oEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 1860 L.Tte Denver CO180295 September 1980 450R80002 J/Vater Planning and Management Brancn Forest Nonpoint Source Control Strategy ------- FOREST NONPOINT SOURCE CONTROL STRATEGY The Clean Water Act of 1972 established a Water Quality Management Program (Section 208) and several other programs to clean up and maintain our waters. The Nonpolnt Source (NPS) Control Program seeks to control pollutants which runoff or seep from broad areas of land. Forest land activities, especially silviculture, is an important nonpoint source pollution control category in EPA Region VIII. The strategy has been developed to provide guidance for this Region's approach to forest land management. It is the regional link between National Water Quality Management Strategy and State and local programs; as such it will be revised periodically to respond to changing conditions and programs. Many good suggestions were received from the review of the draft. Thank you for taking the time to respond. David Stand ley Director Water Division ------- TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Purpose 1 Situation 1 Objective 1. Implement , as needed on Region VIII, the 1979 EPA - Forest Service National Agreement 2 Objective 2. To have an operational self-sustaining and effective forest NPS Control Program for State and private lands in each State by 1983 5 Objective 3. Assist in initiating forestry projects that implement and evaluate Best Management Practices (BMP) 8 Objective 4. EPA and Water Quality Management (WQM) planning agencies assist and review implementation and evaluation of BMP's of silviculture NPS on federal forest land (FS, BLM) 9 ------- TABLES Page I. Federally Managed Land and Commercial Forest Land 11 II. Summary of Present Status of Forest Land NPS Programs - State and Private Lands 12 III. Summary of Present Status (FY 80) NPS Control Programs on National Forest Lands 14 ATTACHMENTS Page I. Statement of Intent FS - EPA Forestry Water Quality Management 16 II. Forestry WQM - BMP Implementation EPA memorandum, September 12, 1979 17 ------- FOREST NONPOINT SOURCE STRATEGY Purpose The purpose of this forest strategy Is to provide direction to EPA Region VIII for the prevention and control of nonpoint source (NFS) water pollution from forest uses for FY 80 and beyond. While the overriding concern Is maintenance and Improvement of water quality, the specific goal addressed by this strategy is to have an operational, self-sustaining, and effective forest nonpoint source control program in each state by FY 8?I This strategy is the framework for: 1) defining regional forest land NPS policy within the national framework, 2) developing state programs for continuing NPS planning and implementation activities on forest lands; 3} funding FY 80 and beyond NPS program elements; 4) determining the need for new Federal, state and local legislation or changes needed in existing legislation, and 5} recommending required legislative action. Situation There are many non-silviculture activities and developments that take place on forest lands that have the potential to contribute to nonpoint source water pollution. Some of these are roads, homes, recreational developments, energy, mining, and livestock grazing. The intent of this strategy is to have comprehensive prevention and control programs dealing with all NPS pollution from forest lands. This initial strategy emphasizes silviculture, hopefully future revisions will deal effectively with all nonpoint sources. All the states in Region VIII contain forest land. Table 1 shows the commercial forest land and federally-managed land in each state. Commercial forest land ranges from almost none in North Dakota to 15.8 million acres in Montana. The majority of commercial forest land is managed by the federal government; primarily by the U.S.O.A. Forest Service. Because of differences in law, policy and financing that applies to federally-managed forest lands and state and private-managed forest lands, separate strategies apply. The EPA strategy for controlling NPS water pollution on state and private forest lands is located in Objective 2 and 3, federal lands is in Objective 4. -1- ------- The major silvicultural activities that cause water quality Impacts are: construction and maintenance of permanent and temporary roads and trails for access; cutting, skidding and decking logs; and slash disposal by fire or mechanical means. Through these activities the following temporary adverse effects can occur: 1. Increase 1n