Healthy Watersheds Initiative National Framework and Action Plan 2011 &EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency EPA 841 -R-11 -005 ------- This Healthy Watersheds Initiative National Framework and Action Plan is a collaborative product of EPA and our state and Federal partners. The following Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators agencies and the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies were primarily involved in developing this document: New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services New Hampshire Fish and Game Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation Massachusetts Department of Fish and Game Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs New York Department of Environmental Conservation Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Maryland Department of Natural Resources North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Oklahoma Conservation Commission Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Iowa Department of Natural Resources Kansas Water Office Utah Department of Environmental Quality Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Washington Department of Ecology Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation U.S. Forest Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Geological Survey The following non-governmental organizations provided ideas and input for the Healthy Watersheds Initiative. We thank them for their technical expertise and input: The Conservation Fund The Green Infrastructure Center The Nature Conservancy The Trust for Public Land ------- * •**. National Framework and Action Plan 2011 ------- ------- I Preface On March 29, 2011, EPA released the Coming Together for Clean Water strategy as the framework for guiding the Agency's imple- mentation efforts and actions to meet the 2011-2015 Strategic Plan objectives for protecting and restoring our waters. One of the key areas of the Agency's strategy is to Increase Protection of Healthy Waters, including healthy watersheds. This Healthy Watersheds Initiative (HWI) National Framework and Action Plan outlines a new approach for how EPA will meet this objective. The approach provided in this document is a recommendation that does not replace existing laws or regulations or impose binding requirements on EPA or the states in implementing partnerships to protect healthy watersheds. What is different with the HWI? The HWI represents a new construct for how EPA promotes the protection of chemical, physical and biological integrity of our waters and aquatic ecosystems. This construct acknowledges that our waters and aquatic ecosystems are dynamic sys- tems that are interconnected in the landscape. We recognize that while we may protect their parts (e.g., water chemistry) or stream segments independently, it is also important to protect them as whole, interconnected systems that include all inte- gral hydrologic, geomorphic and other processes. The HWI represents a cost-effective, non-regulatory approach to protecting our aquatic ecosystems at the state scale that is based on the implementation of strategic watershed protection priorities established by partnerships comprised of states and Federal agencies. Protecting an integrated ecological network or infrastructure of healthy watersheds, in addition to re- moving and reducing the causes of degradation, is important to sustaining healthy watershed processes and ensuring success- ful restoration. EPA will promote and support the national implementation of state healthy watersheds strategies by coordinating across state water quality and aquatic resource protection agencies, and with Federal and non-Federal partners, to leverage programs and resources for protecting and restoring the highest priority watersheds. Protecting healthy watersheds has many benefits: 4 Strategies that prioritize the protection and restoration of healthy watersheds are cost-effective. Budgets are tight, and we can no longer afford not to have a strategy. 4 Healthy watersheds provide sufficient amounts of clean water required for healthy aquatic ecosystems, habitat for fish and wildlife, safe drinking water, and recreational opportunities as well as mental and physical health benefits, and help reduce vul- nerability to climate change impacts and costs for adaptation. Healthy watersheds provide many economic benefits such as reduced costs for supplying and treating drinking water, restor- ing watersheds, and mitigating flood, hazard and climate change damage; expenditures on fishing, boating, swimming recre- ation and eco-tourism; and increased property values. ------- Healthy Watersheds Initiative Tenets 1. Partnerships are established to identify and protect healthy watersheds. 2. Healthy watersheds are identified state-wide using professional, scientifically sound, strategic, integrated assessments. 3. Healthy watersheds are listed, tracked, maintained and increased in number over time. 4. Healthy watersheds are protected and, if applicable, enhanced using the best regulatory and non-regulatory tools. 5. Progress on protecting healthy watersheds is measured and tied to securing and raising the overall goals of EPA's Water Program, including direct support of the public health and environmental goals established in EPA's Strategic Plan. ------- Healthy Watersheds Initiative: National Framework and Action Plan I Table of Contents Preface v Healthy Watershed Initiative Tenets .vi Part 1 -Introduction 1 What Are the Benefits of Healthy Watersheds? 1 Why a Healthy Watersheds Initiative? 4 What Is a Healthy Watershed? 6 What Is the Healthy Watersheds Initiative? 8 How Does the Healthy Watersheds Initiative Enhance and Supplement Existing EPA Water Quality Programs? 8 Purpose of the National Framework and Action Plan 8 Part 2 - Healthy Watersheds Initiative Vision 9 Guiding Principles 9 Goals and Objectives 9 Part 3 - Healthy Watersheds Initiative Action Plan 11 Priority Actions: EPA Headquarters, Regions, States 11 EPA Headquarters Actions 12 EPA Regions Actions. 