shore themselves,  they  have
                                                                   concerns about the effects of development on sur-
                                                                   rounding lands. In response, they have begun to
                                                                   use several innovative methods for protecting the
                                                                   traditional resource-based economy, thus meeting
                                                                   the  goals of this small community  struggling
                                                                   through an economic recession while also preserv-
                                                                   ing a valuable and distinct ecosystem. Two of the
                                                                   most innovative approaches developed are the cre-
                                                                   ation of the Virginia Eastern Shore Corporation
                                                                   and the use of a  community-based  conservation
                                                                   easements program.
                                                                     With $2.7 million, a variety of investors includ-
                                                                   ing  foundations,  private companies, local busi-
                                                                   nesses, and individuals  founded the corporation.
                                                                   Focusing  on meeting sustainable development
                                                                   goals, the corporation is helping identify and sup-
                               port viable businesses compatible with the area's resources.  The corporation consists of
                               three companies with specific missions:

                                    n Eastern Shore Products — This company develops, licenses,  and markets a
                                       range of products.  The company develops and markets nature-based tourism pro-
                                       grams, local crafts, and specialty agricultural products grown through sustainable


Funding for Land Trusts
Acquiring easements or fee simple land is usually expensive.  Land trusts often seek
grants and donations from private charities.  Some land trusts have found other fund-
ing sources, including (Mantell, et al., 1990):

      n Limited Development — The land trust can borrow to finance a purchase,
        and then sell off a small portion of the land for development to repay the
        loan.  The trust can impose requirements, such as clustering or open-space
        allotments, to ensure that the development is appropriate.

      n Conservation Investment — Trusts can sell a part of the land to a buyer who
        is willing to build an ecologically friendly vacation home as an investment.
        The trust also can seek investors who want to purchase an interest in a work-
        ing farm or fishery, from which they get a percentage of profits. This enables
        land to be kept in open-space uses.
      n Eastern Shore Venture Fund — This company provides short-term business
        loans, guarantees, and venture capital to local, emerging, and ongoing enterprises
        that are ecologically sound.

      n Eastern Shore Lands — This company helps implement sustainable development
        of the shore's landscape, just as the other two companies will help develop a sus-
        tainable economy.  Eastern Shore Lands acquires and leases seaside farm and vil-
        lage properties, applies conservation easements and development restrictions, and
        then resells the land.  It also provides farmland for sustainable agriculture and
        works to ensure that affordable housing and commercial facilities are available for
        local families and workers.

  In the Virginia Coast Reserve region of the islands, conservation easements are used in
cooperation with landowners to protect the watersheds adjoining the reserve.
  Easements are valuable community tools because they bring value not only to the conser-
vationists but also the landowner. As a result, they often allow for land uses that yield finan-
cial returns (such as agriculture, forestry, and limited residential development) consistent with
the long-term health of the watershed. TNC is working with existing landowners and with
future seaside farmers who are interested in purchasing TNC lands that already have conser-
vation easements attached.

                      Contact:  John M. Hall
                               The Nature Conservancy
                               Virginia Coast Reserve
                               P.O. Box 158
                               Nassawadox, VA 23413
                               Phone:  (804)442-3049
                               Fax:  (804)442-3050

                To Learn
                 Greenfield, Jennifer and Brian M, LeCouteur, Chesapeake Bay Community Action Guide,
                 Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC, May 1994. This book
                 contains step-by-step instructions on how to organize and carry out voluntary activities.

                 The National Wildlife Federation, Backyard Habitat Program, 1400 Sixteenth Street NW,
                 Washington, DC, phone: (202) 797-6800, can provide information on how individuals can
                 create and improve local habitat.

The Land Trust Alliance, 900 Seventeenth Street NW, Washington, DC, phone: (202) 638-4725, provides
technical assistance and services to local and regional land trusts and conservation groups. Some documents
published by this group include:

        -  Starting a Land Trust: A Guide to Forming a Land Conservation Organization, 1990.
        -  National Directory of Conservation  Land Trusts, 1989.
        -  National Directory of Local and Regional Land Conservation Organizations, Annual Report.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency hotlines  provide information for voluntary action. Some of the most
useful for citizen action include:

     " Green Lights and Energy Stars Programs, phone: (800) 782-7937, Internet Website:, provide information and technical support on energy
        efficient lighting to U.S. businesses and governments.

     " Hazardous Waste Ombudsman, phone:  (800) 262-7937 in U.S.  except metropolitan Washington, DC
        and (202) 260-9361 in metropolitan Washington, DC, assists the public and regulatory community in
        resolving hazardous waste issues. The  ombudsman handles complaints from citizens, conducts
        investigations, undertakes site reviews,  and issues reports relating to hazardous waste sites.

     " Office of Environmental Justice, phone: (800) 962-6215 in U.S. except metropolitan Washington, DC
        and (202) 260-6359 in metropolitan Washington, DC, coordinates public communication and pro-
        vides technical and financial assistance to outside groups on environmental justice issues.

     " Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse, phone: (202) 260-1023, provides answers and refer-
        rals in response to questions from the public concerning pollution prevention.

     " Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Hotline, phone:  (415) 744-2074, responds to
        requests for information on hazardous waste identification, generators, transporters; treatment, stor-
        age, and disposal  facilities; and recycling sites.
                           4.2    Strategies Using Local Laws

                           Some communities have found that achieving their goals requires more than volunteer
                           strategies. Communities often turn to local laws as a means of ecosystem protection.

                           Zoning Ordinances

                           A zoning ordinance describes the ways in which a parcel of land may be used and the
                           intensity of that use (such as the density of development). Land is zoned for industri-
                           al, commercial, or residential development or can be set aside as farmland, forest, pas-

      " RCRA/Underground Storage Tank, Superfund, and Emergency Planning and Community-Right-to-
        Know Hotline, phone: (800) 424-9346 in U.S. except metropolitan Washington, DC and (703) 412-
        9810 in metropolitan Washington, DC, provides information about the title programs and referrals
        for obtaining documents about these programs. Translation is available for Spanish-speaking

      " Small Business Ombudsman Clearinghouse/Hotline, phone: (800) 368-5888 in U.S. except metro-
        politan Washington, DC and (703) 305-5938 in metropolitan Washington, DC, TDD:  (703) 305-
        6824, disseminates regulatory and other environmental information to help small businesses
        enhance voluntary regulatory compliance and pollution abatement and control,

      " Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Assistance Information Service, phone: (202) 544-1404,
        TDD: (202) 544-0551, furnishes TSCA regulation information.

      " WASTEWI$E Helpline, phone:  (800) EPA-WISE, provides information about EPA's voluntary pro-
        gram encouraging businesses to reduce solid waste.

      n Wetlands Information Hotline, phone:  (800) 832-7828 in U.S. except metropolitan Washington,
        DC and (703) 525-0985 in metropolitan Washington, DC, disseminates information about the
        Wetlands Protection Program; answers questions; provides referrals concerning the value, function,
        and protection of wetlands; and accepts requests for certain wetlands publications.

Other useful publications include:

Diehl, Janet, The Conservation Easement Handbook, American Planning Association, Chicago, IL, 1988.

Mantell, Michael A., Stephen F. Harper, and Luther Propst, Creating Successful Communities, The
Conservation Foundation, Washington, DC, ISBN 1-55963-014-0, 1990.  In particular, Appendix A contains
a primer on land acquisition.

Porter, Douglas R., ed., Growth Management: Keeping on Target?, Urban Land Institute, in association with
the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Washington, DC, 1986. In particular, this book discusses land acquisi-
tion for conservation by the City of Boulder, CO.

Small, Stephen, Preserving Family Lands, Landowner Planning Institute, Boston, MA, ISBN 9624557-1-7,
ture, open space, or habitat for wildlife and recreation. Zones can encompass a small
parcel of land, such as a shoreline, or can be extended to an entire watershed.

Many zoning techniques are available for protecting an ecosystem.  Bonus and incen-
tive zoning award developers supplemental development rights, such as allowing con-
struction of more buildings, in exchange for public benefits, such as developing with-
in urban areas instead of in outlying areas.  Buffer zones restrict activities on areas
surrounding key ecosystems to minimize damage.  Floodplain protection districts,
located near rivers or other flood-prone areas, generally prohibit residential and com-
mercial development.  The Westfield River Greenway Plan in Massachusetts  presents

                                                                         As described in Chapter 2, a citizen group
                                                                         in Massachusetts developed the Westfield
                                                                    River Greenway  Plan to ensure a regional
                                                                    approach to river protection.
                                                                       A  100-foot, no-development  buffer zone
                                                                    along the river is  the most critical part of the
                                                                    plan. The plan recommends that management
                                                                    of land use along the Westfield River  remain
                                                                    primarily a local responsibility, and that the six
                                                                    communities  along the upper river branches
                                                                    adopt river protection bylaws as the mecha-
                                                                    nism for  protection.   The  Pioneer  Valley
                                                                    Planning Commission, directed by 43 member
                                                                    communities, worked with  the six communi-
                                                                    ties along the river to pass these bylaws  at
                      town meetings. The by laws establish a river corridor to protect the river's natural and scenic val-
                      ues by prohibiting roads, public recreation facilities, and development inconsistent with the river's
                      wilderness character.
                        Each municipality also has the option to tailor its conservation efforts through its zoning bylaws.
                      Towns  are encouraged to expand the buffer to include important natural features.  The degree of
                      restrictiveness of zoning within the protected corridor can be tailored to meet resource protection
                      needs.  This flexibility allows towns to implement more stringent measures if the community places
                      a relatively higher value on a particular area.
                        Deciding on a 100-foot buffer required considerable research and investigation of other com-
                      munities' experiences.  Minimum septic  system distance from the river, distances needed to fil-
                      ter out non-point source pollution, and buffer strips adopted by other communities were a few of
                      the factors considered.  All the communities adopted the bylaws over four years ago, and the
                                                            buffer appears to be working well, with no legal chal-
                                                        -   lenges to date.
                           The Role of Wetlands
                           in Flood Protection
               Scientists have just begun to understand the
            role of wetlands in protecting developed areas
            from flooding. Floods occur in peaks; that is,
            they do not occur along the entire stretch of a
            river simultaneously. As high water moves
            downstream, it spills over the stream's original
            banks, flooding everything in its wake and often
            damaging property.  Wetlands allow flood
            waters to spread out over a wide area, slow the
            flow of the water, and temporarily store it. This
            decreases the  size of floodpeaks and slows their
            movement. If wetlands are filled  in and the
            banks are altered (a process called channeliza-
            tion), developed areas can suffer more severe
            flood damage.
Contact:  Chris Curtis
         Project Manager
         Pioneer Valley Planning Commission
         26 Central Street
         West Springfield, MA 01089
         Phone:  (413)781-6045
         Fax:  (413)732-2593

a good example of an ecosystem protection plan that uses floodplain (and buffer) zon-
ing to preserve a river ecosystem (see across). Overlay, open-space, and conservation
zones can be applied to a specific resource with defined boundaries, such as a wet-
land, that is already  bound by a zoning ordinance. These zones apply additional
restrictions on development and other activities, over and above those in the underly-
ing ordinance, to ensure that a resource or ecosystem is protected from damage.  The
Urban Forestry Demonstration Project in New Jersey illustrates one New Jersey
county's use of overlay zones.

Other zoning approaches include cluster zoning and interim development controls.
Applied to a subdivided tract, cluster zoning ensures that development is concentrat-
        An innovative  demonstration project  in
        New Jersey has allowed five communi-
    ties to assess their unique environmental con-
    ditions and to involve citizens in improving
    the quality of city life through natural resource
      The Urban Forestry Demonstration Project
    includes  Mercer,  Middlesex, and Passaic
    counties,  and  the urban  communities  of
    Newark and East Orange.  Demonstration pro-
    jects  in the three counties  focused on long-
    term  resource protection, while in the urban
    areas,  neighborhood  revitalization  and
    improved resource  management are highlight-
      Mercer County' s Green Links Project has inventoried the interconnected network of streams, wet-
    lands, woodlands,  and open spaces remaining in the county.  The project has identified these
    resources as vulnerable to development and has targeted them for future protection as a component
    of the county's  comprehensive  natural resource map.  Middlesex County has devised a strategy to
    protect a large percentage of the remaining  forest land in the county through a model protection and
    management overlay zone covering  250  miles of continuous stream corridors.  Passaic County has
    completed a comprehensive natural resource management plan to provide a framework to guide the
    open-space and development plans for the  16 municipalities that make up the county.  These plan-
    ning  efforts have revealed a multitude of  high- priority projects at the  local  level for ecological
    restoration and enhancement.
      Newark and East Orange, as adjacent municipalities, share some common problems associated
    with neighborhood revitalization, restoration of vacant land, enhancement of riparian areas and city
    streets, and re-creation of neighborhood pride through community forestry activities.

                         Contact:  Bob Neville
                                  Program Manager
                                  USDA  Forest Service
                                   State and Private Forestry
                                  Durham, NH 03824
                                  Phone:  (603)868-7688
                                  Fax:  (603)868-7604

                             ed within a small portion of the tract, leaving large areas as open space.  The
                             GreenSpace Alliance in metropolitan Philadelphia is an example of a group using
                             cluster zoning to encourage the preservation of green space (see below). Interim
                                                                                     development controls
                                                                               ^=  include temporary ordi-
                                                                                     nances, such as a moratori-
                                                                                     um on building permits or
Pittsburgh's Split Tax
                               A highly successful example of a preferential assessment
                             is Pittsburgh's "split tax", which taxes owner- or tenant-
                             occupied downtown buildings, as well as buildings under
                             active renovation, at lower rates than abandoned and deteri-
              orating buildings.  Pittsburgh's "split tax" has revitalized the city by reduc-
              ing the number of abandoned or deteriorating buildings while increasing the
              city's overall property tax revenues. In addition, as abandoned or deteriorat-
              ing buildings are renovated, they provide valuable new commercial and resi-
              dential space within the city, thereby reducing pressure to build structures
              outside the downtown business district and community neighborhoods.
                                                         water and sewer connec-
                                                         tions, to slow growth in the
                                                         short term.

                                                         Property Taxes and
                                                         Municipal  Fees

                                                         Taxes or fees for services
                                                         can affect the behavior of
                                                         residents and developers in
                                                                   By encouraging cluster development as a means of pre-
                                                                   serving open space, Philadelphia is melding land con-
                                                               servation and development.  Although the population of
                                                               southeastern Pennsylvania dropped 3.6 percent in the last
                                                               20 years, over 175,000 acres of additional land was devel-
                                                               oped.  Without intervention, prospects for the future are
                                                               discouraging. Experts predict that an additional 173,000
                                                               acres of now open land — an area more than twice the size
                                                               of Philadelphia — will be developed by the year 2020.
                                                                  Metropolitan Philadelphia has responded to this threat
                                                               by forging the GreenSpace Alliance (GSA). The alliance
                                                               is working to foster coordinated planning among neigh-
                                                               boring municipalities as  one way to foster its goal of a
                                                               linked, regional  system  of protected  green spaces that
                                 preserve key agricultural, natural, and historic resources in the region.
                                   Land-use laws in the Philadelphia region require that individual townships zone to allow
                                 for all possible uses (such as industrial, residential, commercial) while also accepting a "fair
                                 share" of projected growth in the region. One method to achieve the GSA's goal is to use
                                 "zoning jointures" that allow neighboring municipalities to develop a single comprehensive
                                 plan and zoning ordinance.  This allows participating communities to account for all neces-
                                 sary uses, and to control future development for combined territories, allowing communities
                                 to maximize open space by  clustering development.  Jointures are allowed under the metro-
                                 politan planning code (MFC) but are seldom used in southeastern Pennsylvania.  The follow-
                                 ing figure compares typical development patterns under the MFC with land use under zoning
                                 jointures, where each square represents  a township and each circle represents development.
                                   One GSA pilot project with the Federation of Northern Chester County has developed a
                                 joint comprehensive plan with nine municipalities, laying the groundwork for joint zoning
                                 in the future. Other GSA projects include  the  Buckingham Township Project, which is
                                 using the transfer of development rights (TDR) to "transfer" the right to develop certain lots

ways that encourage ecosystem protection. For example, property tax breaks can be
given in return for agreements from landowners to protect habitat on their property or
to leave their property's shoreland in a natural state.  Alternatively, localities can pref-
erentially assess properties for taxes at a portion of their value if used in a manner
consistent with conservation goals (such as farming) or if left in a natural state (such
as a forestland). Increases in building permit processing fees can discourage building
or help fund conservation activities.

Performance Standards

Some localities have begun to  enact standards that not only control general uses, such
as commercial or industrial development, but also establish strict guidelines for how
tracts of land can be developed, regardless of use.  For example, some towns regulate
the placement or servicing of septic systems.  Alternatively, localities can assign a
tract of land with an impervious surface ratio that limits the amount of space that can
be covered by roads, sidewalks, parking, and other impenetrable surfaces. This is
intended to  limit runoff and other environmental problems and to encourage the use of
in agricultural areas to areas more appropriate for development
ment rights from local farmers in an agricultural "sending area"
designated "receiving area" adjacent to existing development.
  The alliance also works with the five counties in the region to
tion.  In two counties, over $150
million has been committed to the
purchase  of green spaces, but in
Delaware County voters rejected a
$100-million proposed open-space
program over the issue of taxes.
  Recently, the GSA completed a
comprehensive  GreenPlan  for
southeastern  Pennsylvania that
describes its agenda for  the cre-
ation of a linked regional system of
green spaces and the building of
green communities. The GSA now
is seeking  endorsement  from a
wide variety of organizations  and
interests to make this plan a reality.

Contact:  Patrick Stan-
         GreenSpace Alliance
          1211 Chestnut  Street, Suite 900
         Philadelphia, PA 19107
         Phone: (215)563-0250
         Fax: (215)563-0528
  Developers buy develop-
and then build on land in a

promote open-space protec-

Typical Jointures

Townships Planning



Townships Zoning
Together. Development is
Concentrated, Open Space
& Farmland Preserved.


                          gravel driveways or reduce the size of parking lots.  Finally, municipalities can require
                          developers and other parties to purchase performance bonds, which insure the locality
                          against damage caused to  ecosystems. Developers, for example, would purchase
                          these bonds from the local government. If ecosystems are damaged, the municipality
                          can use those funds to repair the damage.