soil movement and stream sedimentation; 2. Increase in stream temperature; 3. Introduction of wood debris into the stream; 4. Disturbance of fisheries and recreational values; and 5. Changes 1n water runoff (timing) regime. Silviculture has been identified as a significant nonpoint source in the following Water Quality Management Plans: Montana Statewide; Flathead (MT); Blue Ribbons (MT); Blackfoot Indian Reservation (MT); Sixth District (SD); and Northwest Colorado 208 (CO). Montana identified over 150 water quality problems resulting from improper timber harvesting and logging activities in the statewide planning area. Silviculture NFS water quality problems vary in amount and cause from state to state and area to area. i The milestone dates are estimated completion dates for the tasks. The recommended agencies column lists the agencies that are recommended to have a lead role in accomplishing the task. Objective 1. Implement, as needed in Region VIII, the 1979 EPA-Forest Service national agreement (Attachment #1). Responsible Tasks Milestones Agencies 1. Cooperation on the Resource Planning Act. The draft RPA report was published and re- viewed in 1979. -2- ------- a. Review recommendations Sept. 1980 EPA from the Forest Service and determine consistency with state WQM plans. 2. Cooperate with and participate in the National Forest Land Management Planning Projects. FY 80 & 81 EPA The project will test land manage- ment planning guidelines in re- lation to Water Quality Management and the environmental impact state- ment process. The details on how and where this activity will be carried out have not been completed at this time. 3. Coordination between state forest resource planning programs and state water quality plans. Colorado State Forest Service was selected for a $30,000 national program grant. Their efforts will be used as prototype for co- ordination in other states. a. Complete the Colorado SFS project as per attached July, 1981 EPA, Colorado work plan, Attachment I. State Forest Service 4. Forestry Participation in Agriculture Conservation Program (ACP)Special Projects. There are no forestry-related special projects in Region VIII at this time. The opportunity may exist and is mentioned in Objective 3 of the strategy. a. Region VIII should pursue and become involved; encouraging -3- ------- strong coordination between State Forester and State Water Quality Agency; providing planning funds when possible. Continuing EPA 5. National WQM Training Package for loggers and operators. The package is being developed nationally and should be ready for testing during FY81. It will consist of three segments. One segment is designed to inform elected officials of their responsibilities and presents various methods that can be used. A second segment is more technical and is designed for timber sale administrators or forest land owners. The third segment is more field oriented and designed for loggers and operators. It will accommodate regionally specific problems, techniques and data. a. Region VIII has recommended to the Headquarters Office that the State Forester in Montana and the Black Hill N.F. in South Dakota test this package. Sept. 1981 EPA, MT. State Forester and Black Hills N.F. -4- ------- Use of the package should be implemented, by Water Quality Management Planning Agencies, State Forest Agencies and U.S.D.A. Forest Service. Continuing EPA, etc. Objective 2. To have an operational, self-sustaining and effective forest NPS control program for state and private lands in each state by 1983. The essential components of a forest NPS control program for State and private lands are Identified in the first column of Table II. These criteria provide a framework against which the status of the forest NPS control effort can be assessed and program needs evaluated. The status of each state program except North Dakota has been evaluated in terms of these criteria and are noted on Table II. North Dakota has such a small amount of forest land, and what there is is scattered, that there is no need to address it in detail. No forest NPS water pollution problem has been identified in North Dakota and it is probable that there will not be one identified in the future. Of the other five states in Region VIII, Montana and South Dakota have considered silviculture to be a NPS problem. The other states are listed and dealt with because there is a potential for problems to develop or be identified in the future. Each state should have a continuing, preventive program to monitor and deal with existing or