15 States Actions 16 Part4-Implementation Framework 17 Coordination and Communication 17 Tracking Progress 17 Determining Success 17 Specific Examples of Success 17 Summary of Actions for the HWI National Framework and Action Plan 20 ------- Parti ntroduction Recently, a large focus of EPA's water quality protection pro- gram has been based on the remediation of impaired water- bodies and, to a significant extent, on the reduction of specific pollutant levels in waterbodies. Although EPA and our state and other partners have made and are continuing to make consider- able progress in this important work, we recognize the need at the same time to protect and maintain the full chemical, physi- cal and biological quality of our Nation's waters. The Healthy Watersheds Initiative (HWI) explicitly addresses this need by expanding our focus to include protection of intact aquatic eco- systems and integrated processes as they naturally occur within a watershed context: linked surface and subsurface waters and habitats comprised of continuous rivers with natural flowing wa- ter and sediment regimes; lakes and wetlands with natural water volumes and level variation; and springs and groundwater con- nected by hydrology. EPA acknowledged the need to increase protection of healthy waters in the Coming Together for Clean Water: EPA's Strategy to Protect America's Waters.1 The strat- egy increased the focus on the protection of source waters and healthy watersheds as one of five areas guiding the implementa- tion efforts and actions to meet the Strategic Plan objectives in the next 2 years and beyond. Many states, Federal agencies and other EPA partners have begun in recent years to implement broader, aquatic ecosystem- based approaches that identify and protect their healthy water- sheds. They recognize the benefits of protecting and maintaining high-quality waters, which include reducing the number of future impaired waters and resulting cost savings of not having to re- store those waters; ensuring successful and holistic restoration and maintenance of restored waters; and the overall socio- economic benefits of healthy watersheds. I What Are the Benefits of Healthy Watersheds? The benefits of healthy watersheds are numerous. Healthy watersheds provide sufficient amounts of clean water required for healthy aquatic ecosystems; habitat for fish and wildlife; safe drinking water; and recreation as well as mental and physical health benefits; and help reduce vulnerability to climate and land use change impacts and costs for adaptation. Healthy watersheds provide many economic benefits such as reduced costs for supplying and treating water for human consumption and industrial uses, restoring watersheds, and mitigating flood, hazard and climate change damage; expenditures on fishing, boating, swimming and eco-tourism; and increased property values. For example, by protecting aquifer recharge zones and surface water sources, costs of drinking water treatment may be reduced. A survey of the treatment costs and watershed characteristics of 27 drinking water utilities found that for every 10 percent increase in forest cover of the source area, chemical and treatment costs decrease by 20 percent (Ernst, C., 2004).2 1. https://blog.epa.gov/waterforum/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/ComingTogether-for-Clean- Water-FINAL.pdf 2. Ernst C. Protecting the Source: Land Conservation and the Future of America's Drinking Water. Trust for Public Land and the American Water Works Association, Water Protection Series. 2004, 56 pp. ------- Healthy Watersheds Initiative "The once seemingly separable types of aquatic ecosystems are, we now know, interrelated and interdependent We cannot expect to preserve the remaining qualities of our water resources without providing appropriate protection for the entire resource." — Tennessee Senator Howard Baker reinforcing the fundamental impor- tance of the Clean Water Act on the Senate floor, 1977 Also, healthy watersheds have an important role in climate change mitigation and adaptation. Healthy watersheds provide sufficient natural land cover and soil resources capable of pro- viding carbon storage functions, thereby offsetting greenhouse gas emissions. Intact floodplains and riparian zones of healthy watersheds enable them to be better adapted to changes in precipitation associated with climate change. Further, intro- duced species are less likely to become invasive in healthy wa- tersheds, as naturally functioning ecosystems reduce opportuni- ties for colonization by favoring indigenous species and helping them out-compete invasives. The ecological services that healthy watersheds provide—and the benefits they create—are often taken for granted when they exist in natural systems, and are difficult, expensive or impossible to achieve when they must be reproduced. Case Study: New York City Watershed Economic Benefits and Costs Savings of Protecting the Clean Water Supply A case study in the Natural Resources Fo- rum Journal (Postel & Thompson, 2005)3 captured how one of our largest cities, New York City, was able to protect their drinking water source through a unique agreement that links ecosystem-service providers and beneficiaries. The New York City case study demonstrates that watershed protection can be a highly cost-effective alternative to technological treatment in meeting water quality stan- dards that can work for both upstream and downstream parties. New York City was faced with building an estimated $6 billion dollar filtration plant with an annual operating cost of $300 mil- lion to ensure compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act. The City had the option of requesting a waiver, however, if they could demon- strate that they could meet their water quality standards through protection of their source watersheds. The City went through a long agreement-building pro- cess with the private landowners and communities within the Catskill-Delaware watershed, which supplies 90 percent of its drinking water. Terms of the agreement included that the City would not condemn any land through the state's health eminent domain pro- cess. The City would purchase proper- ties for their actual face value from willing sellers and pay taxes on the properties so it would not erode the local tax revenues. The total amount of land purchased was estimated at $94 million, which doubled the area of the protected buffer. The over- all investment was estimated at $ 1 billion. The City also initiated other programs and a trust fund within the area to pro- mote best management practices. These practices, along with the protected lands, increased property values, provided addi- tional income, created healthier streams and habitats, and provided additional rec- reational opportunities. Future protection of this area will be dependent on popu- lation and development growth and any future regulations. 