                          Transfers of Development Rights (TDRs)

                          TDRs involve transferring the rights to develop a site or building, or a portion of a site
                          or building (including the "air rights" above it), to another site or building.  The state
                          or county separates the rights to build on a site from the deed, and allows the
                          landowner to sell these rights to a developer looking to develop in a predesignated
                          "receiving" area where the community wants to concentrate growth.  This often
                          allows the developer to exceed a zoning limit on the new  site or building. TDRs can
                          be used to protect farms, forests, and other areas  by shifting development from one
                          area and  concentrating that development elsewhere. (See the earlier description of the
                          Philadelphia GreenSpace initiative.)

                          Growth Planning in Local Communities

                          Many communities are developing comprehensive growth management plans that
                          combine  a number of land-use  strategies in an effort to concentrate development with-
                          in the city limits. Growth management techniques include:

                                n Development of "Brownfields" Sites — Using cluster or bonus zoning, com-
                                 munities can encourage re-development of "brownfields" sites, underutilized
                                 or abandoned areas such as railroad yards, warehouses, docks, or industrial
                                 sites. Because these areas are usually near or in the urban core of the commu-
                                 nity, this type of development both revitalizes urban areas and curbs sprawl by
                                 reducing pressure to  develop industrial areas outside of town.

                                n Infill and Minimum-Density Requirements — Infill development targets
                                 existing  but underused urban or suburban areas for development. If pockets of
                                 undeveloped or less developed land exist in these areas, communities can set
                                 infill or minimum-density requirements to increase development there. This
                                 reduces pressure to build in undeveloped areas.

                                n Urban Service Limits  and Urban Limit Lines — These techniques mark the
                                 farthest reaches of city services as well as the edges of the city itself.  To
                                 restrict development to city areas, planners can limit the degree to which utili-
                                 ty extensions (such as sewer lines) are granted beyond the city boundaries.

                                n Adequate Public Facilities Requirements — These requirements limit develop-
                                 ment to levels that the infrastructure currently can support and mandate that future
                                 funding sources for infrastructure be identified in all plans for new development.

                                n Increasing Public Transportation — Primarily intended to mitigate air pollu-
                                 tion, this technique involves increasing bus and subway service, implementa-
                                 tion of high-occupancy-vehicle (HOV) designations for commuter traffic,
                                 installing bike lanes and paths, creating pedestrian walkways, and designing
                                 other measures to reduce the use  of personal automobiles.

                 American Planning Association, 1313 E, Sixtieth Street, Chicago,
                 IL 60637-2891, phone: (312) 955-9100, offers many services and
                 publications. For example:

                 n  Planners Bookstore sells hundreds of useful guides, books,
                   reports, analytical tools, and bibliographies on a wide range of
                   planning topics, including land use, growth management, trans-
                   portation, zoning, geographic information systems, economic
                   analysis and development, and habitat protection.  The association
                   can also provide you with model conservation zoning ordinances.
      n Planners Advisory Service is a fee-based research service that can assist in
        developing strategies related to regional planning, land use, growth manage-
        ment, sustainable development, and most other planning topics.

      n Recommended publications available through the American Planning Association

        -  Journal of the American Planning Association, a scholarly journal pub-
           lished quarterly on a wide range of planning topics.
        -  Planning, a monthly magazine published for a general audience and profes-
           sional planners.
        -  APA Planning Advisory Service, Performance Controls for Sensitive
           Lands, 1975.
        -  Beatley, Timothy, Habitat Conservation Planning, University of Texas
           Press, 1994.
        -  Butler, Kent, Protecting Wildlife and Open Space,  1992.  90-minute VHS
        -  Endicott, Eve, Land Conservation through Public/Private Partnerships,
           Island Press, Washington, DC, 1993.
        -  Nelessen, Anton, Visions for a New American Dream, 1994.
        -  Smith, Herbert H., A Citizen's Guide to Zoning, American Planning
           Association Planners Press, Chicago, IL, 1993.
        -  Steiner, Frederick,  The Living Landscape: An Ecological Approach to
           Landscape Planning, McGraw Hill, 1990.

The following publications from other sources also might be useful:

      n Arendt, Randall, Designing Open Space Subdivisions - A Practical Step-by-Step
        Approach, Natural Lands Trust, Media, PA, 1996.

      " Beatley, Timothy and Greg Low, Planning for Tomorrow, The Nature
        Conservancy, Washington, DC, 1989.

      n Collins, Beryl R. and Emily W. B. Russell, eds., Protecting the New Jersey
        Pinelands, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ, ISBN 0-8135-1267-
        0,  1988. This book discusses the transfer-of-development-rights system set up
        to  preserve the New Jersey Pinelands.


                                  To Learn
                                                (continued from previous page)
                                     n Diamond, Henry L. and Patrick F. Noonan, Land Use in America:  The Report
                                       of the Sustainable Use of Land Project, Island Press, Washington, DC, 1996.
                                       This publication summarizes the major trends and controversies in land use,
                                       including the impact of urban sprawl on habitat,

                                     n Einsweiler, Robert C, and Deborah Miness, Managing Community Growth and
                                       Change, Volume I: Managing Growth and Change in Urban, Suburban, and
                                       Rural Settings, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA, October 1992,

                                     n Ewing, Reid, et al,, Best Development Practices: Doing the Right Thing and
                                       Making Money at the Same Time, Florida Department of Community Affairs,
                                       Tallahassee, FL, May 1995,  This guidebook provides recommendations for
                                       growth management that take into account financial interests of developers and
                                       the general public.  It also includes an excellent annotated bibliography,

                                     n Little, Charles E,, Greenways for America, The Johns Hopkins University
                                       Press, Baltimore, MD, 1990.

                                     n Mantell, Michael A., Stephen F. Harper, and Luther Propst, Creating Successful
                                       Communities, The Conservation Foundation, Washington, DC, ISBN 1-55963-
                                       014-0, 1990. In particular, Chapter 1 discusses conservation of agricultural
                                       land, Chapter 2 discusses rivers and wetlands, and Chapter 5 discusses the
                                       value of open space.

                                     n McHarg, Ian L., Design with Nature, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY,
                                       ISBN 0-471-55797-8, 1992. This book discusses the effects of development
                                       on various ecosystems and offers suggestions about how to minimize ecosys-
                                       tem damage from development.

                                     n Miness, Deborah and Robert C. Einsweiler, Managing Community Growth and
                                       Change, Volume II: Bibliography of Academic and Professional Literature on
                                       Growth and Growth Management,  Lincoln Institute of Land Policy,
                                       Cambridge, MA, October 1992.

                                     n Porter, Douglas R. and David A. Salvesen, Collaborative Planning for
                                       Wetlands and Wildlife, Island Press, Washington, DC, ISBN 1-55963-287-9,
                                       1995.  This book provides case studies  in protecting sensitive lands from

                                     n Templin, Elizabeth E., Managing Community Growth and Change, Volume III:
                                       Bibliography of Educational Material for Local Officials on Growth
                                       Management,  Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA, October 1992.

                                     "U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Office of Water, Protecting Coastal
                                       and Wetlands Resources: A Guide for Local Governments, EPA 842-R-92-
                                       002, Washington, DC, 1992. In particular, Chapter 3 addresses zoning tools,
                                       Chapter 4 addresses land acquisition, and Chapter 5 addresses the use of taxes,
                                       fees, and other incentives.

4.3    Strategies Based On Federal and State Laws and

Federal and state laws address a wide range of environmental issues.  Regulations
issued under federal and state laws set limits on releases of toxic substances, require
cleanup of contaminated sites (sometimes with government funding), or control spe-
cific practices (such as the management of underground storage tanks).  Many laws
require public notice and comment, offering communities a way to participate in the
regulatory process.  Some laws provide for citizen law suits to enforce their provisions
or impose penalties for violations.  This section
describes relevant federal and state laws and discuss-
es how to work with them.
Federal and State Laws Affecting

Federal and state lawmakers have introduced an
extensive set of laws designed to protect the environ-
ment. A complete discussion of these laws would be
far too lengthy for this resource book. However,
Table 4-1 presents a brief discussion of some federal
laws that may be applicable to your ecosystem.
Phone numbers for the suggested contact organiza-
tions are included in Appendix A.

State laws complement and expand upon many of the
federal laws.  They often are enacted when states
want more  stringent environmental requirements than
those called for by the federal government, where the
state has been delegated responsibility for implemen-
tation of a federal program, or when there is a specif-
ic, unique ecosystem or problem area that the state
government wishes to regulate. For example, state
laws may address coastal management issues, severe
air pollution (California), or widespread hazardous
waste contamination (New Jersey).
              EPA's Community
              XL Project
  To give communities the opportunity to
implement their own ideas for improving their
ecosystems, the U.S. EPA has developed the
Community XL program. Communities accept-
ed into the program have developed innovative
environmental protection plans that promise
superior environmental protection to what
would be achieved under the current regulatory
system. EPA then works with state and local
agencies to grant the community regulatory
flexibility to try the plan.
  To learn more about Community XL, contact
the Information Line, phone:  (703) 934-3241,
fax: (202) 260-8590, Internet Website:
http: // XL. To submit a
proposal for your community, submit four
copies of the proposal to Regulatory
Reinvention Pilot Projects, FRL 5322-9, Water
Docket, Mailcode 4101, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW,
Washington, DC 20460.
In addition, statewide growth management laws have been enacted by Florida,
Georgia, Maine, Maryland, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and
Washington.  Of these, seven have policies for curbing urban sprawl that require or
encourage contained development and strive to protect rural and natural areas (Maine,
Maryland, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington); two
(Georgia and Vermont) provide for special review and approval of large-scale pro-
jects; and two (New Jersey and Washington) have criteria for assessing new communi-
ty proposals  (Ewing, et al, 1995).

Working With Federal and State Laws

The following are examples of how federal and state laws and regulations may inter-
act with communities' ecosystem protection efforts:

                                                                Table 4-1
 Contacts/Opportunities for Local
          Clean Water Act
          (CWA) Section 402
The CWA covers a number of regulatory, funding,
and education programs aimed at protecting and
restoring the nation's surface waters. These
include a permitting system that limits the amount
and type of pollution that facilities and other indi-
vidual  sources can discharge.  Dischargers must
obey national discharge guidelines, as implement-
ed to achieve state water quality standards.
Usually, the Office of Water within the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency delegates this pro-
gram to the states.  Communities can ask the state
department of environmental protection for a review
of how well local industries are complying with pol-
lution discharge limits.  Also, the CWA has a number
of funding programs to help municipalities build
wastewater facilities and control polluted runoff from
farms, storm sewers, and other sources.
          Coastal Zone
          Management Act
          of 1972
This statute helps coastal states manage and pro-
tect coastal resources from threats such as devel-
opment, erosion, and pollution. States must devel-
op programs to control polluted runoff from farms,
storm sewers, and other sources that affect coastal
Administered by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration within the U.S.
Department of Commerce, this program provides tech-
nical assistance and grants to states in developing
coastal management plans.  Communities can ask their
state for an evaluation of whether development in
coastal areas is consistent with their state's plan, and
can seek state funding for projects in the community.
          Coastal Barrier
          Resources Act
This statute provides federal funding for protec-
tion of barrier islands.
Administered by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration within the U.S.
Department of Commerce.
          Policy Act (NEPA)
All federally funded projects and activities as well
as projects built on federal property (including
highways, ports, dams, power plants, airports,
drinking water plants and pipes, and sewage treat-
ment plants and pipes) must comply with NEPA,
which requires the submission of an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) describing
the project's effect on the local ecosystem as com-
pared to other alternatives.
This program is administered by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.  The community
can examine previous EISs to determine the effects
of similar projects on its ecosystems and can partici-
pate in public hearings on proposed development
          National Flood
          Insurance Program
This statute provides federally subsidized flood
insurance for those communities that have adopted
floodplain management regulations (e.g., wetlands
protection) that will minimize future flood damage.
Generally, flood insurance is required before feder-
ally guaranteed mortgages or loans can be issued.
This program is administered by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). By
incorporating floodplain management regulations
into local zoning ordinances and building codes,
communities can become eligible for floodplain
          Species Act (ESA)
This statute provides for the protection of endan-
gered wild plants and animals.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service administers the
ESA. As part of the process of determining which
plants and animals should be considered endangered,
the FWS conducts hearings to obtain public input.
Communities also can participate in the development
of Habitat Conservation Plans, which developers
must design if their proposed development affects an
endangered or threatened species.
          National Wild and
          Scenic Rivers Act
This statute protects extraordinary rivers from
damming and other forms of development.
The National Park Service, which administers the
NWSRA, manages all rivers that are protected.
Through its Rivers and Trails Assistance Program,
the Park Service also provides technical assistance to
states and localities in developing conservation plans
for rivers and river segments.
          North American
          Management Plan
This program was started in 1986 to enhance
waterfowl populations and habitats. The plan stip-
ulates the use of subsidies, financial incentives,
and tax adjustments favorable to landowners to
promote conservation.
Management of the plan is delegated to state and
regional levels, which work with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service as well as over 40 conservation
organizations.  Communities can get involved by ask-
ing authorities to assess whether local habitat is eligi-
ble for protection under the plan.

                                               Table 4-1  (continued)
                                                   Contacts/Opportunities for Local
  Reserve Program
                      The Conservation Reserve Program uses financial
                      incentives to encourage farmers to leave sensitive
                      lands, such as riparian zones and steep slopes, out
                      of agricultural production. The Wetland Reserve
                      Program is similar, focusing on wetlands.
                                                   The programs are administered by the Natural
                                                   Resource Conservation Service within the U.S.
                                                   Department of Agriculture. Local farmers can
                                                   enroll in the grant program, which involves sign-
                                                   ing 10-year agreements with the government for
                                                   the receipt of grant funds.
  Clean Water Act
  (CWA) Section 404
                      This section of the CWA regulates the discharge of
                      dredged material (silt excavated from the bottom
                      of a waterway) and fill into U.S. waters, including
                      wetlands, and establishes a permit program to
                      ensure compliance with environmental require-
                                                   This program is administered by the U.S.
                                                   Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water
                                                   and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. As a part
                                                   of the permitting process, the Corps holds hear-
                                                   ings on proposed dredge or fill discharge permits.
                                                   Communities can use these hearings as a forum
                                                   for expressing concerns about potential projects.
                      This statute discourages the conversion of wetlands
                      into farmland by making persons who raise crops on
                      wetlands ineligible for most federal farm benefits.
                                                   This program is administered by the U.S.
                                                   Department of Agriculture.
  Conservation and
  Recovery Act
                      RCRA regulates the design, location, operation,
                      and monitoring of new and old municipal landfills
                      and facilities that manage hazardous waste (e.g.,
                      landfills, recyclers, and incinerators). It also regu-
                      lates the generation and transport of hazardous
                      waste, requires cleanup of contaminated hazardous
                      waste facilities, and requires inspection and
                      cleanup of underground storage tanks at gas sta-
                      tions and other sites.
                                                   This program is administered by the Office of
                                                   Solid Waste and Emergency Response within the
                                                   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in con-
                                                   junction with state waste management agencies.
                                                   Permitting of hazardous waste management facili-
                                                   ties includes provisions for public participation;
                                                   communities may wish to take part in these
Clean Air Act
CAA regulations include permits to businesses
and industries to limit the amount of pollution
they emit to the air.  Development that would
increase air pollution is limited in areas that do not
meet federal air quality standards.
                                                                            The CAA requires that states develop plans for
                                                                            maintaining air quality and reducing air pollution.
                                                                            Emissions permitting includes provisions for pub-
                                                                            lic participation; communities may wish to take
  Mitigation and Air
  Quality Program
  under the
  Intermodel Surface
  Transportation and
  Efficiency Act
  (IS TEA)
                      ISTEA promotes mass transit, rails-to-trails pro-
                      grams, and regional transportation land-use plan-
                      ning. The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
                      Program provides grants for projects aimed at
                      reducing transportation-induced congestion, safety
                      hazards, and pollution.
                                                   This program is administered by the Federal
                                                   Highway Administration and Federal Transit
                                                   Administration under the Department of
                                                   Transportation. Communities can apply for
                                                   grants for projects that reduce traffic congestion
                                                   and improve air quality.
  Forestry Assistance
                      This Act provides technical and financial assis-
                      tance for both urban and rural forest management
                      and community development activities that protect
                      and restore ecosystems.
                                                   This program is administered by the USDA
                                                   Forest Service in cooperation with the state
                                                   forester in each of the 50 states.
  Preparedness and
  Community Right-
  To-Know Act
                      EPCRA requires facilities using hazardous chemi-
                      cals to notify the community of chemical spills or
                      leaks.  It also requires facilities to publish lists of
                      the hazardous chemicals used or stored on site and
                      to develop spill response plans.
                                                   At the local level, EPCRA is administered by a
                                                   Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC).
                                                   Through the LEPC, communities can find out what
                                                   hazardous chemicals are present in the area and
                                                   can participate in developing spill response plans.
  Federal Insecticide,
  Fungicide, and
  Rodenticide Act
                      This statute regulates the application of pesticides
                      and other pest control substances to crops.
                                                   Through a system of review and permitting, FIFRA
                                                   provisions can ban the application of substances
                                                   that may harm sensitive ecosystems. Communities
                                                   can take part in this permitting process.
1 Federal statutes not discussed here include a number of laws that regulate federal lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service,
 the Bureau of Land Management, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service.

                                n  Public Disclosure and Community Involvement Laws — Many laws have
                                  been enacted in recent years to promote the public disclosure of information.
                                  These include, for example, the Toxic Release Inventory, the Environmental
                                  Impact Statement (EIS) process described above, the Freedom of Information
                                  Act, which provides citizens the right to access to all types of federal govern-
                                  ment  information (except national security or confidential business informa-
                                  tion),  and requirements under the Intermodel Surface Transportation and
                                  Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and the Clean Air Act (CAA) for government evalua-
                                  tion of the impacts of development.

                                n  Land-Use Planning — The many land-use requirements and grant programs
                                  in federal laws (e.g., the Clean Air Act, the Coastal Zone Management Act,
                                  and the Flood Insurance Act)  support growth management and protection and
                                  restoration of habitats, farms,  forests, wetlands, and open space.

                                n  Supplemental Enforcement Program — The U.S. EPA's Supplemental
                                  Enforcement Program (SEP) is a compliance agreement program whereby the
                                  EPA requires public or private groups that have violated an EPA-administered
                                  law to restore or protect habitats or to modify their operations in an environ-
                                  mentally beneficial way, rather than paying a fine. Communities can be
                                  involved in negotiating a SEP agreement.