potential forest NPS water pollution problems. In general, the State Forester should have the lead role in technical assistance, and educational programs for state and private forest lands. Other state and federal agencies will cooperate and coordinate with the State Forester as needed depending on the particular state Water Quality Management Plan, legislation, etc. A continual dialogue between EPA, U.S.F.S and the states needs to take place to keep this strategy current and valid. All tasks are for EPA to complete unless otherwise noted. COLORADO Tasks Milestones Responsible Agencies Work with the State Forester to complete the national silvi- culture project and implement a non-regulatory program statewide. FY 81 EPA and Colorado State Forest Service -5- ------- 2. Investigate and promote incentives for applying Best Management Practices (BMP's) on privately owned land. 3. Facilitate an agreement between the State 208 Unit, Water Quality control and the State Forester that will define the roles and responsibility of each in water pollution control. 4. Investigate the effect of home development and related access roads are having on water quality, especially sediment. MONTANA Tasks 2. 3. Support and facilitate the State Water Quality Bureau, State Forester, and Conservation Districts in implementing a program that will: provide as- sistance to private forest land owners in preventing nonpoint source pollution from forest lands; and examine and seek additional tech- nical and financial assistance. Fund a project that will find ways of pro- viding funds and technical assistance to rehabilitate eroding lands damaged by past logging practices. Explore the need for a special forestry project in Montana in FY 81 or 82. Continuing EPA FY 82 EPA FY 81 Milestones EPA Responsible Agencies Continuing EPA 1981 or 1982 May 1981 EPA EPA -6- ------- SOUTH DAKOTA Tasks 1. Assist and facilitate the State Forester and the State Department of Environmental Protection in providing adequate technical and financial assistance and an educational program to private forest land owners for the control of nonpoint pollution. The role and respon- sibilities of the State Forester and Department of Envi- ronmental Protection should be documented in an interagency agreement. 2. Encourage the State Department of Environ- mental Protection and Sixth District Areawide to coordinate water quality monitoring between state and federal agencies. Make sure monitoring of privately owned forest land is adequate. 3. Establish procedures to allow the State Forester to inspect for water quality control practices at the same time he inspects for fire, insect and disease control purposes. Milestones Responsible Agencies 1981 or 1982 EPA 1981 EPA 1981 EPA, S.D. Div, of Forestry and Dept. of Environmental Protection -7- ------- UTAH Tasks Follow through with the FY 80 grant to the State Forester. The project should result in a state- wide control program, if needed, to meet all of the essential components listed in Table II. WYOMING Tasks 1. Assist in defining the role and responsibilities of the State Forester in NFS control on private forest lands and document in an interagency agree- ment, between the State Forester and the State D.E.Q. 2. Explore the need for a special forestry project in Wyoming. Objective 3. Milestones Responsible Agencies 1981 Milestones Responsible Agencies FY 81 Dec. 1980 EPA EPA Assist in initiating forestry projects that implement and evaluate Best Management Practices (BMP). See Attachment #2, EPA Information Memorandum 79-111 Tasks 1. EPA met with the state WQM agency, State Forester, and federal agencies (FS, BLM, SCS, ASCS) as needed to determine the potential for implementing forestry demonstration projects, and stimulate interest in these projects. Milestones Responsible Agencies Dec. 1980 EPA -8- ------- Implement BMP's through ACP, FIP, federal, state, local, or private industry financing,on private forest lands. Objective 4. Continuing Agencies to be selected EPA and Water Quality Management (WQM) planning agencies assist and review implementation and evaluation of BMP's for silviculture NPS on federal forest lands (FS, BLM). Table III summarizes the present status of silviculture NPS control programs on National Forest lands. The following tasks and milestones generally apply to each state and therefore, are not broken out by state. Tasks 1. Review and encourage the WQM planning agencies to review consistency of federal agencies, regional (FS).and state (BLM) land management plans (IMP) with state WQM plans. 