EPA/910/9-91-039	Alaska
United States	Region 10	Idaho
Environmental Protection	1200 Sixth Avenue	Oregon
Agency	Seattle WA 98101	Washington
Water Division	NPS Section (WD-139) November 1991
Land Manager's
Guide to Water
Quality Monitoring

-------
WHAT IS WATER QUALITY
MONITORING?
IT'S GOOD BUSINESS.
Land managers are often caught in a
crossfire of conflicting interests. On
one side are the laws that require
safe, environmentally sound
management practices to protect
fish, wildlife and water quality. On
the other side are the fundamental
laws of supply and demand— and
increased competition among
interest groups for forest products
and other natural resources.
To succeed, land managers must
implement cost-effective and
efficient operations that are environ-
mentally sound. Land managers in
the Pacific Northwest and Alaska are
now expected and, in some cases,
required by law to fully integrate
monitoring and evaluation into
their resource management pro-
grams.
Through monitoring and evaluation,
land managers can determine how
well an activity is meeting resource
management objectives— for
example, the protection of fisheries,
drinking water or other beneficial
use§. Information from monitoring
can provide insights about the
effectiveness of planning and
implementation efforts, trigger
corrective action on current activi-
ties and dictate adjustments to
future projects. Monitoring informa-
tion can help land managers set
priorities, define the full range of
management options and determine
the most cost-effective prescriptions.
In short, monitoring and evaluation
are good business.
By evaluating information from
monitoring, managers can determine:
If land management activities comply with state and tribal water quality
standards, forest practice rules or other regulations.
if best management practices (BMPs) have been implemented as
planned.
If existing BMPs are effective, if they need to be modified, or if new
BMPs should be developed in order to meet management goals.
If trends indicate that water quality or other resource conditions are
improving or being degraded over time.
If assumptions about direct, indirect and cumulative effects of manage-
ment activities on resources are valid.
Note: Monitoring is not mitigation. Monitoring is a tool to measure
your success and make adjustments to your mitigation practices.
LAND MANAGER'S GUIDE TO WATER QUALITY MONITORING

-------
WHO BENEFITS FROM
MONITORING AND EVALUATION?
EVERYONE.
Rivers, streams and other aquatic
resources are shared by everyone
who works, lives in or visits the
Pacific Northwest and Alaska. To
protect and restore these important
resources, Congress has amended
the federal Clean Water Act to
emphasize control of nonpoint
source pollution. With this new
focus, management activities with
the potential, to produce nonpoint
source pollution are coming under
increased scrutiny. States are
receiving guidance and financial
assistance from the U.S. Environ-
Who's in Charge?
State water quality agencies
are responsible for imple-
menting the Clean Water Act.
These agencies have desig-
nated land management
agencies (such as the USDA-
Forest Service or state
departments of lands) to assist
in the Act's implementation.
With water quality issues, the
designated agencies are
directly accountable to the
state for their performance.
The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency offers
assistance and oversees each
state's implementation of the
Clean Water Act.
mental Protection Agency to
develop standards, management
techniques and enforcement
mechanisms for management
activities that protect public re-
sources. Included in these improved
standards and mechanisms are
requirements for water quality and
aquatic habitat monitoring. It's
likely that future amendments of the
Clean Water Act will call for even
more aggressive steps to control
nonpoint source pollution.
OURWATERSHEDS.
The fate of our forests and other
natural resources is linked to the
health of our rivers, lakes and
slieains. Water quality monitoring is
the best way to measure the effects
of land management activities on
thes£ aquatic resources. With
information from monitoring, land
managers can take action to better
protect and improve our watersheds
and their beneficial uses.
OURSELVES.
When many of us chose careers in
resource management, we made a
commitment to scientifically
manage and conserve the land.
Guided by information from well-
directed monitoring efforts, land
managers can make resource
decisions that further this commit-
ment to land stewardship. Every-
body benefits— especially ourselves.
LAND MANAGER'S GUI DE TO WATER QUALITY MONITORING