                           You can contact federal and state governments through their public information
                           offices, or you can contact the office in the relevant state  agency that administers the
                           program you're interested in.  The offices can provide you with information on the
                           specific requirements and resources of their programs, information on how to obtain
                                             Diamant, Rolf, I Glenn Eugster, and Christopher J. Duerksen, A
                                             Citizen's Guide to River Conservation, The Conservation
                                             Foundation, Washington, DC, ISBN 0-89164-082-7, 1984. Pages
                                             27-68 address laws and economic tools that apply to conservation
                              Eugster, J. Glenn, Riverwork Book, Mid-Atlantic Regional Office, Division of Parks
                              and Resource Planning, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior,
                              Washington, DC, 1988.

                              Porter, Douglas R. and David A. Salvesen, Collaborative Planning for Wetlands and
                              Wildlife, Island Press, Washington, DC, ISBN 1-55963-287-9, 1995. In particular, this
                              book discusses Special Area Management Plans, Habitat Conservation Plans, and other
                              alternatives for working with federal and state laws.

                              Stevenson, Jane H., Managing Community Growth and Change,  Volume IV:  Directory
                              of Federal Data Sources and Overview of State Data Needs and Activities in Growth
                              Management, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA, October 1992.

                              U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Planning for Small
                              Communities, Appendix B:  What Environmental Regulations Affect Your Community?,
                              Office of Regional Operations and State/Local Relations, Washington, DC, September
                              1994.  This appendix contains a summary of federal laws applicable to ecosystems and
                              describes how you can work with these laws to protect your ecosystem.


Collins, Beryl R. and Emily W. B. Russell, eds., Protecting the New Jersey Pinelands,
Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ, ISBN 0-8135-1267-0, 1988.

Diamant, Rolf, J. Glenn Eugster, and Christopher J. Duerksen, A Citizen's Guide to
River Conservation, The Conservation Foundation, Washington, DC, ISBN 0-89164-
082-7, 1984.

Diamond, Henry L. and Patrick F. Noonan, Land  Use in America:  The Report of the
Sustainable Use of Land Project, Island Press, Washington, DC.

Endicott, Eve,  Land Conservation Through Public/Private Partnerships, Island Press,
Washington, DC,  1993.

Ewing, Reid, et al., Best Development Practices:  Doing the Right Thing and Making
Money at the Same Time, Florida Department of Community Affairs, May 1995.

Greenfield, Jennifer and  Brian M. LeCouteur, Chesapeake Bay Community Action
Guide, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DC, May

Mantell, Michael A., Stephen F. Harper, and Luther Propst, Creating Successful
Communities, The Conservation Foundation, Washington, DC,  ISBN 1-55963-014-0,

McHarg, Ian L.,  Design with Nature, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, ISBN
0-471-55797-8, 1992.

Porter, Douglas R., ed., Growth Management: Keeping on Target?, Urban Land
Institute, in association with the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Washington, DC,

Southern Watersheds Committee, Proposal for Virginia Beach Agricultural Reserve
Program, 1994.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Planning for Small
Communities, Office of Regional Operations and  State/Local Relations, Washington,
DC, September 1994.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Protecting Coastal and
Wetlands Resources: A Guide for Local Governments,  Washington, DC, 1992.


FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-1
                      Evaluating  And   Choosing
                      Strategies  For  Ecosystem
                      Protection  Efforts
            An understanding of the interaction between community life and ecosystems, coupled
            with knowledge of ecosystem protection strategies, provides the foundation for select-
            ing ecosystem protection strategies appropriate for a given community. This chapter
            discusses this selection process.

            5.1    Initial Considerations

            The following criteria can be used to narrow down the choices of strategies and iden-
            tify the best ones for addressing specific ecosystem problems.

                n  The Advantages of Voluntary Strategies and Local Activities — Projects
                  based on voluntary action and local activities may be easier to control and
                  implement, and may achieve results faster.

                n  Environmental Justice — The benefits and burden of ecosystem management
                  decisions may or may not be distributed equitably among community mem-
                  bers. Certainly, you would want to avoid a decision that might put the bulk of
                  the burdens on an area or group that is poorly equipped to shoulder them, par-
                  ticularly if the majority of the benefits would go somewhere else in the com-
                  munity. Therefore, principles of fairness say that "environmental justice" be
                  considered in community-based projects and goals.  The broadest possible
                  stakeholder participation will ensure that all groups within a community are
                  treated fairly regardless of race, religion, gender, or economic position.

                n  Addressing Stressors and Achieving Community Goals — In some cases,
                  preventing a detrimental activity from occurring is not by itself enough to
                  enable an ecosystem to recover. The affected resource may have to be
                  restored. For example, reducing or stopping development near a nesting site
                  may not necessarily cause birds to repopulate; the community may need to
                  plant certain trees or build nesting sites as well.  In this case, multiple strate-
                  gies may be appropriate.

                n  The Legal Feasibility of the Strategies — Local, state, and federal officials
                  are a good source of advice on how to create protection strategies that will
                  work within the requirements and restrictions of all applicable laws, ordi-
                  nances, and regulations.

                "  Monetary Expense and Time Commitments — The best strategies are those

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-2
                                        that cost the least money to achieve a given goal. However, some strategies
                                        that seem less costly may cost participants a lot of time.  For example, acquir-
                                        ing land initially may seem too expensive, yet finding a donor may require
                                        less effort than trying to change a land-use ordinance.  Both the initial level of
                                        effort to get a program in place and the continuing effort required to run it are
                                        potential considerations.

                                      n Cosmetic or Temporary  Solutions or the Big Picture — Often communities
                                        find it helpful to combine short-term  projects with efforts to find  longer term
                                        solutions to environmental problems  — such as encouraging recycling and
                                        composting while working with other local communities to find additional
                                        space for the disposal of materials that can't be recycled. The Kissimmee
                                        River Basin restoration initiative in Florida is an example of an ecosystem
                                        protection effort in which participants focused on reversing fundamental prob-
                                        lems rather than making superficial changes (see below).

                                      n Stakeholders Outside the Community — A community's ecosystem may
                                        have significance to people living in  other parts of the country or world, espe-
                                        cially if it is home to rare and endangered species or extraordinary habitat
                                                                     HjHhe Kissimmee River  restoration  highlights  the
                                                                     JL importance of focusing on  the  root causes  of
                                                                     ecosystem degradation.  Historically, a 103-mile stretch
                                                                     of the Kissimmee River meandered along its natural
                                                                     path through south-central  Florida without  the con-
                                                                     straints of man-made levees, channels, and dams con-
                                                                     trolling its flow.  In the 1960s, the river was channel-
                                                                     ized by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Areas that
                                                                     periodically  had received the floodwaters of  the
                                                                     Kissimmee in the past (approximately 40,000 acres of
                                                                     wetlands) were drained to allow massive commercial,
                                                                     residential, and resort development in the Orlando area
                                                                     and surrounding agricultural regions.
                                                                       The broadleaf marsh and wet prairie communities of
                                   the floodplain were converted to pasture lands, resulting in significant loss of fish and wildlife
                                   habitat and destruction of the wetlands'  food webs and hydrologic cycles. Waterfowl use of
                                   the lower basin decreased by over 90 percent. Suitable habitats for wading birds, forage fish,
                                   and larger riverine fish also were sharply reduced.  Since channelization, the river has lower
                                   dissolved oxygen levels and poorer water quality due to nutrient loading from agricultural and
                                   urban runoff and discharges.  Consequently, these  nutrients are reaching Lake Okeechobee
                                   and increasing the rate of eutrophication.
                                      In the early 1970s, soon after the river was channelized, public  concern and support
                                   increased for restoration  of lost environmental benefits associated with the river and its for-
                                   mer natural floodplain. By the early 1980s, fast- paced development and greater understand-
                                   ing of adverse environmental impacts led to the creation of the Kissimmee River Resource
                                   Planning and Management Committee (KRRPMC) in 1984. The committee was comprised of
                                   35 constituencies, including landowners as well as agricultural, environmental, municipal,

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM  Page 5-3
                       (such as estuaries or marshes). These resources may have value beyond what
                       that community assigns to them directly.   Similarly, communities may be
                       stakeholders in areas down stream or down wind if their actions have impacts
                       in those places.

                     n Existing Institutions and Programs — Rather than starting from scratch,
                       communities often can build on the efforts of other local, state, or federal pro-
                       grams. Some of the stakeholders already participating in a community's effort
                       may be members of these organizations and can provide firsthand information
                       on relevant projects already under way. Examples of some types of organiza-
                       tions that may have similar programs include:

                           -  Watershed Associations - These work to ensure water quality in
                              a region.

                           -  Cooperative Extension Services - These are sponsored by the U.S.
                              Department of Agriculture and assist farmers in protecting their land
                              and preventing pesticide runoff and erosion.

                           -  Land Trusts - These organizations purchase land to be preserved in its
               county, state, and federal authorities. Restoration of the Kissimmee River has hinged large-
               ly upon the support and strength of the KRRPMC, with funding coming largely from feder-
               al and state sources.
                  To carry out the proposed restoration, the state  of Florida, with support from the
               KRRPMC, developed a phased approach to backfilling channelized stretches of the river.
               The first phase of the plan calls for increasing the storage capacity of upper basin lakes to
               provide continuous and more naturally variable downstream river flow. The second phase
               will start by backfilling three to five miles of the canal, then creating one to three miles of
               new river channel and removing levees.
                  By diverting river flow and restoring natural wetland flooding,  water  quality will be
               improved as wetlands filter out sediments and nutrients, enhancing fish and wildlife habitat
               quality and diversity. By re-creating natural ecological interactions, the river system's envi-
               ronmental,  recreational, and cultural functions will be reestablished.  Once complete, near-
               ly two thirds of the original 50,000 acres of floodplain wetlands in the Kissimmee River sys-
               tem will be restored.  The effort required to reach this level of restoration is proving to be
               an admirable accomplishment. It is important to note that, even after adjusting for inflation,
               restoring the ecosystem is costing far more than the actions that caused the damage in the
               first place.
                                     Contact:  Patricia Strayer
                                               South Florida Water Management District
                                               P.O. Box V
                                               West Palm Beach, FL 33042
                                               Phone:  (561)687-6496
                                               Fax:  (561)687-6729

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-4
                                       efore  organizing a  new community-based
                                      (•ecosystem protection initiative, some commu-
                                   nities have chosen to tap into other existing local
                                   groups that have interests in conservation, econom-
                                   ic development, or planning.  The Yampa River
                                   Basin Partnership succeeded in its efforts by draw-
                                   ing on existing groups and encouraging them to
                                   undertake  a comprehensive and coordinated effort
                                   to create a sustainable ecosystem and community.
                                      The Yampa Valley in northwest Colorado faces
                                   many growth, development, and natural resource
                                   issues.  The area is home to the resort town of
                                   Steamboat Springs  and  the Yampa River water-
                                   shed. The Yampa River, a relatively undisturbed
                                   river in the region, is a source of pride and concern
for the community.  The region has experienced rapid population growth, creating concern
about the river's  habitat. Air pollution is also an issue in the region, affecting wilderness
areas and scenic vistas.
   For many years, groups such as Trout Unlimited, the Bureau of Land Management, and
local city councils worked independently to address single issues, such as economic devel-
opment, fish conservation, or recreation.  Organizations acted without knowledge of the
other groups' actions or even existence. Lack of coordination among groups meant that they
duplicated efforts and tangible progress on development and natural resource issues was lim-
ited. Furthermore, these issues are deeply interrelated, and long-term  solutions could not
be accomplished without coordination. For instance, preserving water quality in the Yampa
                                              natural state for public enjoyment. They include national organizations
                                              such as The Nature Conservancy and the Conservation Fund, as well
                                              as local land trusts.

                                           -  Conservation and Environmental Organizations - These include the
                                              Sierra Club, National and state Audubon Societies and the American
                                              Water Resources Association.

                                These organizations already may be working on a strategy your community has identi-
                                fied. They may offer key resources such as experts on staff that you can use to further
                                your effort. Communities also have formed umbrella organizations that help keep dif-
                                ferent organizations informed of each other's actions and help them work with each
                                other. The Yampa River Basin Partnership in Northwest Colorado is an example of
                                such an organization (see above).
                                5.2    A Hypothetical Community Choosing Its Strategy

                                To get a clearer picture of what a final strategy might look like, consider a hypotheti-
                                cal community that wants to improve the quality of its harbor, called "Sunrise Bay".
                                Rapid growth in this community has led to development of coastal areas and pollution

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-5
               River could not be ensured without the creation of a county-wide development plan for river-
               front property.
                 As a result, local mayors and city council members recognized the advantage of merging
               all groups into a single cohesive partnership. To further this effort, community leaders con-
               vened a conference to discuss the idea. Over 260 members of the business, non-profit, and
               government community attended the conference where the Yampa River Basin Partnership
               was created.  Attendees also developed an organizational structure and set goals for the part-
                 Today, the Yampa River Basin Partnership is a successful effort that works to preserve the
               watershed and the quality of life in the region through coordinated natural resource conser-

                                    Contacts:  Wendy DuBord, Co-coordinator
                                              Yampa River Basin Partnership
                                              P.O. Box 775088
                                              Steamboat Springs, CO 80477
                                              Phone:  (970)879-2060

                                              Ben Beall, Co-coordinator
                                              Routt County
                                              P.O. Box 775398
                                              Steamboat Springs, CO 80477
                                              Phone:  (970)879-0108
                                              Fax:  (970)879-3992
               of inshore waters by runoff. The community's overarching goals are to reduce pollu-
               tion and prevent further loss of key ecosystems.  In the category of voluntary activi-
               ties, community members have decided to:

                    n Organize a beach cleanup every six months, where volunteers spend a
                      day picking up trash

                    n Organize biannual household hazardous waste pickups and a storm drain sten-
                      ciling project to reduce hazardous waste pollution of the bay

                    n Organize a wetland planting day, where volunteers plant grasses to provide
                      stability to the bay's wetlands

                    n Organize a festival that highlights the recreational activities provided by the
                      bay to boost nature-based tourism

                    n Encourage owners of beachfront property to donate or offer for sale to a land
                      trust the development rights (easements) to their property between their build-
                      ings and the waterfront.
               In the category of local government tools, the community is implementing:

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-6
                                    n Regulations to reduce septic tank leaks

                                    " Improvements to the storm sewer system to reduce runoff to the harbor

                                    n Zoning ordinances that require clustering of residential developments within or
                                      next to existing urban residential or commercial development.

                               5.3   Analyzing the Socioeconomic  Impacts of Strategies

                               Various ecosystem protection strategies have different effects on economic and social
                               conditions. Some strategies or combinations of strategies will likely yield the best
                               overall future conditions for the ecosystems in your region and the human communi-
                               ties that are a part of them.  This section discusses how local business, government,
                               and residents might be affected and how to analyze the outcomes of your strategy.

                               Effects on Key Segments of the Community

                               Analysis of effects on the business community includes not only short-run effects, but
                               also longer term effects. For example, one strategy may call for reducing the rate of
                               harvesting local shellfish, which  could hurt local shellfishers in the short run.
                                                          _   However, this strategy would leave the shellfish beds
                                                              in much better condition in 10 or 20 years than
                                                              would a strategy of harvesting all of the  shellfish
                   Nature-based tourism is travel and recreation
                 for the appreciation of nature.  The fastest
                 growing segments of this industry include bird
                 and other wildlife watching, hiking and back-
                 packing, photography, boating, camping, and
                 picnicking. In 1991, Americans spent $4.4 bil-
                 lion for food and lodging on wildlife viewing
                 trips, $198 million for guide services, and $88.6
                 million for equipment rentals.
                   Properly managed, nature tourism can
                 enhance the economic well-being of residents.
                 Communities can promote nature tourism by
                 researching the special environmental amenities
                 provided by the community and highlighting
                 them — through printed material, festivals, or
                 other events.
                   For more information about nature tourism
                 and how to get your community involved, con-
                 tact the Office of Sustainable Ecosystems and
                 Communities (OSEC), phone (202) 260-5339, at
                 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for a
                 copy of OSEC Issue Brief #1: Nature-Based
                 Tourism and for other informative reports.
                               Likewise, ecosystem protection strategies affect both
                               businesses that profit from extracting resources as
                               well as companies that benefit from healthy ecosys-
                               tems. For example, a company that rents sailboats
                               likely would be helped by elimination of floating
                               mats of algae on the local lake. Other businesses that
                               depend on tourist revenues, such as restaurants and
                               hotels, also would benefit.

                               Healthy ecosystems can benefit local business in less
                               obvious ways as well. For example, some companies
                               give serious consideration to local environmental
                               amenities when making decisions about where to
                               locate new operations. In many instances, employees
                               consider an attractive location to be an important fea-
                               ture of their job.

                               Finally,  strategies have "ripple effects" through the
                               local economy. In addition to industries directly
                               affected  by your plan (for example, commercial
                               harbor tour or "dinner tour" operators),  there are
                               secondary impacts on businesses that sell to, or buy
                               from, directly affected businesses (for instance, boat

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-7
              builders, local marinas, restaurants, and other service industries). Later in this chap-
              ter we discuss analytic tools for assessing this kind of ripple effect.

              Local Government
              Most local governments rely upon a combination of property taxes, sales taxes, and
              fees to fund schools, roads, parks, utilities (including water, sewer, and recycling), and
              other city services.  Changing zoning laws and tax policies to limit sprawl and protect
              wildlife habitats can reduce the cost of municipal services. Providing services and
              infrastructure to support lower-density developments, particularly those located far
              from a community's center, costs considerably more than providing infrastructure and
              services to higher-density development near the community (Bank of America, 1995).
              They also cost communities significantly more than farmland — one study estimates
              that for every tax dollar collected from low-density development, municipalities spend
              $1.36 on services, whereas for each tax dollar collected on farmland, municipalities
              spend 21 cents on services (American Farmland Trust, 1991). Discouraging low-den-
              sity development, such as strip malls, on the edge of your community while encourag-
              ing medium-density townhouse development in the middle of your community can
              reduce the cost of providing schools, roads, parks, water, recycling, sewage, and other
              city services. Under certain conditions, medium- to high-density developments built
              in the center of a town can even yield greater profits to the developer and landowners
              than low-density developments built on the edge of town or in rural areas.

              Local Residents and Quality of Life
              The most direct effect on quality of life stems from new activities that can be
              enjoyed as a result of protecting local ecosystems.  Local residents may have more
              opportunities for recreation such as swimming, boating, hiking, picnicking, hunting
              and fishing, or  cross-country skiing.  Even if they don't engage in recreational
              activities, people may enjoy the improved appearance of the community. People
              who don't use or even  see protected natural resources may still place value on pre-
              serving them for future generations or derive value simply from knowing that they
              exist. In particular, some people are concerned with extraordinary ecosystems (such
              as coral reefs and hot springs), endangered  species,  and the diversity of species. In
              addition, steps that a community takes to reduce risks to local ecosystems may also
              improve human health.