2. WQM planning agencies review the consistency of the more de- tailed Forest (FS) and District IMP (BLM) with state and areawide WQM plans. Offer written suggestions for improve- ment and coordination. 3. Assist WQM planning agencies that have existing or potential forest land NPS water quality pollution problems on federal lands to complete an agreement with federal land management Agencies. The agreement should include at least the following: a. Methods to coordinate future continuing planning; Milestones Responsible Agencies Continuing EPA Continuing WQM Plan- ning Agen- cies -9- ------- b. Specific Implementation responsibiTitles; c. Responsibilities for mon1toring implementation of BMP's and water quality assessments; d. Designation of the federal land management agency as management agency for the land It administers. 4. Support federal land management Annually EPA agency programs and funding requests related to WQM by: Forest Service - EPA will hold an Interagency meeting with the Forest Service to understand the FS program- ming and budgeting process and explore ways of co- ordinating programs. Initial meetings com- pleted, continue as necessary. 5. Encourage the Forest Service and other institutions to conduct research on how to manage lands according to hydro!ogic limits or what is acceptable 1n the stream or aquatic ecosystem. Ongoing -10- ------- COLORADO 66 5 24.0 36% MONTANA 93.3 27.7 30X NORTH DAKOTA 44.5 2.3 5X SOUTH DAKOTA 42.9 3.3 7X UTAH 52.9 34.9 661 WYOMING 62.3 29.8 48X TABLE I - FEDERALLY - OWNED LAND AND COMMERCIAL FOREST LAMP COLORADO 1. Total State (million acres) (4) 2. Federally-Owned (million acres) Percent of State (4) a. Forest Service 14.4 16.7 1.2 2.0 8.0 9.3 (million acres) b. BLH and other federal agencies 9 6 11.0 1.1 1 3 26.9 20.5 (million acres) 3. Commercial Forest Land (1) Total In 12.3 15.8 (2) Insignificant 1.5 3.4 4.8 State (million acres) a. State and private owned (million ares) b Federally owned (million acres) Percent of State 3.3 9.0 73X \ 5.1 (2) Insignificant 9.2 (2) 58X /- .5 1.0 73X :ootnotes 1 2 3 4 Figures are estimates from the RARE II Draft EIS Supplement, USDA-FS, 1978. Figures are not from comparable data. Commercial forest land are forest sites capable of growing more than 20 cubic feet Figures are from public land statistics. USDA-BLH, 1976. of wood/acre/year. .8 1.0 2.6 (FS) 3.8 (FS) 77X BOX t A ------- TABLE IP SUMMARY OF PRESENT STATUS OF FOREST LAND NFS PROGRAMS - STATE AND PRIVATE LANDS (EXCLUDES FEDERAL LANDS) 1. 4. ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS Geographic prior- tlzatlon of problem watersheds. Responsibility to control silviculture problems has been assigned to desig- nated mgt agencies. Mgt Agencies have a Expertise b. Adequate Staff c Relevant Auth. d. Commitment Identification of BMP's (statewide & where Implementation Is assured) COLORADO No-Not identl- as a signif- icant problem on non-federal lands No-State Forester Is to provide technical assistance. State Forester a Yes b. No c. Yes d. Yes No-State Forester Is presently working on a project to do this. MONTANA Yes-General Identi- fication and prior- Itization. Yes-Legislation designating Cons. Dlst. as as mgt. agency with Dlv. of Forestry respon- 1ble for tech- nical assistance and other assist- ance. a. Yes b. No c. Yes d. Yes Yes-Not site specific. SOUTH DAKOTA Yes-Silviculture was Identified as the jeast priority problem in the 6th plan. D1st. Yes-Dept. of Same & Fish and Parks. Division of Forestry; Ex- tension Service; Conservation District. a. Yes b. No c. Yes d. Yes Yes-6th Dlst. Plan and BHNF BMP's Report UTAH No-Not 1dent1-> fled as a sig- nificant problem. State Forester Is presently doing a state- wide assessment. No. (not Identified) a. b. c. d. No-State Fores- ter Is presently working on a FY 80 funded project to do so if necessary. WYOMING No-Not identi- fied as a significant NPS problem. No. (not identified) a. b. c d. Yes-BMP's Identi- fied for federal lands will apply to all harvest areas as appro- priate. Provision of ade- quate technical and financial assistance to Implement the control program. Effective educational program to Inform and Involve the affected public -Public Participation -Educational-NPS Mgt. No-State Forester will probably need additional resources. No. Yes/No-State and Federal programs are available but neither are adequate. Yes-Need more resources to improve the programs. No-some assistance available but not adequate. No. No-control pro- gram recommended at this time. No. No-No assistance programs defined by the State. No. -12- ------- TABLE II. SUMMARY OF PRESENT STATUS OF FOREST LAND NPS PROGRAMS - STATE AND PRIVATE LANDS (EXCLUDES FEDERAL LANDS) ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS 7. Monitoring and In- spection respon- sibilities Identi- fied & assigned. 