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-
------- |