              Ways to Present  Options

              All of the considerations described  above can make for a complex decision when
              looking at options for ecosystem protection.  A simple way to present these options to
              capture all the various implications they have for the community is to make a chart
              summarizing the pros and cons of each strategy.  Table 5-1 presents an example for
              the strategy chosen by the  hypothetical community  introduced above that  wants
              to improve  the quality of  "Sunrise Bay". The community has filled out Table 5-1
              for each set of strategies it considered.  This effort included asking different business-
              es and residents what they themselves consider the pros and cons of the plan.  Our
              hypothetical community determined that:

                    n Some businesses will profit from increased shellfishing harvests, but other
                     businesses will have to pay for the increased costs of complying with sewer
                     regulations.  Developers will be restricted in their choice of development
                     plans (which will reduce the value of some properties), but may incur savings

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-8
                                           in some development costs through clustering.

                                          The municipality may spend less to provide city services to new residents
                                           because of cluster developments.  The conservation of open space also may
                                           enhance property values and increase property tax revenues.  On the other
                                           hand, the town will have to pay for storm sewer improvements.

                                                               Table 5-1
                               Effects on
n Increased revenues and
  employment associated
  with commercial
  enterprises related to
  nature-based tourism,
  recreation, and
  commercial shell-
                            New jobs created in sewer
                            design and
                            Decreased residential
                            development costs (such
                            as the reduced cost of
                            building roads)
                            Increased value of land
                            near habitat and protected
                            open space
  Monetary, time, and
  paperwork costs of com-
  pliance with sewer regula-
                            Costs for infrastructure
                            improvements to support
                            nature-based tourism
                                Economic Effects on
                                Municipality or State
n Decreased capital construction and
  service costs associated with
  reduced sprawl
                                                       n  Potential tax revenue increases
                                                         from property value increases
                             n Increased revenues from fees
                               for beach attendance and boat
  Cost of storm sewer improvements,
  including capital costs as well as
  hiring inspectors and holding hear-
                               Cost of implementing septic tank
                                                         Cost of developing and implement-
                                                         ing new zoning ordinances
                                       Effects on  Residents'
                                            Quality of Life
Increased opportunity for water- and
land-based recreation
                                                                                              Decreased health risk for swimmers
                                                                                              Aesthetic value
                                       Intrinsic value placed on harbor
                                       cleanliness among those not
                                       directly using the bay
Reduced private space
                                                                                              Cost of compliance with septic tank
                                       Time and effort involved in beach
                                       cleanup, wetland planting, and

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM  Page 5-9
                    n Residents' quality of life will improve
                      because of increased recreational opportuni-
                      ties, reduced health risks for swimmers,
                      improved aesthetics as a result of the volun-
                      teer activities, and because people take plea-
                      sure in knowing that the harbor is healthy
                      and that it will be available for their children
                      to enjoy. On the other hand, residents will
                      have to make do with  smaller lots on which
                      to build houses and will have to pay to
                      upgrade their septic systems.

              Techniques for Analyzing the Pros and Cons

              Beyond considering who is affected by an ecosystem
              protection strategy, communities can evaluate the
              magnitude of the impacts on different community
              members. Getting a sense of just how much people
              will be affected by your plan allows you to decide
              whether it should be modified somehow to ensure
              community stability.  For example, our hypothetical
              community might determine that the benefits for
              charter boat businesses are not large, and that the
              sewer regulations will be extremely expensive and
              would put a great strain on the municipality's ability
              to provide other services.  This information may lead
              the community to improve the sewer system to
              accommodate new development. Alternatively, the
              community may decide that the benefits of this kind
              of business do not outweigh the costs of improved
              infrastructure  and decide against steps that stimulate
              this kind of ecotourism.
              Economic issues such as effects on local business or city tax revenues lend them-
              selves to more quantitative types of analyses. The analyses communities pursue
              depend on the strategies under consideration; it is impossible to describe the full
              range of analyses here. However, two types of analyses stand out as potentially use-
              ful for assessing the magnitude of the impacts: municipal fiscal analysis and regional
              economic impact modeling.

              Municipal Fiscal Analysis
              Municipal fiscal analysis involves determining how local strategies may affect the
              finances of the municipality.  Some ecosystem protection strategies will have clear,
              direct effects on municipal funds. For example, in our hypothetical community, the
              municipality would have to pay to make improvements to the sewer system.  Another
              community's plan might call on the municipality to purchase land or easements for
              conservation purposes. Your strategies might have less obvious effects on municipal
              finances, some of which have been mentioned above. These may include changes in
              the cost of providing services and in property tax revenue.   Some of these costs may
              be reduced by acquiring low-cost loans for the development of publicly owned sani-
              The Cost of Growth
              in New Hampshire
  Like many other states experiencing signifi-
cant growth, New Hampshire is finding that
while much of its new development increases
tax revenues for towns, a significant portion of
new development drains more funds from
municipal budgets than it gives back in taxes.
Municipalities are finding that they have to
spend too much for roads, schools, and other
infrastructure projects.
  These circumstances led authors David
Harrigan and Kathy Morse to outline a method
for towns to determine the cost of new residen-
tial development. This involves adding the
prospective property tax and auto registration
fees to develop a total revenue estimate per
household. Then, the authors subtract total
prospective school and non-school expenditures
per  household, as well as the property taxes that
would have been paid on the undeveloped land.
If this final figure is negative, the development
will cost the municipality more than it will con-
tribute in tax revenue.
  For more information, see:  Harrigan,
David and Kathy Morse, The Cost of Growth,
Economic Benefits of Land Protection. Land
Trust Alliance, Washington, DC, April 1994.

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-10
                                tary treatment plants through the EPA's State Revolving Fund.  Likewise, costs for
                                public education on remediation of hazardous waste sites may be partially covered
                                through an EPA Technical Assistance Grant (for more information on TAG grants you
                                can contact the EPA's RCRA Hotline listed in Appendix A or your EPA Regional
                                office). Your community also may receive increased revenue from access fees.
                                Cleaning up  a harbor or a lake or preserving public land may lead to an increase in
                                attendance at public parks and beaches.  If the municipality charges admission to these
                                areas, an increase in attendance means that revenues will go up.

                                Our hypothetical community could apply municipal fiscal analysis to estimate the
                                change in service costs associated with reduced sprawl, including time spent on
                                garbage pickup and miles of pipeline laid to hook up to town water supplies. The
                                community also may want to estimate potential increases in property values and the
                                resulting increase in property tax revenues.  Officials in your town assessor's or pub-
                                lic works offices can provide guidance on potential municipal fiscal impacts of
                                                    Jackson, Ted and Rosemary Infante, eds., Economic Benefits of
                                                    Land Protection, Land Trust Alliance, 900 Seventeenth Street NW,
                                                    Washington, DC, April 1994, phone: (202) 785-1410. This publi-
                                                    cation includes the following articles:

                                       n Brabec, Elizabeth, On the Value of Open Spaces, Scenic America Technical
                                         Information Series,  Volume 1, No. 2,1992.  This article discusses how open
                                         space can increase the value of existing developments because residents want
                                         to be near undisturbed natural areas.

                                       n Harrigan, David and Kathy Morse, The Cost of Growth, Forest Notes. Spring
                                         1989. This article provides a simple method for estimating how much a devel-
                                         opment will cost the municipal government, and how to compare that estimate
                                         to the costs of keeping the land undeveloped,

                                       n Miller, Stephen, The Economic Benefits of Open Space, Isleboro  Islands Trust,
                                         ME, May 11, 1992. This article discusses how open space can increase the
                                         value of existing developments because of the appeal of undisturbed natural

                                       n Nantucket Land Council, Inc., Balancing Today's Development & Tomorrow's
                                         Taxes, 1989. This article discusses how Nantucket, an island in Massachusetts
                                         heavily dependent on nature-based tourism, is controlling development to
                                         ensure the health of the tourism industry.

                                       n Smith, Van, Protecting Rivers, Trails, and Greenways Reaps Economic
                                         Returns, (Exchange, Summer 1991). This article discusses the  many ways that
                                         protecting ecosystems can provide direct economic benefits to  the community.

                                       n Thomas, Holly L,, The Economic Benefits of Land Conservation, Technical
                                         Memo of the Dutchess County Department of Planning and Development,
                                         February 1991.  This article discusses the reasons why land conservation is
                                         often less expensive for local governments than development.

                                   American Farmland Trust, Alternatives for Future Urban Growth in California's
                                   Central Valley:  The Bottom Line for Agriculture and Taxpayers, American Farmland
                                   Trust, Washington, DC, 1995. This publication discusses how urban  sprawl would
                                   reduce agriculture  in California's Central Valley and estimates the additional costs that
                                   taxpayers would bear.

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-11
               strategies you are considering.

               Regional Economic Impact Modeling
               As noted earlier, your plan may affect a number of sectors indirectly (such as farm-
               ers selling produce to restaurants), as well as having direct impacts. A technique
               called regional economic impact modeling can provide estimates of both direct and
               indirect effects.

               Regional economic impact modeling uses computer programs (models) to track the
               effects of a single economic change on the larger economy — like the ripples on a
               pond when you throw in a stone.  Our hypothetical community, for example, can use
               regional economic impact modeling to estimate the total effect on the regional econo-
               my of an increase in commercial shellfishing. The estimate includes both the
               increased revenues enjoyed by commercial fishermen as well as the increased rev-
               enues of local shipbuilders and ship repair shops, net manufacturers, and other related
                 American Farmland Trust, Making a Positive Contribution, American Farmland, pp. 2-
                 3, Fall 1991.  This article discusses the difference in tax revenue from developed and
                 agricultural land.

                 Burchell, Robert W., et al., Development Impact Assessment Handbook, Urban Land
                 Institute, Washington, DC, ISBN 0-87420-743-6, 1994. This document provides a
                 comprehensive discussion of how to analyze the environmental, social, fiscal, and eco-
                 nomic effects of real estate development.  A computer model is provided on diskette.

                 Doucette, Robert, et al., The Comparative Economics of Residential Development and
                 Open Space Conservation, Allagash Environmental Institute, University of Maine,
                 Portland, ME, 1977.

                 Fox, Tom, Urban Open Space: An Investment That Pays: Real Estate Values, The
                 Neighborhood Open Space Coalition, New York, NY, 1990. This report describes the
                 contribution that open space makes to the economies of large cities, highlighting
                 impacts on real estate values, public health, city image, and other factors.

                 Frank, James E., The Costs of Alternative Development Patterns: A Review of the
                 Literature, Urban Land Institute, Washington, DC, ISBN 0-87420-695-2, 1989.  This
                 publication reviews a number of studies showing that low-density, sprawling develop-
                 ment is more expensive than compact development.

                 Freedgood, Julia, Is Farmland Protection a Community Investment?  How to Do a
                 Cost of Community Services Study, American Farmland Trust, Washington, DC, 1993.

                 Hulsey, Brett, Sprawl Costs Us All:  How Uncontrolled Sprawl Increases Your
                 Property Taxes and Threatens Your Quality of Life, Sierra Club Midwest Office,
                 Madison, WI, 1996. This publication gives estimates of the cost of urban sprawl to
                 resident taxpayers and provides advice  on how community members can work to
                 reduce sprawl.

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-12
                                industries. If you want to implement the model, economists in your city government
                                or at a local college or university can help.
                                5.4    Adapting Strategies to Changing Situations  and
                                                    The Minnesota IMPLAN Group (MIG), located in Stillwater,
                                                    Minnesota, has designed a regional economic impact modeling pro-
                                                    gram called IMPLAN. MIG licenses the software and can be hired
                                                    to perform regional economic impact analyses.
                                   Useful publications include:

                                       n Byrum, Oliver, Old Problems in New Times, American Planners Association
                                         Press, Chicago, IL, 1992.

                                       n Coughlin, Cletus C. and Thomas B. Mandelbaum, A Consumer's Guide to
                                         Regional Economic Multipliers, Review of the Federal Reserve Bank of St.
                                         Louis. Vol. 73, No. 1, pp. 19-32, January/February 1991.  This article provides a
                                         short description of regional economics in language that can be understood by

                                       n Hustedde, Ronald, Ron Shaffer, and Glen Pulver, Community Economic
                                         Analysis: A How To Manual, North Regional Center for Rural Development,
                                         Iowa State University, Ames, IA, 1995.  This manual provides instructions for
                                         making calculations using local economic data that can help communities under-
                                         stand then- economies.

                                       n National Park Service, Economic Impact of Protecting Rivers, Trails, and
                                         Greenway Corridors: A Resource Book, National Park Service, Department of
                                         the Interior, Washington, DC, 1995. This resource book provides examples of
                                         how greenways and parks benefit local economies and gives practical guidance
                                         on how to estimate these benefits in your community.

                                   For more information on sustainable communities:

                                       n  Scruggs, Patricia, Guidelines for State Level Sustainable Development, Center
                                          for Policy Alternatives, Washington, DC, September 1993. This document sur-
                                          veys various international, national, and state programs to promote sustainable
                                          development.  It suggests ways in which various activities do and do not pro-
                                          mote sustainability and provides examples of programs, some of which are rele-
                                          vant at the local level as well.

                                       n Region 3 of the U.S. EPA is beginning an effort to develop a "Green
                                         Communities Assistance Kit", which would be available to communities seeking
                                         to become economically and ecologically sustainable. This assistance kit will
                                         provide instruction on public outreach, visioning, socioeconomic analysis, envi-
                                         ronmental planning, implementation, and indicators.  For more information, con-
                                         tact Susan McDowell, U.S. EPA Region 3, 841 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia,
                                         PA, 19107, phone: (215)566-2739.

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-13
                     New Information
              Chapters 2 and 3 discussed the importance of indicators in setting goals and
              assessing ecosystem health. Indicators show whether the strategies the com-
              munity has chosen are having the desired effects on ecosystems, the economy,
              and the quality of life. In particular, effective indicators can:

                   n Tell the community how well its strategies are working; namely, what
                     is going well or what might need to be changed

                   n Help the community see the full effects of ecosystem planning and
                     management on the ecosystem itself as well as  on the quality of life
                     and the economic health of the community

                   n Help the community decide how to focus community efforts and
                     resources more efficiently and equitably.

              For example, our hypothetical community can use the following indicators to
              measure its progress toward revitalizing  "Sunrise Bay":

                   n Assess the health or abundance of local wetlands by calculating
                     increases in the number of acres  of wetlands and the abundance and
                     diversity of wetland-dependent species

                   n Assess the impact of the plan on the local fishing industry and the
                     health of local fisheries by examining the change in pounds of fish
                     landed per unit of effort (such as hours of fishing) compared to a base

                   n Assess the plan's impact on the local quality of life by calculating
                     increases in beach attendance.

              The Darby Partners in Columbus, Ohio (discussed on following page) chose a
              number of different indicators to measure their progress.

              Community changes and new information may require  changes in the ecosys-
              tem protection plan as well. The changing visions and  desires of stakeholders
              can provide information needed to fine-tune the ecosystem protection plan.
              Continuous monitoring of the ecosystem protection project and its results
              indicates which goals the plan is not meeting so that new strategies can be
              developed, and highlights goals that should be changed to meet the needs of a
              changing community.

              Reasons for Adapting the Ecosystem Protection Plan

              Responding to New Information
              Projects aimed at improving environmental, ecosystem, social, and economic
              conditions deal with very complex and interrelated systems.  New information
              may become available that  enhances your understanding of the system.  The
              following types of information could affect your ecosystem protection plans:
                   n New technologies may be developed that can better solve environmen-

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM  Page 5-14
                                         tal problems. For example, a new treatment process at the local sewage treat-
                                         ment plant might reduce harmful releases to surface water, eliminating the
                                         need for ongoing monitoring efforts.

                                      n New government regulations or court decisions may change how the commu-
                                         nity can address environmental problems.  For example, newly created state
                                         regulations for septic systems might replace local ordinances developed as
                                         part of your ecosystem protection plan, or court decisions may limit govern-
                                         ments' ability to regulate the use of private property.
                                      n New scientific and monitoring data sources may be discovered or created. For
                                                  onitoring allows  citizens concerned
                                                   about the Big Darby  Creek system to
                                             track the results of their efforts. Big Darby
                                             Creek is located outside of Columbus, Ohio
                                             and consists of 86 miles of main stem river and
                                             245 miles of tributaries. The system drains six
                                             counties in central Ohio and is considered to
                                             be the healthiest aquatic system of its size in
                                             the Midwest and one of the healthiest warm-
                                             water habitats in the  nation.  In 1991, The
                                             Nature Conservancy named Big Darby Creek
                                             one of the "Last Great Places".
                                                Although  little  industrial  or municipal
                                             wastewater  has been discharged  into  the
                                             watershed, it has been subjected to stress from
non-point source pollution generated by local farming.  Eighty  percent of the watershed's 580
square miles is farmland.  A decrease in water quality poses a threat to aquatic species, as does
increasing development and resulting erosion.
  In response, local citizens organized the Darby Partners, a partnership that consists of more than
40 private and public organizations. The group measures its success by tracking benchmarks:

        n Over 2,900 individuals have been involved in Darby protection activities

        n One-third (284) of all local farms are working to reduce sediment and nutrient runoff

        n 18 new wetlands have been created

        n 32,056 acres are now in conservation tillage

        n 312 acres of trees have been planted

        n Sediment transport has been reduced by 35,500 tons

        n A number of further studies and research projects have been initiated.

                      Contact:  Teri Devlin
                               Project Director
                               The Nature Conservancy
                               1504 W. First Avenue
                               Columbus, OH 43212
                               Phone: (614)486-4194
                               Fax: (614)486-9772

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-15
                     example, a study of local wetlands by a nearby university may shed new light
                     on the consequences of wetlands loss.

              Responding to Changes in the Community
              Changes within your community, such as rapid growth or the loss of a key indus-
              try, can affect the plan.  As communities change, goals may change.  Community
              growth also may cause unforeseen problems that require new or revised solu-
              tions, or it may allow you to implement solutions that were too expensive for a
              smaller community.  In addition, stakeholders' priorities may change as some
              problems are addressed successfully and resources become available to address
              new problems.

              Stakeholder Participation in Adapting the Plan

              Changes in the plan imply changes in its effects on stakeholders, who likely will
              want to discuss any proposed alterations. The community may wish to undergo
              another visioning process to accomplish this. This process can reaffirm or adjust the
              project's basic direction and confirm whether or not the community in general
              believes that its priorities have changed. Visioning is also an opportunity to revital-
              ize the community's commitment to the project, recruit new participants, and take on
              new challenges.