3. Postel S & BH Thompson, Jr. Watershed Protection: Capturing the Benefits of Nature's Water Supply Ser- vices. Natural Resources Forum. 2005, pp.98-108. ------- t f ~ 11 • -- V*" z* Case Study: The Economic Impact of Recreational Trout Angling in the Driftless Area Restored streams in the Driftless Area (Drift fess Area Minnesota Wisconsin Reprinted with permission from the United States Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service. The Economic Impact of Recreational Trout Angling in the Drift/ess Area, April 2008. The Driftless Area is a 24,000 square-mile area that encompasses portions of south- east Minnesota, northeast Iowa, southwest Wisconsin and northwest Illinois bypassed by the last continental glacier. According to a study by Trout Unlimited, recreational angling in the Driftless Area generates a $1.1 billion annual economic benefit to the local economy, far exceeding the com- bined revenues of Illinois' professional sports teams (the Bears, Bulls, Cubs and White Sox) of $728 million. Anglers in the Driftless Area spend an impressive $647 million each year that goes directly into the local economy. The total economic impact is actually much bigger than that. The money produces a "ripple effect" of approximately $3,000 additional spending per angler. These indirect and induced effects represent the money spent by Driftless Area anglers continuing to flow through the local econo- my as local business people turn around and buy additional goods and services. The total annual "ripple effect" of spending by anglers in the Driftless Area is approximately $ 465 million. Adding the direct spending total to the indirect and induced spending total reveals that trout anglers produce an eco- nomic benefit to the Driftless Area in excess of $1.1 billion every year. The authors at- tribute those economic benefits to the natu- Angler in the Driftless Area Reprinted with permission from Trout Unlimited — Driftless Area Restoration Effort. The Economic Impact of Recreational Trout Angling in the Driftless Area, April 2008. ral potential of the streams, good land stew- ardship, public access and wise investment in restoration. Overall, trout anglers have a light impact on natural resources. Many anglers release the fish they catch back to the stream and treat the areas they fish with respect. It is clear that clean water, resilient streams and healthy fish popula- tions help support a thriving economy in the Driftless Area. For more information, go to http://www.tu.org/atf/cf/%7BED0023C4- EA23-4396-9371-8509DC5B4953%7D/ TroutUnlimited-EconStudySummaiyFinal.pdf ------- If successfully implemented, the HWI will greatly enhance our abil- ity to meet the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 101 (a) objective, "...to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Nation's waters." The Committee Report written in support of the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act amend- ments clarified that the term integrity "...refers to a condition in which the natural structure and function of ecosystems is [sic] maintained,"4 rather than simply improving water quality in a nar- row sense. The HWI is intended to preserve and maintain natural ecosystems by protecting our remaining healthy watersheds, preventing them from becoming impaired, and accelerating our restoration successes. It is based on an integrated, systems- based approach to watershed protection, supported by the latest science that views watersheds as dynamic systems that include surface water (instream flow in rivers and lake levels) and sub- surface groundwater quantity variability, water quality, biological resources and their habitat, and other key processes (e.g., geo- morphic) that support healthy aquatic resources. EPA is embarking on the HWI as part of a comprehensive ap- proach to integrate protection and restoration. Similar comple- mentary approaches also have been adopted by the Associa- tion of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and the Departments of the Interior and Commerce - National Fish Habitat Action Plan5, and the U.S. Forest Service - Watershed Condition Framework.6 The need for this approach has become increasingly clear: despite our best efforts and many local successes, overall, our aquatic ecosystems are declining nationwide. This trend has been documented by many, including the Heinz Center (State of the Nation's Ecosystems, 2008)7 and the American Fisheries Society (see figure at top right). The rate at which new waters are being listed for water quality impairments exceeds the pace at which waters are removed from the list (EPA, Region 3, see figure at bottom right). Pollution and water quality problems continue to be causes, but other significant sources of the decline include loss of habitat and habitat fragmentation, hydrologic alteration and fragmentation, invasive species and climate change. It is clear that a better strategy is needed if we are to achieve the Section 101 (a) objective of the CWA. The HWI is a further refinement and enhancement of EPA's exist- ing watershed approaches; an explicit recognition that restora- Numbers of imperiled North American freshwater and diadromous fish taxa in each status category as listed previously by the American Fisheries Society Endangered Species Committee in Deacon et al. (1979), Williams et al. (1989), and Jelks et al. (2008). (1) .a 3 300 -i 200 - 100 - Vulnerable Threatened Endangered | Extinct Delisted 1979 1999 2008 Conservation status of imperiled North American freshwater and diadromous fishes. Jelks HL, et al. Fisheries 2008;33(8):372-407. tion will not succeed without maintaining healthy watershed "infrastructure" of habitat, biotic communities, water chemistry, and intact watershed hydrologic (surface and subsurface) and geomorphic processes. The HWI is based on a key, overarching concept: the integrity of aquatic ecosystems is tightly linked to the watersheds of which they are part. There is a direct relation- ship between land cover, hydrology and key watershed process- es and the condition of aquatic ecosystems. Healthy, functioning watersheds provide the building blocks that anchor water quality restoration efforts. Without this ecological support system, we will not only fail to successfully restore impaired waters, but also waste limited financial resources as additional waters become impaired and other socio-economic benefits are lost. Gap between impaired waters and delisted waters 7000n 5000- £ 3000- I 1000- Impaired Waters Delisted Waters 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 EPA Region 3. 