NATIONAL
ESTUARY
PROGRAM
LAND PROTECTION
Most coastal managers would prefer to choose habitat restoration sites and design an action plan based solely on ecological need and benefit. However,
the availability of property, cooperative landowners, funding, and a variety of other factors are often what drive restoration decisions, at least partially. Yet
despite challenges that may exist, some NEPs are finding successful ways to enhance restoration and protection decision-making by identifying sites and
projects that will provide the greatest benefit to their study areas and resources.
THE NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM IN ACTION
Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership
The Lower Columbia River
Estuary Partnership (Estuary Part-
nership) recently developed a
Strategic Habitat Restoration
Prioritization Framework (the
Prioritization Framework)* with the
help of many partners. The Prioriti-
zation Framework adds an impor-
tant element to the Estuary Part-
nership's habitat strategy and
assists them in making better-in-
formed decisions when prioritizing
sites and selecting restoration
projects.
Placing potential projects through
the Prioritization Framework and
using a priority ranking process
helps them select projects that
provide the best opportunity for
environmental benefits while
still staying within the context
of opportunity. The Prioritization
Framework utilizes a conceptual
model and is structured to help
the Estuary Partnership identify
areas most suitable for restora-
tion and the types of restoration
strategies appropriate for those
areas. Since physical controlling
factors in a location drive the
habitats that can form, and ulti-
Mirror Lake, OR, an Estuary Partnership restoration site. Photo Credit: Yvonne Vallette
!'f 0. Oi<-ni.--« i.t cist Pi MII[I;.HI..I, Fi ,imt«,-,]]:.
mately the ecological functions
that develop, the Geographic In-
formation System-based Priori-
tization Framework links an ex-
tensive collection of pertinent
data to geographical areas and
then utilizes that data within the
program to rank sites for their
suitability for restoration. Data
used includes the site's ecologi-
cal properties and existing func-
tions and the impacts suffered
from specific stressors, such as
diking, agriculture, flow restric-
tions, etc. Additional site data
would enhance the reliability and
usability of the Prioritization
Framework, and the Estuary
Partnership is pursuing addition-
al data sets. While the Prioritiza-
EFFECTIVE
EFFICIENT
ADAPTIVE
COLLABORATIVE
-------
tion Framework provides a help-
ful tool, the Estuary Partnership
still must evaluate projects using
a variety of other criteria and ul-
timately make the best decisions
possible with the information
available. However, the Prioriti-
zation Framework is a new and
helpful means toward smarter
decision-making, and one that
the Estuary Partnership antici-
pates utilizing more as new data
improves the robustness and re-
liability of the Prioritization
Framework.
Effectiveness monitoring, adap-
tive management, and the Priori-
tization Framework will all help
the Estuary Partnership select
important restoration projects
for funding in areas where resto-
ration will have the greatest eco-
logical benefit and be most likely
to succeed. So while there re-
mains an opportunistic element
to project development, the Es-
tuary Partnership is taking steps
to enhance its ability to prioritize
projects based on a wide variety
of ecological conditions.
Visit www.lcrep.org to learn
more about this and other LCREP
efforts.
EPA's National Estuary Program
(NEP) is a unique and successful
coastal watershed-based program
established in 1987 under the
Clean Water Act Amendments.
The NEP involves the public and
collaborates with partners to pro-
tect, restore, and maintain the wa-
ter quality and ecological integrity
of 28 estuaries of national signifi-
cance located in 18 coastal states
and Puerto Rico.
For more information about the
NEP go to www.epa.gov/owow/
estuaries.
A CHECKLIST FOR SELECTING HABITAT RESTORATION PROJECTS
The Estuary Partnership ranks restoration and protection project proposals based on specific selection
criteria and any criteria required by the funding agency. Estuary Partnership project criteria include:
ECOSYSTEM
Habitat Connectivity
Areas of Historic Habitat Type Loss
Improvement in Ecosystem Function
Adequate Size and Shape
Level of Complexity
Accessibility for Target Species
IMPLEMENTATION
Use Natural Processes to Restore and Maintain Structure Over Habitat Creation
Community Support and Participation
Potential for Self Maintenance and Certainty of Success
Potential for Improvement in Ecosystem Function While Avoiding Impacts to Functioning Ecosystems
Avoid Sites Where Irreversible Change Has Occurred
Capacity of Sponsor/Partnership
Project Context Within Broader Management and Planning Objectives
MONITORING
Monitoring and Evaluation with Relationship to Stated Goals and Objectives
Linkages to Reference Sites
Transferability of Results
* The Prioritization Framework developed by the Estuary Partnership in 2006 is based in part on concepts developed previously in the Brainbridge Island Nearshore Habitat Assessment, Management Strategy Prioritization, and Monitoring
Recommendations (Williams et al., 2004) and An Ecosystem-Based Restoration Plan with Emphasis on Salmonid Habitats in the Columbia River Estuary (Johnson et al., 2003).
The NEP: Implementing the Clean Water Act in ways that are Effective, Efficient, Adaptive, and Collaborative.
EPA-842F09001
------- |