              A community effort to manage a local forest in Nevada County, California, illustrates
              the importance of getting feedback from affected stakeholders — in this case, a timber
              sales contractor (see following page).

              Keeping Everyone Informed

              Some communities have used written progress reports as a means of keeping every-
              one informed about the project. These reports can describe progress toward commu-
              nity goals. To this end, a checklist with completed actions can be a useful part of the
              progress report.  Communities have distributed reports as an  easy-to-read pamphlet
              or a series of articles in the local newspaper. Finally,  the community can make these
              reports the focus of community events,  keeping the project in the public eye.  As
              mentioned in Chapter 2, newsletters that document the history of the project help
              everyone keep progress in mind and serve as a resource to educate newcomers.

              Staying Aware of Problem Areas

              No matter how much thought the community has put into its  ecosystem protection
              project, some of the chosen strategies may not work out.  Your indicators will help to
              pinpoint problem areas. Indicators yield data necessary for assessing results periodi-
              cally and comparing them to your goals. When solutions do  not meet expectations, it
              may be time to reevaluate the plan. Communities often must  change strategies to
              adjust for unexpected results. For example, the ecosystem protection plan may rely
              on voluntary action,  such as the use of erosion control practices by farmers and
              developers to reduce sedimentation of streams.  If sedimentation problems continue,
              the community may want to consider more direct measures, such as ordinances
              requiring maintenance of streamside buffer zones, which protect the forest, fields,
              and wetlands adjacent to local waterways.
              Expanding the Scope of the Project

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-16
I                                                   he 1995 forest timber harvest on Bureau of
                                                   Land Management (BLM) land in Nevada
                                               County, California, was unique from the very
                                               beginning.   Communities  normally  have an
                                               opportunity  to  voice  their opinions during
                                               development of timber harvest plans on public
                                               land,  but this local community  participated
                                               from  the start.   The residents living in and
                                               around  the  "inimim  forest"  (a  Native
                                               American word for Ponderosa Pine,  pro-
                                               nounced "IN-I-mim") now have an integrated
                                               role in the management of  neighboring public
                                               lands. They were involved during the invento-
                                               ry process, through the marking of trees,  the
                                               felling, and the subsequent sale. While some
stages of the process were slowed down by involving volunteers in the work (trained and supervised
by BLM foresters throughout), other stages went smoothly because of the extent of community
  After putting the timber sale out to bid three times, the BLM finally found a contractor willing to
involve local residents.  To evaluate the effectiveness of the sale, the forest management committee
analyzed the process with the contractor. The committee  was trying to assess how much the con-
straints imposed by citizen involvement reduced the value  of the timber sale, if at all. The contrac-
tor's response was mixed. While he disagreed with the way some trees were marked, he did say that
he would work with the group again — that it was worth it for him, economically, to manage the
  The timber sale took a "light on the land approach", according to BLM Area Manager, Deane
Swickard. The team chose to protect wildlife habitat by leaving  dead standing trees and selected
individual trees with the intention of producing a high quality, value-added product. The BLM then
arranged for local mills to process and sell the wood to the Timber Framer's Guild (for milled tim-
ber-framed houses) and local craftspeople at a premium price.
  Evaluation and adaptation is in progress on other features of this innovative partnership.  One
management prescription included controlled burns. This technique maintains  a healthy understo-
ry of vegetation for wildlife habitat while simultaneously removing forest debris that may otherwise
accumulate to be a serious fire hazard.  Prescribed burns, as they are called, are allowed during a
small window of time, when it is neither too wet nor too dry.  In this fully democratic decision-
making process, community members had to be located and quick decisions needed to be made.
Project leaders are currently attempting to identify a speedier notification and concurrence system
for making more timely decisions about prescribed burns.

                       Contact:  Deane Swickard
                                Area Manager
                                Bureau of Land Management
                                Folsom Resource Area
                                63 Natoma Street
                                Folsom, CA 95630
                                Phone: (916)985-4474

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-17
               In tracking the progress of the project, the community may see opportunities to
               expand the scope of its activities.  You may be able to build on existing successes to
               achieve better protection of your ecosystem or to reinforce a commitment to commu-
               nity sustainability.  A re-visioning process may identify further goals and tasks that
               you could tackle. For example, if the community has succeeded in restoring river-
               banks in your town, it could consider forming partnerships with towns up- or down-
               river to show them  how they might do the same. Ultimately, this effort might grow
               into a watershed management project. Likewise, if a goal to reduce erosion is suc-
               ceeding, the community
               might consider a broader
               goal to increase soil pro-
               ductivity so that less
               chemical fertilizer is
               needed, or implement
               integrated pest manage-
               ment practices to reduce
               the use of chemical pesti-
                USDA Forest Service and Center for Urban Forestry, An
                Ecosystem-Based Approach to Urban and Community
                Forestry, Center for Urban Forestry, Philadelphia, PA,
                December 1994. This workbook presents practical infor-
                mation on community-based ecosystem protection, with
                a focus on urban forestry. In addition to describing steps
for monitoring and evaluating ecosystem protection strategies, it provides
an excellent overview of all the steps involved with ecosystem protection
— from forming a project team to selecting strategies.
               American Farmland Trust, Alternatives for Future Urban Growth in California's Central
               Valley: The Bottom Line for Agriculture and Taxpayers, American Farmland Trust,
               Washington, DC, 1995.

               American Farmland Trust, Making a Positive Contribution, American Farmland, pp. 2-3, Fall

               Bank of America, et al., Beyond Sprawl: New Patterns of Growth to Fit the New California,
               Bank of America, Environmental Policies and Programs, #5800, P.O. Box 37000, San
               Francisco, CA 94137, phone: (415) 622-8154.

               Coughlin, Cletus C. and Thomas B. Mandelbaum, A Consumer's Guide to Regional Economic
               Multipliers, Review of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Vol. 73, No. 1, pp. 19-32,
               January/February 1991.

               Doucette, Robert, et al., The Comparative Economics of Residential Development and Open
               Space Conservation, Allagash Environmental Institute, University of Maine, Portland, ME,

               Fox, Tom, Urban Open Space: An Investment That Pays: Real Estate Values, The
               Neighborhood Open Space Coalition, New York, 1990.

               Frank, James E.,  The Costs of Alternative Development Patterns:  A Review of the Literature,
               Urban Land Institute, Washington, DC, ISBN 0-87420-695-2, 1989.

               Freedgood, Julia, Is Farmland Protection a Community Investment? How to Do a Cost of
               Community Services Study, American Farmland Trust, Washington, DC, 1993.

               Hulsey, Brett, Sprawl Costs Us All: How Uncontrolled Sprawl Increases Your Property Taxes
               and Threatens Your Quality of Life, Sierra Club Midwest Office, Madison, WI, 1996.
               Hustedde, Ronald, Ron Shaffer, and Glen Pulver, Community Economic Analysis: A How To

FnlchapS.qxd 9/13/00 3:19PM Page 5-18
                                 Manual, North Regional Center for Rural Development, Iowa State University, Ames, IA,

                                 Jackson, Ted and Rosemary Infante, eds., Economic Benefits of Land Protection, Land Trust
                                 Alliance, Washington, DC, April  1994.

                                 National Park Service, Economic Impact of Protecting Rivers, Trails, and Greemvay
                                 Corridors: A Resource Book, National Park Service, Department of Interior, Washington, DC,

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page A-1
                    Technical  Assistance  Directory
                        This directory is provided as a starting point for your information and technical assis-
                        tance needs. This listing is by no means comprehensive, but provides representative
                        examples of organizations that can assist you in or provide information for your com-
                        munity ecosystem protection effort. The technical assistance directory is divided by
                        topic into eight sections:
                        General Information Directories
                        Ecosystem Assessment Data (Federal Agencies)	A-3

                        EPA Hotlines and Regulatory Dockets 	A-5

                        Ecosystem Protection/Land Conservation	A-7

                        Sustainable Development/Economics 	A-9

                        Program Organization and Funding	A-10

                        State Environmental Protection Agencies 	A-ll

                        Natural Heritage Programs and Related Data Centers 	A-17

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page A-2
                                GENERAL  INFORMATION  DIRECTORIES

               In addition to the major organizations referenced in the rest of this appendix, the directories listed below can lead
               you to useful organizations and data resources.

               1)      National Wildlife Federation, 1996 Conservation Directory, 1996, phone: (800) 432-6564.
                       A list of organizations, agencies, and officials concerned with natural resource use and management.
                       Published annually.  Check your local public library.

               2)      Balachandran, Sarojini, ed., Encyclopedia of Environmental Information Sources, Gale Research
                       Inc., Washington, DC, 1993, available also from Gale Research Inc., 853 Penobscot Building, Detroit, MI
                       48226-4094.  A subject guide to print and other sources of information on all aspects of the environment.
                       Sources include government organizations, online databases, research centers, and trade organizations,
                       among others. Check your local public library.

               3)      U.S. EPA, Access EPA, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402-9328, ISBN 0-16-
                       037989-X, Internet Website: Developed for citizens and other U.S. EPA partners,
                       this guide provides a roadmap to EPA information services,  contacts, and products.

               4)      Leadership Directories, Inc., State, Federal, and Municipal Yellow Books, phone:  (212) 627-4140.
                       Listings of government agencies at the federal, state, and local levels.  Includes addresses, telephone num-
                       bers, and names of administrative heads.  Available at public libraries,  or can be purchased by calling
                       Leadership Directories.

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page A-3

              1)      U.S. EPA — 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460, phone: (202) 260-2080, Internet Website:

                     n   CBEP Clearinghouse — U.S. EPA Office of Sustainable Ecosystems and Communities, 401 M
                         Street SW, Washington, DC 20460-2134, phone:  (202) 260-5339.  The Community-Based
                         Ecosystem Protection Clearinghouse has a number of U.S. EPA documents pertaining to ecosystem

                     "   Office of Water — 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460, phone:  (202) 260-7018.

                     "   Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) — Research Triangle Park, NC 27111,
                         phone:  (919)541-5616.

                     "   Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER)  — 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC
                         20460, phone:  (202) 260-4610.

                     n   Regional Offices

                            —  Region 1, John F. Kennedy Federal Building, 1 Congress Street, Boston, MA 02203-2211,
                                phone:  (617) 565-3400. CBEP Contacts: Deb Hartstedt and Rosemary Monahan (ME, NH,
                                VT, MA, CT, RI)

                            —  Region 2, 290 Broadway, New York, NY 10007-1866, phone:  (212) 637-3000.  CBEP
                                Contact: Rabi Kieber (NY, NJ, PR)

                            —  Region 3, 841 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19107, phone: (215)  566-5000.  CBEP
                                Contacts: Dominique Lueckenhoff and Susan McDowell (PA, WV, VA, MD, DE)

                            —  Region 4, 100 Alabama Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30365, phone:  (404) 562-8327. CBEP
                                Contact: Grace Deatrick (KY, TN, NC, SC, MS, AL, GA, FL)

                            —  Region 5, Robert E. Metcalfe Federal Building, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,  IL
                                60604-3590, phone: (312)353-2000.  CBEP Contact: Marylou Martin (MI, OH, IN, IL,
                                WI, MM)

                            —  Region 6, First Interstate Bank Tower at Fountain Place, 1445 Ross Avenue, 12th Floor,
                                Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202-2733, phone:  (214) 665-2100.  CBEP  Contacts: Shirley
                                Bruce and Cindy Wolf (MM, TX, LA, AR, OK)

                            —  Region 7, 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, KS 66101, phone:  (913)551-7000. CBEP
                                Contacts: Cathy Tortorici and John Houlihan (ME, KS, IA, MO)

                            —  Region 8, 999 Eighteenth Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202-2466, phone:  (303) 312-
                                6308. CBEP Contacts: Karen Hamilton  and Nat Miullo (MT, ND, SD, WY, UT, CO)

                            —  Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, phone: (415) 744-1305. CBEP
                                Contacts: Denise Zvanovec, Debbie Schechter, and Stephanie Valentine (CA, NV, AZ, HI)

                            —  Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA  98101-1128, phone: (206) 553-1200. CBEP
                                Contact: Eric Winiecki (WA, OR, ID, AK)

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page A-4
               2)      U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1849 C Street NW, Washington, DC 20240, phone:  (202) 208-3171,
                       Internet Website:

                       "   National Contaminant Biomonitoring Program — phone:  (703) 358-2148. This group can pro-
                           vide information on contaminant concentrations in fish, waterfowl, and other wildlife.

                       n   National Wetlands Inventory — Internet Website: The U.S. Fish and
                           Wildlife Service began the National Wetlands Inventory in 1977 to systematically classify and map
                           America's remaining wetlands.  This website has information on where to find maps of wetlands, as
                           well as contacts for regional wetlands coordinators.

               3)      Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly Soil Conservation Service) — U.S. Department of
                       Agriculture, National Resources Inventory, phone:  (202) 720-4530. The NRCS can provide information
                       on soil quality and soil erosion control measures.

               4)      United States Geological Survey — U.S. Geological Survey National Center, 12201 Sunrise Valley
                       Drive, Reston, VA 22092. Public  Information, phone:  (703) 648-4000, National Mapping Division,
                       phone: (800) USA-MAPS, Internet Website: The National Mapping Program
                       Website contains information about land mapping programs throughout the country, as well as a guide to
                       obtaining USGS earth science information and services.

               5)      U.S. Army Corps of Engineers — Casimir Pulaski Building, 20 Massachusetts Avenue  NW,
                       Washington, DC 20314-1000, phone: (202) 761-0660.

               6)      National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration — U.S. Department of Commerce, Silver Spring
                       Metro Center 3, 1315 East West Highway, Silver Spring, MD  20910-3282, phone: (202) 482-6090,
                       Internet Website:

                       "   National Marine Fisheries Service — Internet Website:

                       "   National Weather Service — Internet Website:

               7)      Federal Emergency Management Agency — Center Plaza 500 Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,
                       phone: (202)646-4600.

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM  Page A-5
                           EPA HOTLINES AND REGULATORY DOCKETS

               U.S. Environmental Protection Agency hotlines provide information for voluntary action.  Some of the most
               useful include:

               1)      Green Lights and Energy Stars Programs, phone: (800) 782-7937, Internet Website:
             , provide information and technical support on energy
                       efficient lighting to U.S. businesses and governments.

               2)      Hazardous Waste Ombudsman, phone:  (800) 262-7937 in U.S. except metropolitan Washington, DC
                       (202) 260-9361 in metropolitan Washington, DC, assists the public and regulatory community in resolving
                       hazardous waste issues. The ombudsman handles complaints from citizens, conducts investigations,
                       undertakes site reviews, and issues reports relating to hazardous waste sites.

               3)      Office of Environmental Justice, phone: (800) 962-6215 in U.S. except  metropolitan Washington, DC
                       (202) 260-6359 in metropolitan Washington, DC, coordinates public communication and provides techni-
                       cal and financial assistance to outside groups on environmental justice issues.

               4)      Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse, phone: (202) 260-1023, provides answers and referrals
                       in response to questions from the public concerning pollution prevention.

               5)      Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Hotline, phone:  (415) 744-2074, responds to requests
                       for information on hazardous-waste identification, generators, transporters, treatment, storage, and dispos-
                       al facilities, and recycling sites.

               6)      RCRA/Underground Storage Tank, Superfund, and Emergency Planning and Community-Right-to-Know
                       Hotline, phone:  (800) 424-9346 in U.S. except metropolitan Washington, DC (703) 412-9810 in metro-
                       politan Washington, DC, provides information about the title programs and referrals for obtaining docu-
                       ments about these programs.  Translation is available for Spanish-speaking callers.

               7)      Small Business Ombudsman Clearinghouse/Hotline, phone:  (800) 368-5888 in U.S. except metropolitan
                       Washington, DC (703) 305-5938 in metropolitan Washington, DC, TDD:  (703) 305-6824, disseminates
                       regulatory and other environmental information to help small businesses enhance voluntary regulatory
                       compliance and pollution abatement and control.

               8)      Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Assistance Information Service, phone:  (202) 544-1404, TDD:
                       (202) 544-0551, furnishes TSCA regulation information.

               9)      WASTEWISE Helpline, phone: (800) EPA-WISE, provides information about EPA's voluntary program
                       encouraging businesses to reduce solid waste.

               10)     Wetlands Information Hotline, phone:  (800) 832-7828 in U.S. except metropolitan Washington, DC
                       (703) 525-0985 in metropolitan Washington, DC, disseminates information about the Wetlands Protection
                       Program; answers questions and provides referrals concerning the value, function, and protection of wet-
                       lands; and accepts requests for certain wetlands publications.
               The EPA regulatory dockets provide information about regulations,  permitting, and hazardous waste
               cleanup decisions.

               1)      Air Docket — Office of Air and Radiation (6102), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460,
                       phone:  (202)260-7548

               2)      Water Docket — Office of Water (4101), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460, phone:
                       (202) 260-3027

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM  Page A-6
               3)      Wetlands Docket — Office of Water (4101), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460, phone:
                       (202) 260-1799

               4)      Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Docket — Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
                       (5305), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460, phone:  (202) 260-9327

               5)      Superfund Docket — Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (5201G), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street
                       SW, Washington, DC 20460, phone: (703) 603-8917

               6)      Underground Storage Tank Docket — Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (5305), U.S. EPA,
                       401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460, phone:  (202) 260-9720

               7)      Pesticides Docket — Office of Pesticides (7506C), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460,
                       phone:  (703)305-5919

               8)      Toxic Substances Control Act Docket — Office of Toxic Substances (7407), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street SW,
                       Washington, DC 20460, phone: (202) 260-7099

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page A-7

               1)      U.S. Department of Interior — 1849 C Street NW,  Washington, DC 20240, phone: (202) 208-3171.

                       "   U.S. Bureau of Land Management, phone:  (202) 208-3171. The BLM manages 300 million acres
                           of land, most of which is in the Midwest and western United States.

                       n   National Biological Service — Ecosystem Monitoring Division, phone: (202) 482-3774, Internet
                           Website:  This agency seeks to enhance scientific understanding and sustainable
                           management of our nation's biological resources. The website provides access to a range of data, as
                           well as an excellent list of linked servers.

                       "   National Park Service — phone:  (202)208-3171.

                       "   U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service — phone: (202) 208-3171, Internet Website:
                           The FWS manages the National Wildlife Refuge System — over 100 million acres of land devoted to
                           conservation of plant and wildlife species.

               2)      U.S. Department of Agriculture — Fourteenth Street and Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC
                       20250, phone: (202) 720-2791.