8. Consideration of regulatory alternatives. Agreement on schedule of ml lestones for implementation a. Prog, deficiencies b. Priority watersheds. 10. Agreement on reporting system (at least annual) to the R.A. on progress made In Implementation. COLORADO Yes-Dept of Health UQC Dlv , and Federal Agencies need better coordination. Yes-Not needed. No. No. MONTANA Yes-NQB and Div. of Forestry have the re- sponsibility but resources are limited. Yes-Win pursue regulatory alternative If the non- regulatory program falls Yes-As related to the present detailed work plan for Dlv. of Forestry, FY 80 dollars, state- wide, in process. Yes-C.D.'s and Dlv of Forestry to UQB and UQB to EPA. SOUTH DAKOTA No-Undefined at this time. No. No. WYOMING DEQ has overall monitoring and inspection re- sponsibilities. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. -13- ------- ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS P-eA. 1. Geographic prior 1- ttzatlon Of NFS problems 2. Responsibility to control silviculture problems has been assigned to desig- nated management agencies 3 Mgt. Agencies have a Expertise b 'Adequate Staff c. Relevant Authorities d. Coimltment 4. Identification of BMP'S. TABLE III: SUMMARY COLORADO R-2 No-F.S. plans to have a new Inventory completed by end of FY 61. Some units are complete now Yes. - Yes. Yes-could use more. Yes. Yes. Yes OF PRESENT STATUS MONTANA R-l Yes-New In- ventory com- plete by end of FY 80. Yes-Forest Service. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. (FY 80) NFS CONTROL PROGRAMS EPA. REGION VIII SOUTH DAKOTA ft-2 Yes-Forest wide. Yes-Forest Service. Yes. No-need additional staff. Yes. Yes. Yes. ON NATIONAL FOREST LANDS UTAH R-4 No-New Inventory being done now. to be completed by the end of FY 81. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. WYOMING R-2 No-New Inventory to be completed by the end of FY 81. Coordinate with state and areawldes. Yes-Some land areas were not assigned to the FS as Mgt Agency, Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. -14- ------- 7. ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS Provision of adequate technical and finan- cial assistance to implement the control program. Monitoring and Inspection re- sponsibilities Identified and assigned. Agreement on: Implement. a. Schedule b UQ Improvements c. Reporting and coordination with States on areawldes. re- COLORADO R-2 Yes. Technical sources come from within the FS, Finan- cial from Congress. The watershed pro- gram has not been financed to 100X of needs. Yes. SOUTH DAKOTA R-2 Yes. UTAH R-4 Yes No-Has been started. No. Yes-Parti ally Yes-forest Service. Yes. Yes. Yes. No-Need to de- fine 6th 01st., State and FS. No-Has been started. No. Yes. Yes. Yes-Except no schedule on priority. Yes. Yes. Yes-Forest Service and state. Needs to be better defined. No. No. No. -15- ------- STATEMENT Og FS-EPA FORESTRY WATER Q'JALTTy MANAGEMENT February 14, 1979 USDA, Forest Service and U. S. Environmental Protection Agency acting within their legal authorities, budget, and personnel constraints will cooperate to achieve improved water quality resulting from forestry activities* Forest. Service will provide overall leadership in forest conservation, develop- ment and ultilization practices that result in improved water quality* Environmental Protection Agency will provide financial assistance and review* Four major coordination areas are included in this effort* They are (1) Resource Planning Act Assessment and Program, {2} Forest Land and Resource Management Planning projects, (3) Water Quality Management aspects of the Forest Incentives Program'and Agricultural Conservation Program, and (4) Information and Education. Executive meetings will be held as requested by either agency. An ad hoc Forestry Water Quality Management: Workgroup is established for program coordination and problem solving*. Menher- ship includes: FS, Watershed Management Staff Director, Chairman FS, Cooperative Forestry FS, Area Planning and Development FS, Resource Program and Assessrvent FS, land Management Planning FS, Forest Environmental Research FS, Timber Management Research EPA, W&ter Planning Division EPA, Office of Federal Activities EPA, Research and Development This Statement of Intent renews emphasis expressed in the April 2, 1976 Forest Service-Environmental Protection Agency cooperative Agreement* O xv /John R. McGulre Chief, Forest Service Barbara Blum Deputy Administrator Environmental Protection Agency Attachment I -16- ------- UNI I tU 5 1 A I ti t N V IKUNMCN i AU rnu i cu i rorr«uc w. SEP 12 1973 SUBJECT Forestry WQM-BMP Implementation FROM: Merna Hurd, Direct* Water Planning MstW/Mf-fv "V •$£? 