4. U.S. Government Printing Office. Report for the Committee on Public Works-United States House of Representatives with additional and supplemental views of H.R. 11896 to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. House Report 92-911. 92nd Congress, 2nd session, 11 Match 1972, page 149. 5. National Fish Habitat Action Plan. 2006. www.fishhabitat.org. 6. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Watershed Condition Framework. Publication Number FS-977, May 2011. 7. Heinz Center. State of the Nation's Ecosystems Report. Washington, DC: Island Press. 2008. ------- Linking Watershed Protection With Restoration The Woonasquatucket River Watershed (land use and forest and wetland resources thematic maps) Land Use Forest & Wetland Resources qurtudut HJvw VMmlwl KKK KKK Reprinted with permission from the University of Rhode Island Environmental Data Center. The Woonasquatucket River is a small, 19-mile river originating 300 feet above sea level in the town of North Smithfield, Rhode Island. From several ponds there, the river flows south and east to downtown Providence, and at sea level, it joins the Moshassuck River to form the Providence River, which flows into Narragansett Bay. The lower reaches of the river are tidal be- fore blockage by the first dam in Providence. The Native Americans who lived here named it "Woonasquatucket," meaning "the place where the salt water ends" or the meeting of the river and the sea. These maps illustrate the challenges and opportunities in promoting a healthy water- shed approach. Although the river itself is only 19 miles long, its watershed drains 50 square miles in parts of six towns, ranging from the rural headwaters of North Smith- field to the channelized post-industrial cor- ridors of Johnston, North Providence and Providence, and passing 18 dams, a Super- fund site and numerous official and unof- ficial brownfields. The contrast between the northern half of the watershed and its urbanized south is not only stark, but also it is misleading. With funding from the U.S. Forest Service, an intensive study of the en- tire river corridor found scores of sites with riparian restoration potential. Although some 80 percent of the existing riparian forestlands are in the upper part of the wa- tershed, the key fisheries of alewife, shad and herring only spawn there if they can make it through the dams of Providence and the southern watershed. The two halves need each other: restoration of the impaired reaches and fish passage in the urbanized south is only sustainable if the healthy sec- tions in the northern half remain so. ------- Healthy Watersheds Initiative I Part 1 What Is a I Healthy Watershed? Ideally, a healthy watershed has the ability to provide the following: Habitat of sufficient size and connectivity and hydrologic (surface and subsurface) connectivity to sustain native aquatic and riparian species; Native vegetation and green infrastructure (network of habitat hubs and corridors) in the landscape to maintain natural hydrology (including recharge of groundwater) and nutrient and organic matter inputs essential to maintaining aquatic ecosystem functions; 4 Biotic refugia or critical habitat (e.g., deep pools, seeps and springs, cold water tributary junctions for survival during droughts all sustained by sufficient water levels in lakes and instream flows in rivers); 4 Natural hydrology (e.g., flow regime, lake water levels) that supports aquatic species and habitat; Natural transport of sediment and stream geomorphology that provide a natural habitat; 4 Natural disturbance regimes (e.g., floods and fire) on which biota depend; 4 Water quality that supports aquatic and riparian biotic communities and habitat; and 4 Healthy, self-sustaining aquatic and riparian biological communities. A healthy watershed has, either in its entirety or as components, intact and functioning headwaters, wetlands, floodplains, ripar- ian corridors, biotic refugia, instream and lake habitat, and biotic communities; green infrastructure; natural hydrology (e.g., range of instream flows, lake water levels); sediment transport and flu- vial geomorphology; and natural disturbance regimes expected for its location. Healthy watersheds range from those undis- turbed by humans to developed areas that still retain healthy components and habitat connectivity (e.g., Fairfax County, VA).8 Healthy watersheds are identified through integrated assess- ments of landscape condition, biotic communities, habitat, water chemistry and intact hydrologic (surface and subsurface) and geomorphic processes. This is similar to the essential ecological attributes assessment approach (see figure below) proposed by EPA's Science Advisory Board in its report, A Framework for Assessing and Reporting on Ecological Condi- tion: An SAB Report (EPA, 20029) and many other approaches (e.g., Doppelt, etal., 199310and Annear, et al., 200411). Essential ecological attributes8 Ecological Landscape Condition Biotic Condition Natural Disturbance Landscape condition is the patterns and connectivity of habi- tat in the landscape, both terrestrial and aquatic (e.g., forest cover, headwaters, riparian corridors, floodplains, wetlands, lakes and stream network connectivity). Green infrastructure assessments are useful in providing this information. Green infrastructure is an interconnected network of natural areas and open spaces that sustains ecosystems (Benedict MA and ET McMahon, 2006).12 8. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation and Virginia Commonwealth Univer- sity Center for Environmental Studies. Healthy Waters-A New Ecological Approach to Identifying and Protecting Healthy Waters in Virginia, www.dcr.virginia.gov/healthywa- ters. 2009, 28 pp. 9. EPA. A Framework for Assessing and Reporting on Ecological Condition: An SAB Report. EPA Science Advisory Board, Washington, DC, 2002, Publication Number EPA-SAB-EPEC-02-009. 10. Doppelt B, M Scurlock, C Frissell, & J Karr. Entering the Watershed: A New Approach to Save America's River Ecosystems. The Pacific Rivers Council. Washington, DC: Island Press, 1999. 11. Annear T, I Chisholm, H Beecher, A Locke, P Aarrestad, C Coomer, et al. Instream Flows for Riverine Resource Stewardship. Revised Edition. Instream Flow Council, Cheyenne, WY, 2004. 12. Benedict MA and ET McMahon. Green Infrastructure Linking Landscapes and Com- munities. The Conservation Fund. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2006. ------- "/ ask that your marvelous natural resources be handed on unimpaired to your posterity." — Theodore Roosevelt, Sacramento, CA, 1903 Aquatic biota, habitat and water chemistry are assessed in state water quality monitoring programs, natural heritage, fishery and other programs. These include bioassessments (e.g., macroinvertebrates, fish, periphyton), habitat assessments, wetland assessments, biodiversity surveys, fish population as- sessments and ecologically relevant water chemistry (e.g., tem- perature, dissolved oxygen, pH and nutrients). Hydrology includes instream flow, lake level and groundwater regimes characterized by seasonal varying components of mag- nitude, frequency, duration, timing and rate of change, which are required to sustain healthy freshwater ecosystems (Poff, et al. 1997).13 Instream flow and lake level requirements are assessed using a variety of hydroecological assessment approaches (e.g., Ecological Limits of Hydrologic Alteration [ELOHA]) that are similar to bioassessment approaches and result in ecologically relevant flow and water level standards for different river and lake types as well as ecological condition goals. Geomorphology describes the channel form and sediment transport processes that define instream habitat. Fluvial geo- morphic assessments identify rivers and streams that have a natural channel form and dynamic equilibrium in sediment trans- port (i.e., the volume of sediments moving in equals the volume of sediments moving out of a stream segment). Protection programs span a wide range, including habitat and stream corridor protection, conservation tax credits, landowner stewardship, sustainable forestry, instream flow and lake level wa- ter protection, water resource policy, source water and ground- water protection, anti-degradation, wetland protection, invasive species control, monitoring, and education. Some state and local examples of these diverse watershed protection programs are included as success stories at the end of this document. 13. Poff NL, et al. The natural flow regime: a paradigm for river conservation and restora- tion. B/oscfence 1997;7(11): 769-784. ------- The key components of the HWI are to: 1. Establish partnerships to identify and implement protection of healthy watersheds; 2. Identify healthy watersheds and intact components of altered watersheds state-wide through integrated assessments; 3. Implement state-wide strategic protection plans and pro- grams based on vulnerability and other opportunities; 4. Implement local protection programs based on priorities from state and local assessments; 5. Provide information to inform ecological recoverability and help set priorities for restoration of impaired waters; and 6. Provide information to the public on healthy watersheds, including the socio-economic benefits of their protection. How Does the Healthy Watersheds Initiative Enhance and Supplement Existing EPA Water Quality Programs? The HWI promotes the utilization of a set of analyses (e.g., hydroecology, fluvial geomorphology and green infrastructure) using state-of-the-science and improvements to methods that were not fully developed or available until the past decade, and combines the results of these analyses using modern comput- ing power to assess watersheds as functional systems. These and similar technical tools and approaches are used to support a holistic systems approach. Going beyond watershed planning approaches that focus on impaired waterbodies and specific pollutant-based impairments to those waterbodies, healthy wa- tersheds assessments focus on also identifying those habitats and critical watershed processes that are intact and in good condition. Once identified, those habitats and processes can be protected as part of a comprehensive watershed plan that includes both protection and restoration. Moreover, healthy watersheds assessments are meant to be strategic at the state scale in terms of focusing state and local protection resources towards the remaining high-quality areas throughout the state, and to help target restoration opportunities. Purpose of the HWI National Framework and Action Plan: The purpose of this HWI National Framework and Action Plan is to provide a clear and consistent framework with sufficient flexibility for appropriate action by EPA and our partners. EPA will work with states and other partners to implement the HWI linking to other related initiatives and programs, and including the actions herein. EPA Regions will develop healthy watershed strategies that are consistent with this national framework, but also tailored to the unique opportunities within the Regions. Clinch/Powell Watersheds: Local Protection of Healthy Watersheds Photo and map are courtesy of The Nature Conservancy. The Upper Clinch and Powell River Watersheds, located in south- western Virginia and northeastern Tennessee, harbor one of the most diverse fish and mussel assemblages in North America with 118 native fish species and 45 species of mussels. The Commonwealth of Virginia and State of Tennessee both identified these watersheds as priorities for coordinated