                       "   The U.S. Forest Service, phone:   (202) 720-2791, Internet Website:  This
                           agency manages approximately 200 million acres of forestland in the United States

               3)      Trust for Public Land — 116 New Montgomery Street, 4th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105, phone:
                       (415) 495-4014,  Internet Website:  This national non-profit organization is
                       dedicated to the  conservation of land for parks, gardens, natural areas, and open space.  The website
                       includes information on the organization s Green Cities Initiative, as well as an excellent list of linked

               4)      American Farmland Trust — 1920 N Street NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC 20036, phone: (202) 659-
                       5170,  Internet Website:  This non-profit organization is dedicat-
                       ed to the conservation of land for agricultural use.  AFT has also developed an economic model of urban
                       sprawl and its fiscal impacts with the University of California-Berkeley. The website contains updates on
                       federal, state, and local farm policies, extensive research material, and information on obtaining AFT pub-

               5)      The Nature Conservancy — 1815 N. Lynn Street, Arlington, VA 22209, phone: (703) 841-5300,
                       Internet Website:  This non-profit organization identifies ecologically significant
                       lands and protects them through gifts, purchase, cooperative management agreements with governments
                       or public agencies, or through voluntary arrangements with private landowners.

               6)      The Conservation Fund — 1800 N. Kent Street, Suite 1120,  Arlington, VA 22209, phone:  (703) 525-
                       6300.  This organization helps to protect ecosystems, develop greenways, develop economic assessments
                       for conservation objectives, and promote other environmental protection activities.

               7)      The Sierra Club — 730 Polk Street, San Francisco, CA 94109, phone: (415) 776-2211, Internet
                       Website:  This environmental group was founded to explore, enjoy, and pro-
                       tect natural areas. Work includes lobbying, litigation, publishing, and arranging conferences.

               8)      The National Audubon Society — 700 Broadway, New York, NY 10003-9501, phone: (212) 979-3000,
                       Internet  Website: This environmental group's mission is  to protect
                       the air, water, land, and habitat that are critical to the health of the planet.

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00  3:01 PM Page A-8
               9)      National Wildlife Federation — 1400 Sixteenth Street NW, Washington, DC 20036-2266, phone (202)
                       797-6800, Internet Website:  A non-profit organization whose mission is to edu-
                       cate, inspire, and assist individuals to conserve wildlife and other natural resources.

               10)     The Wilderness Society —  900 Seventeenth Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, phone: (202) 833-2300.
                       Promotes protection of public (especially federal) lands.

               11)     Natural Resources Defense Council — 40 W Twentieth Street, New York, NY 10011, phone:  (212)
                       727-2700.  Dedicated to sound management of natural resources through research, education, and devel-
                       opment of public policies.

               12)     Environmental Defense Fund — 257 Park Avenue S., New York, NY 10010. Dedicated to the improve-
                       ment of environmental quality and public health through responsible reform of public policy.

               13)     Defenders of Wildlife — 1244 Nineteenth Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, phone: (202) 659-9510.
                       Promotes the preservation and protection of wildlife and habitat.

               14)     Native Ecology Initiative — Lillian Wilmore, Director, P.O. Box 470829, Brookline Village, MA
                       02147-0829, phone:  (617) 232-5742. This Native American organization is devoted to cultural and eco-
                       logical preservation.

               15)     League of Women Voters — 1730 M Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, phone: (202) 429-1965.  The
                       league has an educational branch that conducts research and publishes newsletters on topics such as safe
                       drinking water, nuclear waste issues, and pesticides in food  and water.

               16)     The following religious organizations have ecological protection or environmental justice missions:

                           n    Episcopal Church  Center, Peace and Justice Ministries — 815 Second Avenue, New York, NY
                               10017, phone:  (800) 334-7626.

                           n    Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Environmental Stewardship and Hunger Education
                               — 8765 W. Higgins Road, Chicago, IL 60631, phone:  (312)380-1485.

                           n    Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America, Church and Society — 8-10 E.
                               Seventy-Ninth Street, New York, NY  10021, phone: (212)570-3500.

                           n    Jewish Theological Seminary of America, Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life —
                               3080 Broadway, New York, NY  10027, phone:  (212)678-8996.

                           n    National  Council of the Churches of Christ, USA, Environmental Justice — 475 Riverside
                               Drive, New York, NY 10115, phone:  (212)870-2141.

                           n    Presbyterian Church (USA), Office of Environmental Justice — 100 Witherspoon Street, Room
                               3046, Louisville, KY 40202, phone: (502) 569-5809.

                           n    Progressive National Baptist Convention, Home Mission Office — 601 Fiftieth Street NE,
                               Washington, DC 20019, phone:  (202)396-0558.

                           n    Roman Catholic Church, U.S. Catholic Conference, Office of International Justice and Peace
                               — 3211 Fourteenth Street NE, Washington, DC  20017, phone:  (202) 541-3140.

                           n    United Church of Christ, Office for Church Society — 700 Prospect Avenue, Cleveland, OH
                               44115, phone:  (216)736-2174.

                           n    United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society Resources — 100 Maryland
                               Avenue NE, Washington, DC  20002, phone: (202)488-5617.

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page A-9

               1)      U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis — 1441 L Street NW, Washington, DC
                      20230, phone:  (202) 606-9900. Publishes regional economic data such as employment and revenues of
                      various industries.

               2)      U.S. Department of Energy, Center of Excellence for Sustainable Development — 1617 Cole
                      Boulevard, Golden, CO 80401, phone: (303) 275-4830, e-mail:,
                      Internet Website:

               3)      National Park Service, Economics Clearinghouse,  — 600 Harrison Street, Suite 600, San Francisco,
                      CA 94107-1372, phone: (415) 744-3975.  Encourages up-to-date information exchange on the economic
                      impacts of rivers, trails, and greenways. Included are case studies, economic impact analyses, benefit and
                      cost estimation techniques, and other reference materials.

               4)      The Ecotourism Society — P.O. Box 755, North Bennington, VT 05257, phone:  (802)447-2121.  The
                      Ecotourism Society is an international nonprofit organization dedicated to finding the resources and build-
                      ing the expertise to make tourism a viable tool for conservation and sustainable development.

               5)      Lincoln Institute of Land Policy — 113 Brattle Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-3400, phone:  (617) 661-
                      3016. Publishes reference materials on land use, public policy, and sustainable development.

               6)      The Nature Conservancy, Center for Compatible Economic Development — 7 East Market Street, Suite
                      210, Leesburg, VA 22075. This group within The Nature Conservancy evaluates and promotes opportuni-
                      ties for communities to pursue tourism and other businesses that are compatible with the conservation of
                      biodiversity and environmental protection.

               7)      Rocky Mountain Institute — 1739 Snowmass Creek Road, Snowmass, CO 80164, phone:  (970) 927-
                      3851. Many publications and reference materials on sustainable economic development, energy efficien-
                      cy, agricultural policy, and other community development issues.

               8)      Corporation for Enterprise Development — 777 North Capitol Street NE, Suite 410, Washington, DC
                      20002, phone:  (202) 408-9788. Conducts economic assessments for communities and helps assemble
                      community development plans.  Variety of publications, including case studies.

               9)      Heartland Center for Leadership Development — 941 O Street, Suite 920, Lincoln, NE 68508, phone:
                      (402) 474-7667.  Programs and publications to help rural communities develop local leadership, including
                      practical resources and policies for the survival of small towns.

               10)    United States Tourist Council — Drawer 175, Washington, DC 20013-1875.  A non-profit association of
                      conservation-concerned individuals, industries, and institutions who travel or cater to the traveler.
                      Emphasis is on historic and scenic preservation, wilderness and roadside development, ecological protec-
                      tion through sound planning  and education, and support of scientific studies of natural wilderness.

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM  PageA-10
                             PROGRAM ORGANIZATION AND  FUNDING

               1)      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of the Comptroller, Environmental Financing
                      Information Network — 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460, e-mail:
                      This network can provide information on financing alternatives for state and local environmental

               2)      Foundation Center — 79 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10003, phone: (212) 620-4230. This organiza-
                      tion publishes summary information about charitable foundations and their grant-making policies and
                      practices. There are regional offices in San Francisco, CA, Cleveland, OH, Washington, DC, and
                      Atlanta, GA.

               3)      The Grantsmanship Center — P.O. Box 17220, Los Angeles, CA 90017, phone: (213)482-9860. This
                      organization publishes information on how to obtain grants and raise other funds.

               4)      Land Trust Alliance — 900 Seventeenth Street NW, Suite 410, Washington, DC 20006, phone:  (202)
                      638-4725.  The Land Trust Alliance provides a broad range of technical assistance and services to local
                      and regional land trusts and land conservation groups.

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM PageA-11
              Conservation and Natural Resources Department
              P.O. Box 301450
              Montgomery, AL 36130-1450
              Phone: (800)262-3151
              Fax: (334)242-1880

              Environmental Management Department
              1751 Cong. W.L. Dickinson Drive
              P.O. Box 301463
              Montgomery, AL 36130-1463
              Phone: (334)271-7700
              Fax: (334)271-7950


              Environmental Conservation Department
              410 Willoughby Avenue, Suite 105
              Juneau, AK 99801-1795
              Phone: (907)465-5010
              Fax: (907)465-5097
              TTY: (907)465-5010

              Natural Resources Department
              3601 C Street, Suite 858
              Anchorage, AK 99503
              Phone: (907)269-8400
              Fax: (907)269-8901
              TTY: (907)269-8411
              Agriculture Revolving Loan Fund:  (907) 745-7200


              Environmental Quality Department
              3033 N. Central Avenue
              Phoenix, AZ 85012
              Phone: (602)207-2300
              Fax: (602)207-2218
              TTY: (602)207-4829


              Pollution Control and Ecology Department
              8001 National Drive
              P.O. Box 8913
              Little Rock, AR 72219-8913
              Phone: (501)682-0744
              Fax: (501)682-0798
Environmental Protection Agency
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 525
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone:  (916)445-3846
Fax: (916)445-6401

Resources Agency
Resources Building, Suite 1311
1416 Ninth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone:  (916)653-5656
Fax: (916)653-8102

Natural Resources Department
1313 Sherman Street, Room 718
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303)866-3311
Fax:  (303)866-2115

Public Health and Environment Department
4300 Cherry Creek Drive, South
Denver, CO 80222
Phone: (303)692-2000
Fax:  (303)782-0095
TTY: (303)691-7700


Environmental Protection Department
79 Elm Street
Hartford, CT 06106
Phone: (860)424-3000
Fax:  (860)424-4053


Natural Resources and Environmental
  Control Department
89 Kings Highway
P.O. Box 1401
Dover, DE 19903-1401
Phone: (302)739-4506
Fax:  (302)739-6242

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM PageA-12
               District of Columbia
               Environmental Regulation Administration
               2100 Martin L. King Avenue SE
               Washington, DC 20020
               Phone:  (202)645-6617
               Fax: (202)645-6622


               Environmental Protection Department
               3900 Commonwealth Boulevard
               Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000
               Phone:  (904)488-1073
               Fax: (904)921-6227


               Natural Resources Department
               205 Butler Street SE, Suite 1252
               Atlanta, GA 30334
               Phone:  (404)656-3500
               Fax: (404)656-0770


               Land and Natural Resources Department
               Kalanimoku Building
               1151 Punchbowl Street
               Honolulu, HI 96813
               Phone:  (808)587-0406
               Fax: (808)587-0360


               Environmental Quality Division
               450 W. State Street
               P.O. Box 83720
               Boise,  ID 83720
               Phone:  (208)373-0502
               Fax: (208)373-0417


               Environmental Protection Agency
               P.O. Box 19276
               Springfield, IL 62794
               Phone:  (217)782-2829
               Fax: (217)782-9039
               TTY: (217)782-9143
Natural Resources Department
Lincoln Tower Plaza
524 S. Second Street
Springfield, IL 62701-1787
Phone:  (217)782-6302
Fax: (217)785-3150
TTY: (217)782-9175

Environmental Management Department
105 S. Meridian Street
P.O. Box 6015
Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015
Phone: (317)233-6894
Fax: (317)232-5539
TTY:  (317)233-6087

Natural Resources Department
402 W. Washington Street
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Phone: (317)232-4200
Fax: (317)233-6811


Natural Resources Department
Wallace Building
Des Moines, IA 50319-0034
Phone: (515)281-5145
Fax: (515)281-6794
TTY:  (515)242-5967


Health and Environment Department
Landon State Office Building
900 S.W Jackson Street
Topeka, KS 66612-1290
Phone: (913)296-1500
Fax: (913)296-6247


Natural Resources and Environmental
  Protection Cabinet
Capital Plaza Tower, 5th Floor
500 Mero Street
Frankfort, KY 40601
Phone: (502)564-5525
Fax: (502)564-3354

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM  PageA-13
              Environmental Quality Department
              P.O. Box 82231
              Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2231
              Phone: (504)765-0741
              Fax: (504)765-0045

              Natural Resources Department
              P.O. Box 94396
              Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9396
              Phone: (504)342-4500
              Fax: (504)342-2707

              Conservation Department
              22 State House Station
              Augusta, ME 04333-0022
              Phone: (207)  287-2211
              Fax: (207) 287-2400
              TTY: (207)287-2213

              Environmental Protection Department
              17 State House Station
              Augusta, ME 04333-0017
              Phone: (207)287-7688
              Fax: (207)287-2814


              Natural Resources Department
              Tawes State Office Building
              Annapolis, MD 21401
              Phone: (410)974-3195
              Fax: (410)974-5206
              TTY: (410)974-3683

              Environment Department
              2500 Broening Highway
              Baltimore, MD 21224
              Phone: (410)631-3000
              Fax: (410)631-3888
              TTY: (410)631-3009


              Environmental Affairs Executive Office
              100 Cambridge Street, Room 2000
              Boston, MA 02202
              Phone: (617)727-9800
              Fax: (617)727-2754
Environmental Quality Department
P.O. Box 30473
Lansing, MI 48909-7973
Phone: (800)662-9278
Fax:  (517)241-7401
Pollution Emergency Alerting System:
(800) 292-4706

Natural Resources Department
P.O. Box 30028
Lansing, MI 48909
Phone: (517)373-1214
Fax:  (517)335-4242
TTY:  (517)335-4623


Natural Resources Department
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155-4001
Phone: (612)296-6157
Fax:  (612)296-3500
TTY:  (612)296-5484

Environmental Assistance Office
520 Lafayette Road, 2nd Floor
St. Paul, MN 55155-4100
Phone: (612)296-3417
Fax:  (612)297-8709


Environmental Quality Department
P.O. Box 20305
Jackson, MS 39289-1305
Phone: (601)961-5650
Fax:  (601)354-6965


Natural Resources Department
P.O. Box 176
Jefferson City, MO 65102
Phone: (573)751-3443
Fax:  (573)751-7627


Environmental Quality Department
P.O. Box 200901
Helena, MT 59620-0901
Phone: (406)444-2442
Fax:  (406)444-1804

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM PageA-14
              Natural Resources and Conservation Department
              1625 Eleventh Avenue
              P.O. Box 201601
              Helena, MT 59620-1601
              Phone: (406)444-2074
              Fax: (406)444-2684
              TTY:  (406)444-2074


              Environmental Quality Department
              1200 N Street, Suite 400
              P.O. Box 98922
              Lincoln, NE 68509-8922
              Phone: (402)471-2186
              Fax: (402)471-2909


              Conservation and Natural Resources Department
              123 W. Nye Lane
              Carson City, NV 89710
              Phone: (702)687-4360
              Fax: (702)687-6122

              New Hampshire	

              Environmental Services Department
              6 Hazen Drive
              Concord, NH 03301
              Phone: (603)271-3503
              Fax: (603)271-2867
              TTY:  (800)735-2964

              New Jersey	

              Environmental Protection Department
              40IE. State Street, CN402
              Trenton, NJ 08625-0402
              Phone: (609)777-3373
              Fax: (609)292-7695

              New Mexico	

              Environment Department
              1190 St. Francis Drive
              P.O. Box 26110
              Santa Fe, NM 87502
              Phone: (505)827-2855
              Fax: (505)827-2836
New York
Environmental Conservation Department
50 Wolf Road
Albany, NY 12233
Phone:  (518)457-5400
Fax:  (518)457-7744

North Carolina	

Environment, Health and
  Natural Resources Department
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
Phone:  (919)733-4984
Fax:  (919)715-3060

North Dakota	

Environmental Health Section
1200 Missouri Avenue
P.O. Box 5520
Bismarck, ND 58506-5520
Phone:  (701)328-5150
Fax:  (701)328-5200


Natural Resources Department
Fountain Square
Columbus, OH 43224-1387
Phone:  (614)265-6565
Fax:  (614)261-9601

Environmental Protection Agency
1800 WaterMark Drive
P.O. Box 1049
Columbus, OH 43216-0149
Phone:  (614)644-3020
Fax:  (614)644-2329
TTY: (614)644-2110


Environmental Quality Department
1000 NE Tenth Street
Oklahoma City, OK 73117-1212
Phone:  (405)271-8056
Fax:  (405)271-8425
Complaints Hotline: (800) 522-0206

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM  PageA-15
              Environmental Quality Department
              811 S.W. Sixth Avenue
              Portland, OR 97204-1390
              Phone: (503)229-5696
              Fax: (503)229-6124
              TTY: (503)229-6993

              Environmental Protection Department
              P.O. Box 2063
              Harrisburg, PA 17105-2063
              Phone: (717)783-2300
              Fax: (717) 783-8926
              TTY: (800)654-5984

              Rhode Island	

              Environmental Management Department
              235 Promenade Street, Suite 425
              Providence, RI 02908
              Phone: (401)277-6800
              Fax: (401)277-6802
              TTY: (401)831-5508
              24-Hour Hotline: (401)277-3070

              South Carolina	

              Health and Environmental Control Department
              2600 Bull Street
              Columbia, SC 29201
              Phone: (803)734-5000
              Fax: (803)734-4777

              Natural Resources Department
              Rembert C. Dennis Building
              P.O. Box 176
              Columbia, SC 29202
              Phone: (803)734-3888
              Fax: (803)734-6310

              South Dakota	

              Environment and Natural Resources Department
              Joe Foss Building
              523 E. Capitol Avenue
              Pierre, SD 57501-3181
              Phone: (605)773-3151
              Fax: (605)773-6035
Environmental and Conservation Department
Life & Casualty Tower
401 Church Street, 21st Floor
Nashville, TN 37243-0435
Phone:  (615)532-0109
Fax:  (615)532-0120


Natural Resource Conservation Commission
12100 Park 35 Circle
P.O. Box 13087
Austin, TX 78711-3087
Phone:  (512)239-1000
Fax:  (512)239-5533