-------
HOW DOES
IT WORK?
manager's questions. Often these
techniques will include monitoring
up on the slopes as well as in
streams— giving managers a more
complete picture of land-based
activities and their effects on aquatic
resources. Monitoring techniques
can involve a wide range of chemi-
cal, physical or biological param-
eters. In-stream techniques could
range from traditional water column
chemistry to the evaluation of
physical features of acquatic habitat.
Monitoring on the slope might
range from photo points to the
measurement of erosion rates from a
disturbed area.
A monitoring plan should clearly
identify the staff responsible for
each task. The plan should also
START WITH A PLAN.
Monitoring, like any other manage-
ment activity, should begin with a
plan. The first step in developing a
monitoring plan is to formulate a set
of clearly defined objectives. Cast
from the questions that you want to
answer, these objectives should be
identified by land managers in
consultation with technical staff.
For instance, a manager may want
to determine the effects of forest
practices on fish habitat in a
watershed. From this rather broad
objective, a series of specific objec-
tives can be drafted by technical
staff in consultation with the land
manager. Technical staff can then
decide which monitoring techniques
will provide data to answer the
define the milestones and products
(such as progress reports) for
various phases of the monitoring
project. To support all of these
activities, include monitoring as a
regular part of the project cost when
you prepare program budgets.
A WELL-CRAFTED
MONITORING PLAN
IS...
Understandable
Don't hesitate to ask questions. If
you are unsure about part of the
monitoring plan, then it's a good bet
the confusion is shared by others.
Have technical staff clarify the plan
before work begins. Otherwise the
monitoring effort could fail to
address your management needs.
Efficient
Avoid monitoring for monitoring's
sake— it's a waste of your time and
money. A water quality monitoring
project should be focused toward
the specific management issues you
are facing. Each monitoring activity
should relate directly to one of the
objectives you've established. Don't
take a "shotgun" approach to
monitoring. Instead, choose a few
key monitoring parameters and
focus on them.
Affordable
Answering some questions or
obtaining certain levels of accuracy
LAND MANAGER'S GUIDE TO WATER QUALITY MONITORING

-------
in monitoring results may be time-
consuming and costly. However, an
appropriate monitoring project
doesn't have to be expensive. Often,
monitoring costs can be held down
by clearly defining water quality
questions and choosing techniques
and parameters that are appropriate
to those questions. Avoid selecting
"cheap" measurements and monitor-
ing designs that provide inconclu-
sive results. Coordinate monitoring
projects with other agencies and
groups to avoid any duplication of
effort.
Accessible
Demand that your technical staff
develop a system (based on water-
sheds) to store and retrieve data,
reports and other information. This
will ensure that monitoring informa-
tion can be put to good use, that
new information can be added, and
that information can be shared with
other agencies and groups.
STAY INVOLVED.
Don't leave monitoring and evalua-
tion solely to the technical staff. A
land manager's input will make
monitoring a more focused, efficient
and worthwhile activity. Make
periodic checks on progress— just
like you would any other project.
Sometimes these checks on progress
may inform managers and staff that
adjustments are needed to meet
monitoring objectives.
Identify Management Questions
Develop Monitoring Objectives
Define Monitoring Parameters
& Procedures
Collect Data
Analyze and Evaluate Data
Relative to Monitoring Objectives
Report on Results
Management Recommendations
and Follow-up
By following each step of the monitoring planning process, land
managers can recognize problems and take action to control
nonpoint source pollution.
LAND MANAGER'S GUIDE TO WATER QUALITY MONITORING