1 7 T0' All Regional Water Division Directors «j«if« L .|V> ATTN: All HPS Coordinators r«.\Ui::s All 208 Coordinators INFORMATION MEMORANDUM: INFO 79-111 Purpose To provide guidance on the development and funding of State Forestry projects which highlight the implementation of forestry best management practices (BMPs). Background Forestry projects to implement and evaluate BMPs on forestlands are included in several State WQM plans. Implementing these projects can strengthen forestry WQM activities through the 208 continuing planning process. v - EPA has initiated action with the Forest Service (FS) through the February 15, 1979, "Statement of Intent" to encourage such projects through the Forestry Incentives Program (FIP) and Agricultural Con- servation Program (ACP). Some forestry activity is reported in existing MIP and ACP Special Projects, primarily in New York, South Carolina, and New Mexico. Other States such as Kentucky, Florida, and Oregon are initiating prototype projects through State WQM Programs. Information K'OH projects should be encouraged where forestry related water quality problems or potential problems exist. These projects should contain i,e.'eral key elements: 1. Focus" on a particular area with specific water quality problems. C. Provisions for public involvement and education, including a iTiechanism to involve the forestry community in the project. 4, Provisions to implement BMPs. Through existing Federal Programs (FIP/ACP). Through State or local Programs. Through private industry, consultants and others. technical assistance to carry out the project. Attachment II -17- ------- -2- 5. A process for handling problem forestry polluters in the project area* 6. An evaluation and monitoring program. Where these elements are adequately addressed, 203 funds could be utilized for the following parts of the projects: 1. Planning Identifying specific problem areas requiring BMPs Determining specific BMPs to be applied Determining Monitoring and Evaluation procedures 2. Monitoring and Evaluation of water quality impacts and BMP effectiveness. 3. Public involvement and education EPA and State Water Quality Agency personnel should actively participate in the institutional arrangements to implement these projects. The mechanism for initiating forestry WQM projects is the 208 continuing planning process. These projects should be identified in the WQM plans and/or State/EPA Agreements. ACP and FIP are programs that may be utilized to implement BHPs. Where appropriate, other Forestry programs through forest industry, extension forestry, consultants, and landowners associations should also be utilized to implement BMPs. Experience has shown that EPA initiatives at the State and local level are important in getting projects underway. Your active involvement will be critical to the success of these programs. The State Forester is generally responsible for implementing the projects so coordination between State Water Quality Agency Administrator and the State Forester is the key to project success. EPA Regions should continue to strengthen the relation- ship between State Water Quality Agencies and State Foresters by bringing tnem together to discuss potential projects. Active participation in ACP btate Development Committees is another forum for discussing potential projects. Close coordination with the Agricultural Stabilization and ^Conservation Service (ASCS), which administers the ACP and FIP programs, and the FS is essential to activate ACP and FIP projects. EPA will continue to cooperate with ASCS, FS, and State Foresters through Ua« National ACP Development Committee to encourage forestry and agriculture w«t*r quality projects. In addition, FS has agreed to advise their Rogi'onal/Area-personnel to work with the State Water Quality Agencies for the p«t*pes3 of highlighting the UQM aspects of the FIP and ACP programs. However FS suggests thai: EPA psrsonnel encourage State WQM agency coordi- nation with noth ASCS and the State Forester to facilitate project imple- mentation. As Projects develop, keep Walt Rittall (755-9231) informed so we can maintain coord'"'St -18- ------- |