Environmental Quality Department
168 N. 1950 West
Salt Lake City, UT 84116
Phone:  (801)536-4400
Fax:  (801)536-4480
TTY: (801)536-4414

Natural Resources Department
1594 W. North Temple, Suite 3710
Box 145610
Salt Lake City, UT 84116-5610
Phone:  (801)538-7200
Fax:  (801)538-7315
TTY: (801)538-7458


Natural Resources Agency
State Complex
103 S. Main Street
Waterbury, VT 05671
Phone:  (802)241-3600
TTY: (800)253-0191


Natural Resources Secretariat
733 Ninth Street Office Building
Richmond, VA 23219
Phone:  (804)786-0044
Fax:  (804)371-8333
TTY: (804)786-7765

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM  PageA-16
              Ecology Department
              P.O. Box 47600
              Olympia, WA 98504-7600
              Phone: (360)407-6000
              Fax: (360)407-6989
              TTY:  (360)407-7155

              Natural Resources Department
              1111 Washington Street SE
              P.O. Box 47000
              Olympia, WA 98504-7001
              Phone: (360)902-1000
              Fax: (360)902-1775
              TTY:  (360)902-1125

              West Virginia	
Environmental Quality Department
Herschler Building, 4th Floor
122 W. Twenty-Fifth Street
Cheyenne, WY 82002
Phone: (307)777-7937
Fax: (307)777-7682

Puerto Rico
              Environment Bureau
              10 McJunkin Road
              Nitro, WV 25143-2506
              Phone: (304)759-0515
              Fax: (304)759-0526
              TTY: (800)637-5893

Natural and Environmental Resources Department
P.O. Box 9066600
San Juan, PR 00906-6600
Phone: (787)723-3090
Fax:  (787)723-4255

Environmental Quality Board
P.O. Box 11488
San Juan, PR 00940-1119
Phone: (787)723-6200
Fax:  (787)724-3270
              Natural Resources Department
              P.O. Box 7921
              Madison, WI 53704
              Phone: (608)266-2621
              Fax: (608)267-3579
              TTY:  (608)267-6897

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM PageA-17
              State Natural Heritage

              Alabama Natural Heritage
              Department of Conservation &
              Natural Resources
              Division of Lands
              Folsom Administration Building
              64 N. Union Street, Room 421
              Montgomery, AL 36130
              Phone: (334) 242-3484
              Fax: (334) 242-0098
              Director: vacant

              Alaska Natural Heritage Program
              707 A Street, Suite 208
              Anchorage, AK 99501
              Phone: (907) 257-2702
              Fax: (907) 258-9139
              Program Director: David Duffy

              Arizona Heritage Data
              Management System
              Habitat Branch
              Arizona Game & Fish Department
              2221 W. Greenway Road
              Phoenix, AZ 85023
              Phone: (602) 789-3612
              Fax: (602) 789-3928
              Coord. Data Mgmt. System:
              Barry Spicer

              Arkansas Natural Heritage
              Suite 1500, Tower Building
              323 Center Street
              Little Rock, AR 72201
              Phone: (501) 324-9150
              Fax: (501) 324-9618
              Chief of Research: Tom Foti

              California Natural Heritage
              Department of Fish & Game
              1220 S Street
              Sacramento, CA 95814
              Phone: (916) 322-2493
              Fax: (916) 324-0475
              Director: Ken Hashagen
Colorado Natural Heritage
College of Natural Resources
Colorado State University
254 General Services Building
Fort Collins, CO 80523
Phone: (970) 491-1309
Fax: (970) 491-3349
Coordinator: Chris Pague

Connecticut Natural
Diversity Database
Natural Resources Center
Department of Environmental
79 Elm Street, Store Level
Hartford, CT 06106-5127
Phone: (860) 424-3540
Fax: (860) 424-4058
Coordinator: Nancy Murray

Delaware Natural Heritage
Division of Fish & Wildlife
Department of Natural Resources &
Environmental Control
4876 Hay Point Landing Road
Smyrna, DE 19977
Phone: (302) 653-2880
Fax: (302)653-3431
Coordinator: Lynn Broaddus

District of Columbia Natural
Heritage Program
13025 Riley's Lock Road
Poolesville, MD 20837
Phone: (301) 427-1354
Fax: (301) 427-1355
Coordinator: Olin Allen

Florida Natural Areas Inventory
1018 Thomasville Road
Suite 200-C
Tallahassee, FL 32303
Phone: (904) 224-8207
Fax: (904) 681-9364
Acting Coordinator: Gary Knight
Georgia Natural Heritage Program
Wildlife Resources Division
Georgia Department of
Natural Resources
2117 U.S. Highway 278 SE
Social Circle, GA 30279
Phone: (706) 557-3032
Fax: (706) 557-3040
Coordinator: Jonathan Ambrose

Hawaii Natural Heritage Program
The Nature Conservancy of Hawaii
1116 Smith Street, Suite 201
Honolulu, HI 96817
Phone: (808) 537-4508
Fax: (808) 545-2019
Coordinator: Dan Orodenker

Idaho Conservation Data Center
Department of Fish & Game
600 South Walnut Street, Box 25
Boise, ID 83707
Phone: (208) 334-3402
Fax: (208)334-2114
Coordinator: Bob Moseley

Illinois Natural Heritage Division
Department of Resources
524 South Second Street
Springfield, IL 62701-1787
Phone: (217) 785-8774
Fax: (217) 785-8277
Division Chief: Carl Becker

Indiana Natural Heritage
Data Center
Division of Nature Preserves
Department of Natural Resources
402 West Washington Street,
Room W267
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Phone: (317)232-4052
Fax: (317)233-0133
Coordinator: Cloyce Hedge

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM PageA-18
               Iowa Natural Areas Inventory
               Bureau of Preserves &
               Ecological Services
               Department of Natural Resources
               Wallace State Office Building
               Des Moines, IA 50319-0034
               Coordinator: Daryl Howell

               Kansas Natural Heritage
               Kansas Biological Survey
               2041 Constant Avenue
               Lawrence, KS 66047-2906
               Phone: (913) 864-3453
               Fax: (913) 864-5093
               Coordinator: Craig Freeman

               Kentucky Natural Heritage
               Kentucky  State Nature Preserves
               801 SchenkelLane
               Frankfort, KY 40601
               Phone: (502) 573-2886
               Fax: (502) 573-2355
               Director: Robert McCance, Jr.

               Louisiana Natural Heritage
               Department of Wildlife & Fisheries
               P.O. Box 98000
               Baton Rouge, LA 70898-9000
               Phone: (504) 765-2821
               Fax: (504) 765-2607
               Coordinator: Gary Lester

               Maine Natural Areas Program
               Department of Conservation
               (FedEx/UPS:  159 Hospital Street)
               93 State House Station
               Augusta, ME 04333-0093
               Phone: (207) 287-8044
               Fax: (207) 287-8040
               Coordinator: Molly Docherty

               Maryland Natural Heritage
               Department of Natural Resources
               Tawes State Office Building, E-l
               Annapolis, MD 21401
               Phone: (410) 974-2870
               Fax: (410) 974-5590
Coordinator: Lynn Davidson
Massachusetts Natural Heritage
& Endangered Species Program
Division of Fisheries & Wildlife
Route 135
Westborough, MA 01581
Phone: (508) 792-7270 ext. 200
Fax: (508) 792-7275
Coordinator: Henry Woolsey

Michigan Natural Features
(FedEx/UPS: 530 W Allegan.
Mason Building, 5th Floor,
Box 30444
Lansing, MI 48909-7944
Director: Leni Wilsmann

Minnesota Natural Heritage &
Nongame Research
Department of Natural Resources
500 Lafayette Road, Box 7
St. Paul, MN 55155
Phone: (612) 297-4964
Fax: (612) 297-4961
Coordinator: Bonita Eliason

Mississippi Natural Heritage
Museum of Natural  Science
111 North Jefferson Street
Jackson, MS 39201-2897
Phone: (601) 354-7303
Fax: (601) 354-7227
Coordinator: Ken Gordon

Missouri Natural Heritage
Missouri Department of
P.O. Box 180
(FedEx: 2901 West Truman
Jefferson City, MO 65102
Database Coordinator:
Dorothy Butler
Montana Natural Heritage
State Library Building
1515 E. Sixth Avenue
Helena, MT 59620
Phone: (406) 444-3009
Fax: (406) 444-0581
Coordinator: David Center

Nebraska Natural Heritage
Game and Parks Commission
2200 N. Thirty-Third Street
P.O. Box 30370
Lincoln, NE 68503
Phone: (402) 471-5421
Fax: (402) 471-5528
Co-coordinators: Mike Fritz and
Gerry Steinauer

Nevada Natural Heritage
Department of Conservation &
Natural Resources
1550 E. College Parkway, Suite 145
Carson City, NV 89710
Phone: (702) 687-4245
Fax: (702) 885-0868
Coordinator: Glenn Clemmer

New Hampshire Natural Heritage
Department of Resources &
Economic Development
172 Pembroke Street
P.O. Box 1856
Concord, NH 03302
Phone: (603) 271-3623
Fax: (603) 271-2629
Coordinator: vacant

New Jersey Natural Heritage
Office of Natural Lands
22 S. Clinton Avenue, CN404
Trenton, NJ 08625-0404
Phone: (609) 984-1339
Fax: (609) 984-1427
Coordinator: Tom Breden

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM PageA-19
               New Mexico Natural Heritage
               University of New Mexico
               2500 Yale Boulevard SE, Suite 100
               Albuquerque, NM 87131-1091
               Phone: (505) 277-1991
               Fax: (505) 277-7587
               Director: Pat Mehlhop

               New York Natural Heritage
               Department of Environmental
               700 Troy-Schenectady Road
               Latham, NY 12110-2400
               Coordinator: Kathryn Schneider

               North Carolina Heritage Program
               NC Department of Environment,
               Health & Natural Resources
               Division of Parks & Recreation
               P.O. Box 27687
               Raleigh, NC 27611
               Phone: (919) 733-7701
               Fax: (919) 715-3085
               Coordinator: Linda Pearsall

               North Dakota Natural Heritage
               North Dakota Parks & Recreation
               1835 Bismarck Expressway
               Bismarck, ND 58504
               Phone: (701) 328-5357
               Fax: (701) 328-5363
               Coordinator: Kathy Armstrong

               Ohio Natural Heritage Program
               Division of Natural Areas &
               Department of Natural Resources
               Fountain Square, Building F-l
               Columbus, OH 43224
               Phone: (614) 265-6453
               Fax: (614) 267-3096
               Division Chief:  Guy Denny
Oklahoma Natural Heritage
Oklahoma Biological Survey
111 East Chesapeake Street
University of Oklahoma
Norman, OK 73019-0575
Phone: (405) 325-1985
Fax: (405) 325-7702
Coordinator: Caryn Vaughn

Oregon Natural Heritage Program
Oregon Field Office
821 S.E. Fourteenth Avenue
Portland, OR 97214
Phone: (503) 731-3070, 230-1221
Fax: (503) 230-9639
Coordinator: Jimmy Kagan

Pennsylvania Natural Diversity
Inventory - East
The Nature Conservancy
34 Airport Drive
Middletown, PA 17057
Phone: (717) 948-3962
Fax: (717) 948-3957
Coordinator: Julie Lundgren

Pennsylvania Natural Diversity
Inventory - West
Western Pennsylvania Conservancy
Natural Areas Program
316 Fourth Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
Phone: (412) 288-2777
Fax: (412) 281-1792
Coordinator: Paul Wiegman

Pennsylvania Natural Diversity
Inventory - Central
Bureau of Forestry
P.O. Box 8552
Harrisburg, PA 17105-8552
Phone: (717) 783-0388
State Coordinator:  Kathy McKenna

Rhode Island Heritage Program
Department of Environmental
Division of Planning &
83 Park Street
Providence, RI 02903
Phone: (401) 277-2776 x 4308
Fax: (401) 277-2069
Coordinator: Rick Enser
South Carolina Heritage Trust
SC Wildlife & Marine Resources
P.O. Box 167
Columbia, SC 29202
Phone: (803) 734-3893
Fax: (803) 734-6310 (call first)
Coordinator: Steve Bennett

South Dakota Natural Heritage
SD Department of Game,
Fish & Parks
Wildlife Division
523 E. Capitol Avenue
Pierre, SD 57501-3182
Phone: (605) 773-4227
Fax: (605) 773-6245
Coordinator: Dave Ode

Tennessee Division of Natural
Department of Environment &
401 Church Street
Life and Casualty Tower, 8th Floor
Nashville, TN 37243-0447
Fax: (615) 532-0614
Director: Reggie Reeves

Texas Parks and Wildlife
Endangered Resources Branch
3000 IH-35 South, Suite 100
Austin, TX 78704
Heritage Coordinator: vacant

Utah Natural Heritage Program
Division of Wildlife Resources
1596 West North Temple
Salt Lake City, UT 84116
Phone: (801) 538-4761
Fax: (801) 538-4709
Coordinator: Doug Stone

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page A-20
               Vermont Nongame & Natural
               Heritage Program
               Vermont Fish & Wildlife
               103 S. Main Street, 10 South
               Waterbury, VT 05671-0501
               Phone: (802) 241-3700
               Fax: (802) 241-3295
               Heritage Coordinator: Bob Popp
               Virginia Division of Natural
               Department of Conservation &
               Main Street Station
               1500 E. Main Street, Suite 312
               Richmond, VA 23219
               Phone: (804) 786-7951
               Fax: (804) 371-2674
               Division Director: Tom Smith

               Washington Natural Heritage
               Department of Natural Resources
               (FedEx: 1111 Washington
               Street SE)
               P.O. Box 47016
               Olympia, WA 98504-7016
               Phone: (360) 902-1340
               Fax: (360) 902-1783
               Coordinator: Mark Sheehan

               West Virginia Natural Heritage
               Department of Natural Resources
               Operations Center
               Ward Road, P.O. Box 67
               Elkins, WV 26241
               Phone: (304) 637-0245
               Fax: (304) 637-0250
               Coordinator: Brian McDonald

               Wisconsin Natural Heritage
               Endangered Resources/4
               Department of Natural Resources
               101 S. Webster Street, Box 7921
               Madison, WI 53707
               Phone: (608) 266-7012
               Fax: (608) 266-2925
               Coordinator: Betty Les
Wyoming Natural Diversity
1604 Grand Avenue, Suite 2
Laramie, WY 82070
Phone: (307)745-5026
Fax: (307) 745-5026 (call first)
Coordinator: George Jones

Regional Heritage Data

Navajo Natural Heritage
Navajo Fish & Wildlife
P.O. Box 1480
Window Rock, AZ 86515-1480
Phone: (520) 871-6472
Fax: (520) 871-7069
Coordinator: Jack Meyer

TVA Regional Heritage
Division of Land Management
Tennessee Valley Authority
Norris, TN 37828
Phone: (423) 632-1593
Fax: (423) 632-1795
Coordinator: William H. Redmond

National Park  Data Centers

National Park Service
75 Spring Street SW
Atlanta, GA 30303
Regional Data Manager:
Teresa Leibfreid

Florida and Caribbean Marine
Conservation Science Center
c/o Biology  Department
P.O. Box 249118
University of Miami
Coral  Gables, FL 33124-0421
Phone: (305) 284-3013
Fax: (305) 284-3039
Marine Ecologist: Kathleen Sullivan

Great Smoky Mountains
National Park
c/o Janet Rock/Keith Langdon
1314 Cherokee Orchard Road
Twin Creeks Natural
Resources Center
Gatlinburg,  TN 37738
Phone: (423) 436-1264
Fax: (423) 436-5598
Coordinator: Keith Langdon

Gulf Islands National Seashore
1801 Gulf Breeze Parkway
Gulf Breeze, FL 32561
Phone: (904) 934-2605
Research Mgmt. Specialist: vacant

Mammoth Cave National Park
Division of Science & Resource
Mammoth Cave National Park
Mammoth Cave, KY 42259
Phone: (502) 758-2238
Chief, Science & Research Mgmt:
Jeff Bradybaugh

National Capital Region
Conservation Data Center
District of Columbia Natural
Heritage Program
13025 Riley's Lock Road
Poolesville, MD 20837
Phone: (301) 427-1354
Fax: (301) 427-1355
Resource Biologist: Olin Allen

National Forest Data Centers

National Forest in Florida
Department of Agriculture
227 N. Bronough Street,  Suite 4016
Tallahassee, FL 32301
Phone: (904) 681-7329
Fax: (904) 681-7144
Coordinator: Guy Anglin

National Forest in North Carolina
P.O. Box 2750
Asheville, NC 28802
Phone: (704) 257-4810
Forest Botanist: Steve Simon

Ouachita National Forest
P.O. Box 1270
Hot Springs, AR 71902
Phone: (501) 321-5323

Virginia Coast Reserve
The Nature Conservancy
P.O. Box 158
Brownsville Road
Nassawadox, VA 23413
Phone: (804) 442-3049
Fax: (804) 442-5418
Director: John M. Hall

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page B-1
             Glossary of Terms

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page B-2
                                               GLOSSARY OF TERMS
               Biodiversity: The number and variety of different species that populate a given place and contribute to the balance
               of ecological forces.

               Biological Stressors: Organisms that are introduced (intentionally or accidentally) to habitats in which they do not
               evolve naturally.  Examples include gypsy moths, certain tree diseases, certain types of algae, and some bacteria.

               Chemical Stressors: Chemicals released to the environment through industrial waste, auto emissions, pesticides,
               and other human activity. These chemicals can cause illnesses and even death in plants and animals.

               Consumers: Organisms such as people, other mammals, birds, and reptiles that take energy and materials from
               producers (plants) through the food web.

               Decomposers: Microscopic organisms that break down matter such as fallen trees and dead animals into basic
               chemicals such as carbon dioxide, oxygen, water, and minerals.

               Ecosystem: A community of plants and animals (including people) interacting with each other and their physical
               environment. Ecosystems include places as diverse as urban parks, wetland areas, lakes, prairie potholes, and
               major forests.

               Food Web: The set of feeding relationships by which energy and materials are transferred from one species to

               Ground Water: Underground water,  often pumped and used for drinking, irrigation, and other purposes.

               Habitat: The environment that supports plant or animal species. Examples include terrestrial (land) habitats such
               as forests and marine (ocean) environments.

               Nutrients: Basic elements that plants and animals need to survive, including carbon, nitrogen, calcium, oxygen,
               phosphorus, sulfur, and magnesium.