protection and, in 2007, along with EPA Regions 3 and 4, established the Clinch Powell Clean Rivers Initiative (CPCRI). The main goal of the CPCRI is to protect and restore water quality by: (1) conducting cutting-edge science and river monitoring to advance understanding of watershed stressors and the causes of rare mussel decline; (2) translating the results of science and monitoring into more effective regulations, best manage- ment practices and conservation strategies; (3) fostering increased coordination between state and Federal agencies, the regulated community and other key watershed stakeholders; and (4) elevat- ing awareness of the Clinch River system as a national model for collaborative environmental management. The CPCRI, led by The Nature Conservancy, represents an excellent example of coordination and leveraging of multiple stakeholders and their programs towards protecting and restoring high-priority healthy watersheds. ------- Part 2 HWI Vision Guiding Principles EPA's broad mission charges us with protecting the Nation's en- vironment, including land, water and air that comprise a whole ecosystem. We will promote achievement of the intended use of the term "integrity" in Section 101 (a) of the Clean Water Act (CWA),"... to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Nation's waters," by recognizing the importance of preserving natural aquatic ecosystems to fully meet the goals and objectives of the CWA. EPA recognizes that our Federal partners, state and local gov- ernments, and non-government organizations already have made great progress in protecting healthy watersheds and bring significant resources and complementary tools to this work. The HWI both supports and expands on this work. This Initia- tive only can be successful if we collaborate with others to inte- grate protection and restoration in watersheds. The proposed action plan presented here aims to provide a clear, consistent framework for action, both internally among our own programs, and externally in working with our partners. Goals and Objectives GoaM Identify, protect and maintain a network of healthy water- sheds and supportive green infrastructure habitat networks across the United States. Objectives In collaboration with states, other Federal agencies and non-governmental partners: * Support state-wide assessments of green infrastruc- ture, hydrology, geomorphology, and biotic, habitat and chemical condition, as well as integrated assessments of the above to help identify healthy watersheds. * Establish state watershed goals that help protect and maintain a healthy watershed condition. * Implement strategic state programs and plans to protect identified healthy watersheds, including green infrastructure and restored watersheds. ------- Healthy Watersheds Initiative Healthy Watersheds Initiative Vision: Protect and maintain the aquatic ecological integrity of watersheds and supporting habitat networks to ensure that future generations may enjoy these resources and the social and economic benefits that they provide. Goal 2 Goal3 Integrate protection of healthy watersheds into EPA programs. Objectives * Develop and implement a policy to protect a national network of remaining healthy watersheds, including supporting green infrastructure habitat networks. * Look for opportunities to integrate healthy water- sheds protection into EPA Water and other programs (e.g., implementation of the Compensatory Mitigation Rule, watershed restoration programs, Water Quality Standards, Source Water Protection Program, Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund, National Environmental Policy Act [NEPA], Smart Growth, etc.). * Support state strategic plans that integrate protection and restoration priorities into program implementation to achieve environmental results efficiently and cost ef- fectively through the continuing planning process and in performance partnership agreements. * Identify funding resources and develop guidance and measures to support healthy watersheds assess- ment and protection opportunities. Increase awareness and understanding of the importance of protecting our remaining healthy watersheds and the range of management actions needed to protect and avoid adverse impacts to those healthy watersheds. Objectives * Develop and implement public outreach programs on the importance of protecting healthy watersheds, in- cluding the ecological services, economic benefits and cost savings they provide, and on actions that can be taken to avoid adverse environmental impacts from land use changes, energy development and climate change. * Provide information and examples on the myriad of successful healthy watersheds protection and prevention actions. * Provide support to local and regional planning com- missions and governments for implementing pro- grams to protect healthy watersheds. 10 ------- Parts HWI Action Plan This Action Plan is organized by the roles of EPA Headquarters, EPA Regions and states. It includes six major focus areas that support the Goals and Objectives: EPA Regions Actions Policy and Guidance Assessments Protection Outreach and Communications Partnerships Research Goal2 Goal 1 ...Goals 1, 2 and 3 Goal 3 Goals 1 and 3 Goal 1 The actions below are a sub-set of those in the tables that follow and represent those actions that will be implemented initially. I EPA Headquarters Actions 4 Develop as EPA policy that protection of healthy water- sheds is a priority and an integral part of water programs under the CWA. 4 Develop guidance on how healthy watersheds protection will be integrated into EPA programs. 4 Identify and dedicate sources of funding and associated guidance to implement the HWI. 4 Develop HWI measures for the EPA Strategic Plan and National Water Program Guidance and a periodic report on the national status of healthy watersheds. 4 Document the economic and social benefits as well as cost savings of protecting healthy watersheds. 4 Develop Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with other Federal agencies and a statement of intent with our partners. 4 Develop and implement Regional HWI Strategies. 4 Provide guidance and technical assistance to states and local communities to help them develop healthy water- sheds assessments and implement healthy watersheds protection programs. 