-------
DEMAND A REPORT.
Too many water quality monitoring
projects are abandoned before the
job is done. That is, data may have
been collected and summarized, but
rarely is this information evaluated
and presented to management with
recommendations in a final report.
Without the final monitoring report,
your questions about management
activities and their effects on aquatic
resources are likely to remain
unanswered. As a result, you may
not have information for making
subsequent resource decisions. You
may even need to repeat a similar
monitoring effort at a later date.
For these reasons, it should be made
clear at the start of each project that
the end product of the monitoring
effort is the final report. Make sure
that technical staff understand that
their work will be judged by the
quality of this document— not by
the data they collect. Require that
interim or annual reports be produc-
ed for monitoring efforts that need
progress checks, especially for long-
term trend monitoring projects.
The final report should do more
than present the data. It should
clearly explain what was learned by
interpreting the data from the
monitoring project. The report
should also contain specific recom-
mendations on actions to be taken
in response to the monitoring
results. Occasionally, monitoring
results may indicate that no actions
need to be taken— or that activities
other than yours are contributing to
the nonpoint source pollution
problem in the watershed.
The final report should focus on
recommendations to management.
It should include:
Summary of primary results and
their importance to management.
Management questions and
corresponding monitoring
objectives.
Methods used to collect, interpret
and store data.
Summary and interpretation of
data, focusing on their signifi-
cance and relationship to the
monitoring objectives.
Recommendations for manage-
ment, identifying needed
changes in management prac-
tices, adjustments to monitoring
and new management questions
that should be addressed by
monitoring.
*
Evaluate:
(1)	BMP implementation and
effectiveness
(2)	Attainment of in-stream
criteria, or...
(3)	Impacts to beneficial uses
Continue with existing
Monitor results —	practices, or modify/
on-site and in-stream	develop new BMPs as
necessary
BMPs implemented
on-site
*
Incorporated into the monitoring plan, a feedback loop can help
managers evaluate and improve management activities.
LAND MANAGER'S GUIDE TO WATER QUALITY MONITORING

-------
PUT THE REPORT TO
GOOD USE.
You've received the final monitoring
report — now it's time to make this
new information work for you. Use
the report's conclusions to make or
confirm management decisions, to
improve existing management
activities or to congratulate workers
for a job well done. But don't stop
there — use what you've learned to
make improvements to future
projects.
Share what you've learned with
other land managers, who will use
your findings to fine tune their own
management practices. Share this
information with the staff of state
and tribal water^uality agencies,
who need your assistance to assess
the condition of aquatic resources
and gauge compliance with water
quality standards.
Feedback in Action:
Management Question - "Can
sediment delivery to Deer Creek
from a segment of new road be
reduced to an acceptable level?"
Monitoring Objective - 'To
evaluate the effectiveness of
proposed BMPs in reducing
sediment delivery from this new
road segment."
Monitoring Results -" BMPs
effectively reduced sediment
delivery to within the identified
level, with slash filter windrow
providing the greatest benefit-
however, efforts to reestablish
vegetation on the fill slopes were
not successful, due to poor
survival of the grass seed mix."
Management Improvement -
"Use similar BMP package at
future Sites, with emphasis on
slash filter windrows. Modify
grass seed mix to favor hardier
species."
Be creative in your use of the
findings of the report. Be satisfied
only if the feedback and follow-up
based on the monitoring results
demonstrate your commitment to
quality resource management.
LAND MANAGER'S GUIDE TO WATER QUALITY MONITORING

-------
For more information on water quality monitoring and
evaluation, contact the NPS Program Coordinator...
in Alaska
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
Division of Environmental Quality
Water Quality Management Section
PO Box O
Juneau, AK 99611-1800
(907) 465-2653
in Idaho
Idaho Department of Health and Welfare
Division of Environmental Quality
Water Quality Bureau
1410 North Hilton
Boise, ID 83720
(208) 334-5867
021133
3*
in Oregon
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Water Quality Division
811 SW Sixth Avenue
Portland, OR 97204-1309
(503) 229-6893
in Washington
Washington Department of Ecology
Water Quality Program
Mail Stop PV-11
Olympia, WA 98504-8711
(206) 438-7528
at EPA — Region 10
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Water Division - Mail Stop WD-139
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
(206) 553-4181
UhfZ,'
r, I ¦ ,
m f


im Kxm-y
DATE DUE
Specific guidance on designing monitoring projects and selecting monitoring parameters can be
found in the following free publication, available from the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's
Region 10 office in Seattle:
MacDonald, Lee H, A.W. Smart and R.C. Wissmar, 1991. Monitoring Guidelines to Evaluate Effects of
Forestry Activities on Streams in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska. (EPA/910/9-91-001) Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 10, in cooperation with the Center for Streatnside Studies, University of
Washington, Seattle, WA. 176 pp.

-------