               Photosynthesis: The process by which plants combine sunlight, water, and carbon dioxide to make carbohydrates,
               proteins, and sugars necessary for all life.

               Physical Stressors: Activities that directly remove or alter habitat, including logging, road construction, and land

               Producers: Plants that perform photosynthesis and provide food to consumers.

               Stressors: Man-made factors that can undermine the proper functioning of ecosystems.

               Surface Water: Ground-level water bodies such as rivers, lakes, reservoirs, bays, and oceans.

               Watershed: An area where rain and other water drains to a common location such as a river or lake.

               Wetlands: Areas between land-based and surface-water ecosystems, including swamps, bogs, and marshes.
               Wetlands help control floods, filter pollutants, and serve as spawning and nursery areas for fish.

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page C-1
          Understanding Ecosystems
          An Ecosystem Primer

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page C-2
                           Understanding   Ecosystems  —
                           An  Ecosystem   Primer
                          From urban settings to rural land, the landscape is alive with the beauty and detail of nature.
                          The ecosystems that you see support you with resources (timber, water, components of phar-
                          maceuticals, and food, just to name a few) and services (water purification and erosion con-
                          trol, for example), making your survival possible and your life more enjoyable. While any-
                          one can enjoy ecosystems for their resource value or essential beauty, knowledge of their
                          underlying complexity yields a deeper appreciation for them. Being successful in protecting
                          this life support system means understanding how ecosystems work and how they can be
                          threatened. This appendix provides some basic information to help you succeed.  Appendix
                          B provides a glossary of ecosystem terms used in this appendix.

                          What Is An Ecosystem?

                          An ecosystem is a community of animals and plants interacting with one another and with
                          their physical environment. Ecosystems include physical and chemical components, such as
                          soils, water, and nutrients, that support the organisms living there.  These organisms may
                          range from large animals to microscopic bacteria. Ecosystems also can be thought of as the
                          interactions between all organisms in a given habitat; for instance, one species may serve as
                          food for another.

                          People are part of the ecosystems where they live and work. Human activities can harm or
                          destroy local ecosystems unless actions such as land development for housing or businesses
                          are carefully planned to conserve and sustain the ecology of the area. An important part of
                          ecosystem management involves finding ways to protect and enhance economic and social
                          well-being while protecting local ecosystems.

                          Ecosystem Structure and Function
                          Most ecosystems consist of four basic components: producers, consumers, decomposers, and
                          non-living matter. Most producers are green plants that use light energy from the  sun, car-
                          bon dioxide, and water to make simple sugars.  These sugars are the building blocks for the
                          other complex molecules necessary for life.

                          Consumers are organisms that consume producers (plants). Consumers include humans,
                          other mammals, birds, fish, and insects. When consumers eat producers or other con-
                          sumers, they break down, store, and use the food through the processes of digestion and
                          respiration. When an animal eats a plant or another animal, it is obtaining not only the
                          matter contained in that food source, but also the energy stored there. Producers also
                          absorb mineral nutrients from soil and water. Animals that consume lower level plants or
                          animals obtain the nutrients necessary for growing and reproducing.  When plants and
                          animals die or release organic material to the environment (for example, when leaves fall

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page C-3
              from trees), bacteria and fungi in the soil decompose this material and return its
              original mineral components to the soil.

              A "food web" or a "food chain" is one way, then, of describing how plants and animals
              interact in an ecosystem. An ecosystem also is described by cycles of component materi-
              als — minerals, energy or heat, carbon — that result in the interdependence of humans,
              other animals, plants, and the environment.

              A variety of environmental problems result when the cycles are disrupted.  For
              instance, farming and forestry operations can significantly deplete nutrients (nitrogen,
              phosphorus) in soil.  Likewise, rain and soil erosion can wash nutrients away.

              In the case of threatened and endangered plants or animals, loss of even a few individ-
              uals is significant, because the species is at or near the point of no return. When the
              population of a given plant or animal species dwindles, food chains may be broken
              and biodiversity is lost.

              Types of Ecosystems
              Living organisms interact with their environment to create many varieties of ecosys-
              tems. Understanding the different types of ecosystems helps to identify aspects of the
              local environment that need protection.

              Some major types of natural ecosystems include the  following:

                   n Surface Water Ecosystems — These include rivers, lakes, reservoirs, ponds,
                      and bays. These aquatic environments support fish and other organisms such
                      as worms, crustaceans, aquatic plants, and microscopic organisms.

                   n Estuaries — Estuaries are coastal areas where freshwater drains from the land
                      and mixes with ocean saltwater in swamps, marshes, lakes, and bays.
                      Examples include the Mississippi Delta, Chesapeake Bay, and San Francisco
                      Bay. Estuaries are biologically diverse and provide  spawning and nursery
                      grounds for the majority of the nation's fisheries.

                   n Wetlands — Wetlands are transitional areas between land-based and aquatic
                      ecosystems where ground water is at or near the surface or the land is covered
                      by shallow water. This definition would include swamps, bogs, marshes, and
                      a variety of other wet environments.  Whether coastal (such as salt marshes)
                      or inland (such as fresh water),  wetlands are  critical to water flow control,
                      water supply, water quality, and wildlife habitat.

                   n Forests — Forests are ecosystems dominated by large woody plants, particu-
                      larly trees.  In North America, forests are home to wildlife as diverse as bear,
                      moose, deer, rabbits, birds, toads, and worms.

                   n Grasslands — Grasslands cover much of the plains of the central and western
                      United States and represent important feeding areas  for wild animals and
                      domestic livestock.

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page C-4
                                    n Deserts — Deserts are arid regions that support a unique system of plants
                                      (such as cacti), mammals, reptiles, and birds.

                               Sometimes local ecosystems will be part of a last remaining area that has many of its
                               original and natural attributes. In other cases, ecosystems will be heavily influenced
                               by humans. For example, a city is an urban area that combines elements of the
                               "green" environment (such as parks) with the "built" environment (such as houses,
                               skyscrapers, and roads).  Cities are different from natural ecosystems because they
                               need large imports of energy, water, and other materials; that is, they are not self-sus-
                               taining.  Likewise, agricultural land, while cleared and planted by humans, must retain
                               certain natural features (such as healthy topsoil) to be productive and may be bordered
                               or interspersed with wooded or wetland habitat.

                               It may be difficult for a community to identify its ecosystems because:

                                    n The physical boundaries of ecosystems don't always coincide with a communi-
                                      ty's political boundaries or developed area.

                                    n The natural range for species of concern may move beyond one ecosystem.
                                      For example, songbirds that nest in your backyard may have a migratory
                                      range of thousands of miles.

                                    n  "Natural" ecosystem boundaries (where one ecosystem begins and the next
                                      one ends) are often not easily identified.

                                    n Human activities that harm an ecosystem are sometimes located far from that
                                      ecosystem. For example, air pollutants from power plants in the Midwest
                                      may travel hundreds of miles and contribute to acid rain in the Northeast.

                               A specific community's environment may contain several ecosystems. Both the rela-
                               tionships of components within ecosystems (such as water, plants, and animals) and
                               the interactions among neighboring ecosystems are important.  Communities con-
                               cerned with ecosystem protection often consider both man-made and natural bound-
                               aries, including geographic and political boundaries of the neighborhood, village, or
                               city.  A  community that manages the area in which it lives can be said to be taking a
                               "place-based" approach to protecting its environment.  A community that takes it one
                               step further and looks toward managing the ecological structure and integrity of the
                               place around it is taking an ecosystems approach.

                               Ecosystem Stress
                               Both natural and man-made factors can put the structure and healthy function of
                               ecosystems under stress.  Scientists refer to these influences collectively as "stressors".

                               Even healthy ecosystems change over time. Ecologists refer to a process of ecosys-
                               tem change as "ecological succession". There are gradual successions where the
                               aging of soils or changes in regional  climate make the landscape inhospitable to some
                               species but appropriate for others.  Succession can also result from sudden, drastic
                               change.  For instance, soon after a forest fire, shoots of pioneering grasses and  wild-
                               flowers sprout from the charred earth. Within a year or so, bushes begin to replace
                               the pioneers.  Over time, the first wave of trees becomes higher than the shrub  layer
                               and shades out some of the shrubs.  Finally, decades after the  fire has occurred, a for-

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM  Page C-5
              est community emerges that is virtually indistinguishable from nearby areas not affect-
              ed by the fire.

              Ecosystems may be able to absorb many natural processes such as forest fires and
              floods because these events usually occur infrequently or at a low level of intensity.
              Indeed, efforts to protect ecosystems from these natural processes have recently been
              found to be damaging rather than helpful.  For example, preventing small, periodic
              forest fires can lead to a buildup of debris on the forest floor that fuels major, destruc-
              tive fires. In fact, the smaller fires sometimes have a specific ecological purpose, as
              with Scotch Pines that require heat to drop their seeds.

              In contrast, an ecosystem is less able to recover from stresses induced by humans
              when those stresses  are constantly applied or occur at high levels of intensity.
              Human activity also may cause novel stresses that ecosystem processes are not adapt-
              ed to handle, such as spills of synthetic chemicals that do not degrade over time.  The
              ecosystem may have insufficient time to recover or adapt to the rapid changes
              imposed by human  activities.

              This section briefly reviews the types of ecosystem stressors — physical, biological,
              and chemical — and the problems they can cause.

                   n  Physical Stressors — Physical stressors include changes that remove or alter
                      habitat. For instance, erosion of topsoil that results from land disturbance can
                      result in loss of habitat for vegetation on land and accumulation of sediment
                      in streams and lakes. In addition, physical stressors can undermine ecosys-
                      tems by fragmenting habitats.  Physical disturbance — such as the excessive
                      destruction of nesting habitat for birds or the alteration of in-stream fish habi-
                      tat such as swift water, pools, and rapids — can result in major losses of these
                      organisms.  Wildlife that need more space or access to multiple areas (such as
                      lakes  and forests) will disappear.

                      Because the sources of physical stress tend to be visible and well known in
                      the community (for example, land development), they are often the object of
                      community-based ecosystem protection efforts.  However, obvious physical
                      stressors are often not the only influences on the ecosystem.

                   "  Biological Stressors — Biological stressors are organisms or microorganisms
                      that are introduced (released), intentionally or accidentally, to habitats in
                      which they did not evolve naturally. These organisms are often called
                      "exotics", because they did not occur naturally along with the native plants or
                      animals. They may be difficult to control if they reproduce rapidly in the new
                      environment.  Examples include infestations of insects such  as the gypsy
                      moth, plants such as kudzu, and tree diseases such as chestnut blight.
                      Biological stressors become  a concern when they compete against native
                      species, replace them, and become pests.  The result often can be loss of habi-
                      tat or disruption of established food chains.

                      The bacteria, parasites, and viruses that occur in human sewage and animal
                      waste are common biological stressors. These microscopic organisms are
                      released to the environment by sewage treatment plants, farm runoff, or other
                      means. The result can be contaminated drinking wells that cause illness in

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page C-6
                                 Ecological Society of America, The
                                 Scientific Basis for Ecosystem Management -
                                 An Assessment by the ESA, Washington, DC,
                                 1995, e-mail: esahq@esa,org. Developed by
                                 a committee of ecologists, this document
                                 defines ecosystem management and explains
                 how ecological science can be applied to improve ecosystem

                 Freedman, Bill, Environmental Ecology: The Ecological Effects
                 of Pollution, Disturbance, and Other Stresses, Academic Press,
                 San Diego, CA, ISBN 0-12-266542-2, 1995. This environmen-
                 tal science text provides a detailed explanation of the ecological
                 effects of human activity, with chapters on air pollution, acidifi-
                 cation, forest declines, oil pollution, eutrophication, pesticides,
                 and other topics.

                 MiDer, G. Tyler, Living in the Environment, Wadsworth
                 Publishing, Belmont, CA, ISBN 0-534-00684-1, 1979.

                 Noss, R.F, and A.Y. Cooperrider, Saving Nature's Legacy:
                 Protecting and Restoring Biodiversity, Defenders of Wildlife,
                 Island Press, Washington, DC 20009, ISBN  1-55963-248-8,
                               of stressors and their impacts.
humans or contamination of rivers
and lakes, sometimes resulting in
fish kills and waterfowl deaths.

n  Chemical Stressors —
   Technology and industrialization
   have resulted in the introduction
   of increasing  quantities of chem-
   icals into the  environment.
   Chemical stressors include haz-
   ardous waste, industrial chemi-
   cals, pesticides, and fertilizers.
   Depending  on the physical and
   chemical properties of contami-
   nants, they  can  be incorporated
   into the cycles of the atmos-
   phere, soil,  and water, where
   plants and animals become
   exposed.  Chemical stressors can
   hurt individual organisms in a
   variety of ways, ranging from
   rapid death to non-lethal effects
   (such as impairment of repro-
   ductive capability).

Table C-l provides several examples
                               Ecosystems Provide Key Services

                               Ecosystems Make the Human Environment Livable
                               One function of ecosystems can be described as "infrastructure services". This refers
                               to the ways that ecosystems, when properly functioning, can make the human environ-
                               ment more habitable.  These services include the following:

                                    n Water Supply — Ecosystems provide fresh water for household uses (such as
                                      drinking and bathing) and for agricultural and industrial uses.  Surface water
                                      sources (such as lakes, reservoirs, and rivers) and underground water sources
                                      both play a vital role in the maintenance of human and animal life.

                                    n Control of Water Movement — Wetlands control floods, serving as a sponge
                                      that absorbs water from  heavy rains or snowmelt.  Similarly, coastal dune sys-
                                      tems  and wetlands help protect against storms, absorbing the effect of waves
                                      and other storm surges.  This storm protection limits flooding and reduces
                                      erosion of coastal areas.  The salt marshes and barrier islands from Cape Cod
                                      to Florida, the delta system of Louisiana, and the mangroves of the Florida
                                      keys  are all examples of coastal wetlands that provide protective services.

                                    n Erosion Control — Soil is held in place by the root systems of trees, grasses,
                                      and other vegetation, preventing  erosion by rain, wind, and waves. All terres-

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page C-7
                                                        Table C-1

Habitat removal
and fragmentation
Zebra mussels
Toxic Chemicals
Logging, agriculture, surface
mining, construction
Residential and commercial
development, logging
Transported on hulls of foreign
ships and spread by small boats
Human sewage,
animal waste
Fertilizers, animal waste
Automobiles, factories,
How Ecosystems Are Affected
Loss of topsoil; siltation of rivers and
Decline in animal abundance and diversity
Crowding out of native species in affected
surface waters
Illness in humans through drinking water;
fish kills, waterfowl deaths
Eutrophication of surface water
Contamination of air, water, and soil;
health and reproductive effects in humans
and wildlife
trial plants, especially healthy forest and grassland ecosystems, promote soil
formation, enrichment, and stabilization. Soil erosion can lead to increased
sedimentation of streams, rivers, and lakes, which can harm or destroy aauatic

                      habitats, such as trout streams, oyster beds, or salmon spawning grounds.
                      Sedimentation also can impair water transportation, possibly requiring dredg-
                      ing or other expensive measures to correct the problem.

                    n Pollution Control — Soil and plant life are essential  to the storage  and
                      control of toxics  in the  environment. For example, wetlands and soil
                      ecosystems in rural areas are the first line of defense against pesticide runoff,
                      breaking organic contaminants down before they reach sensitive areas and
                      slowing the movement of inorganic pollutants. Organisms in water can break
                      down sewage, oil, and other pollutants. Vegetation also plays  a role in reduc-
                      ing air pollution. Trees can trap dust and dirt particles that transport pollu-
                      tants. Their leaves also absorb gases like ozone and sulfur dioxide. Of
                      course, ecosystems' ability to absorb pollutants is limited; humans must also
                      control the release of pollutants to the environment.

                    n Local Climate Control — Trees and shrubs, particularly in densely forested
                      areas, can affect local climate. They absorb and give off water to the  atmos-
                      phere.  Removing trees can make affected areas drier and hotter. In addition,
                      trees cool by shading.  Finally, trees and plants absorb carbon  dioxide and
                      release the oxygen needed by most living things.

              Ecosystems Influence a Community's Economic and Social Well-Being
              Ecosystems play a major role in economic life as well as the community's social well-

Fnlappen.qxd 9/13/00 3:01 PM Page C-8
                              being.  See Chapter 3 of this resource book for a detailed discussion of how ecosys-
                              tems affect local economies and the quality of life.

                              Ecosystems Are Needed by Other Species
                              Humans are only one member of the ecosystem. Every ecosystem also includes a
                              multitude of other plants and animals.  Some species depend on more than one habi-
                              tat. This is most obvious with amphibians and migratory birds.  Frogs and salaman-
                              ders develop in the water but spend much of their adult lives on land. A wood duck
                              may winter in the Everglades, feed and rest in a Virginia pond, and nest in an upstate
                              New York swamp.  The survival of such species is dependent on the availability and
                              environmental condition of all the required habitats — at the right time and place.
                              Other species' reliance on local ecosystems is important when evaluating the benefits
                              these ecosystems provide your community.

                              Barataria-Terrebonne National Estuary Program (BTNEP), Estuary Facts, 1995.

                              Barth, S., et al., Exploring the Theory and Application of Ecosystem Management,
                              University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 1994.

                              Cairns, J., Jr. and B.R. Niederlehner, Estimating the Effects of Toxicants on Ecosystem
                              Service, Environmental Health Perspectives. Volume 102, Number 11, pp. 936-939.

                              Ecological Society of America, The Scientific Basis for Ecosystem Management - An
                              Assessment by the ESA, Washington, DC, 1995.

                              Horwitz, Elinor L., Our Nation's Wetlands,  Council on Environmental Quality,
                              Washington, DC, 1978.

                              Kusler, Jon A., Our National Wetland Heritage: A Protection Guidebook,
                              Environmental Law Institute, Washington, DC, 1983.

                              Spurr, Stephen H. and Burton Barnes, Forest Ecology, John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 0-
                              471-04732-5, 1980.

                              Terrene Institute, Handle with Care: Your Guide to Preventing Water Pollution,
                              Washington, DC, 1991.

                              University of Colorado, Natural Resources Law Center, The  Watershed Source Book:
                              Watershed Based Solutions to Natural Resource Problems, no date.

                              U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cooling and Communities, Washington DC,

                              Vance, Tamara A. and Arthur B. Larson, Fiscal Impact of Major Land Uses in
                              Culpeper County, Virginia, Piedmont Environmental Council, 1988.

CoverREV.QXD 9/13/00 2:55 PM Page 2
                                                                                           & Tl O

C/J 00 S
CoverREV.QXD 9/13/00 2:55 PM Page 3