4 Develop and implement partnerships with states, lo- cal governments, Federal agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and others to identify and protect healthy watersheds. 4 Pilot demonstrations that incorporate healthy watersheds protection into EPA programs. 4 Develop healthy watersheds in-reach and outreach programs. States Actions Inventory healthy watersheds using integrated assess- ments developed through collaboration across state agencies and with other partners. 4 Develop and implement coordinated healthy watershed protection programs both at the state level and collabora- tively at the local level. 4 Develop partnerships with other states, Federal agencies, NGOs, etc. to inventory and protect healthy watersheds. Activities are already underway for some of the focal areas outlined below and others are yet to be conceptualized. The actions are intended to be carried out by EPA and the states with our Federal and non-Federal partners. Because the HWI is a new initiative, it is expected that these actions will evolve and perhaps expand with new partners joining the effort. The Action Plan will be updated periodically to reflect changes as the HWI matures into a program. 11 ------- Healthy Watersheds Initiative EPA Headquarters Actions EPA Headquarters will take the primary lead on Policy and Guidance and have some responsibilities under the other five focus areas. EPA has a unique role and opportunity to institutionalize the HWI through new policy and guidance. Key to the success of the HWI will be the launch of a new healthy watersheds national policy that commits the Agency, working with our state and other partners, to leverage new and existing technical and financial resources towards the assessment and protection of healthy watersheds. This new healthy watersheds national policy would be supported by complementary guidance. Focus Area Policy and Guidance (Goal 2) When Action 2011 2011 & ongoing 2011 & ongoing 2012 2012 2011 & ongoing Develop policy statement on protecting healthy watersheds Purpose: To make it a priority and an integral part of water quality and watershed programs at EPA and in the states Partners Regions Develop HWI measures for the EPA Strategic Plan and National Water Regions, states Program Guidance (NPG) Purpose: To create the accountability framework and incentives to implement healthy watersheds protection programs at EPA and in the states Identify funding sources for the HWI and develop funding guidance Regions Purpose: To support states and others in conducting healthy watersheds assessments and implementing protection programs Develop an annual HWI Report, including guidelines for reporting on healthy watershed activities and progress (healthy watersheds list and national status) at EPA and in the states Purpose: To track progress and inform the public on how we are doing Integrate healthy watersheds into EPA programs and develop guidelines for leveraging and working with EPA's programs (e.g., wetlands, National Environmental Policy Act, coastal programs, 604 (b) Continuous Planning Process, total maximum daily load and nonpoint source program implementation, water quality standards, source water protection, etc.) Purpose: To improve our protection capabilities by using a holistic, system-based approach to aquatic ecosystem protection Support, through the continuing planning process and in perfor- mance partnership agreements, the development of state strategic plans that integrate protection and restoration priorities into program implementation Purpose: To achieve environmental results efficiently and cost effectively Regions, states Regions 12 ------- EPA Headquarters Actions Focus Area When Action Partners Assessments (Goal 1) Strategic healthy watershed protection is guided by identifying healthy watersheds at the state scale. The healthy watersheds approach advo- cates assessing watersheds as systems integrat- ing assessments of landscape condition, habitat, biological integrity, water quality, hydrology and geomorphology. Once integrated assessments are complete, vulnerability is assessed to help guide strategic protection. EPA and its partners will promote and provide technical support to interested states to develop (or for assessments underway, complete) healthy watersheds assess- ments. EPA and its partners will develop assessment tools. Fall 2011 Develop the document, Identifying and Protecting Healthy Water- sheds Concepts, Assessments and Management Approaches Purpose: Facilitate implementation of the HWI by providing EPA, state and local practitioners with an overview of key concepts behind the healthy watersheds approach, examples of healthy watersheds assessments, an integrated assessment framework for identifying healthy watersheds, examples of management ap- proaches, sources of data and key assessment tools November 2010 (Workshop) April 2011 (Report) Convene a Healthy Watersheds Integrated Assessment Expert ORD, Regions, Workshop and produce a report states, NGOs, Purpose: To develop ideas and further research needed to improve ottier exPerts and advance integrated healthy watersheds assessment methods Outreach and Communications (Goal 3) A successful HWI will require significant and effective outreach to internal and external stake- holders. This includes outreach within EPA and with the public and others. Some of this is well underway (e.g., HWI website [www.epa.gov/ healthywatersheds] and the Fact Sheet (on web- site). Also, future outreach and communications actions will be outlined in the Communications Strategy (ideas may include a newsletter; healthy watersheds on agendas of major conferences, meetings and forums; healthywatersheds course on EPA's Watershed Academy; talking points; Q&As, etc.). 2011 & beyond 2011 2011 & ongoing 2011 & ongoing Develop and implement an HWI Communications Strategy (empha- sizing cost/benefits) Purpose: To help implement healthywatersheds approaches and programs at the state and local levels across the country Regions, states, AFWA14 Prepare a white paper on economic and social benefits and cost savings of protecting healthy watersheds and develop outreach tools Purpose: To provide sound evidence to convince the public and others of the value of protecting healthy watersheds Update the EPA healthy watersheds website Purpose: To provide the latest information on healthywatersheds assessment and protection approaches and the HWI Conduct healthy watersheds webinars at EPA HQ and the Regions Purpose: To share information on the latest approaches with larger audiences ORD, OPEI 14. Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. 13 ------- Healthy Watersheds Initiative I Part 3 Focus Area When Action Partners Partnerships (Goals 1 & 3) Protecting healthy watersheds requires effective partnerships. We all share the responsibility for protecting the environment. Bringing practitioners and policy makers together will help us integrate and share resources. Partnerships across orga- nizations are particularly important. Our environ- mental laws and regulations have created stove- pipe organizations at the Federal and state levels of government. Ecosystem-based environmental protection calls for integration of programs and ap- proaches; thus, working across Federal and state agencies is a necessity if we are to be successful in protecting the remaining healthy watersheds. Partnerships with key non-governmental organiza- tions (NGOs) and local governments and organiza- tions also are important as they have the most direct effect on the resource. Some partnership building has occurred already with Federal and state agencies, between agencies within states, and with NGOs, and others. 2011 2011 & ongoing 2011 & ongoing Develop a statement of intent among partners to work together to identify and protect healthy watersheds (initiated and signed by the EPA Administrator) Purpose: To establish Federal and non-Federal support and coordination of mutual efforts to achieve a national network of healthy watersheds Develop partnerships (e.g., MOUs) with (e.g., U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service [USFWS] on the Landscape Conservation Cooperatives; USFWS and National Marine Fisheries Service [NMFS] on the National Fish Habitat Action Plan; U.S. Forest Service [USFS] on the Strategic Framework for Water and Watershed Condition Assessments; Department of Transportation [DOT] on Ecological; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [USCOE] on Integrated Basin Management Plans, Compensatory Mitigation Rule, Principles and Standards for Water Re- sources Planning, Sustainable Rivers Program, instream flow program, etc.; U.S. Geological Service [USGS] on the National Water Census; Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] on Floodplains Easements, Wetlands Reserve Programs) Purpose: To coordinate our similar efforts more effectively with our state partners Develop partnerships with the states and NGOs such as The Nature Conservancy (TNC), USGS, and the Instream Flow Council (IFC) on instream flow; The Conservation Fund (TCP) on Green Infrastructure; Source Water Collaborative (SWC), and other NGOs Purpose: To coordinate our mutual goals and efforts more effectively so that we can achieve a national network of healthy watersheds Federal agencies, national state organizations, NGOs (TBD) USFWS, NMFS, USFS, DOT, COE, USGS, NRCS, and other agencies TNC, USGS, states, IFC, TCP, SWC, etc. Research (Goal 1) Research support is critical as some of the science supporting healthy watersheds assessment and benefits analyses is burgeoning. This is particularly relevant for hydroecology, fluvial geomorphology, and economic and social benefits. There is some research support in EPA's Office of Research and Development; however, research needs and a plan have not been developed yet. 2011 & Develop partnerships with national state organizations: ASIWPCA, ongoing AFWA, ASFM, NASF, ASWM and IFC Purpose: To establish effective implementation of the HWI by work- ing across state agencies 2012 Develop a healthy watersheds research plan Purpose: To identify critical research and methods needed for improved healthy watersheds assessments, including social and economic benefits assessments, and social marketing ASIWPCA15, AFWA16, ASFM17, NASF18, ASWM19, IFC20 ORD 15. Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators. 16. Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. 17. Association of State Floodplain Managers. 18. National Association of State Foresters. 19. Association of State Wetland Managers, Inc. 20. Instream Flow Council. 14 ------- EPA Regions Actions The Regions will develop and implement HWI strategies that are tailored to the interest of the states and unique opportunities within the Region. This will include developing a wide array of partnerships and in-reach and outreach activities, and providing technical as- sistance to the states. The Regions also will help Headquarters identify program integration opportunities and implement pilot projects. Focus Area Policy and Guidance (Goal 2) When Action Assessments (Goal 1) 2012 & ongoing 2011 - 2014 Ongoing Regional healthy watersheds strategies Purpose: To develop and refine overtime organized strategies sup- ported by management that implement the HWI with the states and our other partners Pilot demonstrations of incorporating healthy watersheds protection into EPA programs Purpose: To begin exploring how healthy watersheds protection can strengthen our programs Conduct multi-state or regional assessments (e.g., Region 4 Water- shed Index Tool, Region 3 Natural Infrastructure), as appropriate Purpose: To share data across state boundaries, enhance state as- sessments, and help set protection and restoration priorities Partners NGOs, states, Federal Agencies HQ, states ORD, states, and others Ongoing Protection (Goals 1,2 & 3) Protection of healthy watersheds is implemented by governments, the private sector, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), citizens and others at the na- tional, state and local scales. This can include a range of actions (e.g., land acquisition, local planning and zoning, land stewardship, conservation tax credits, water resource policies, instream flow regulations, flood hazard ordinances, river corridor protection programs, invasive species prevention, watershed protection plans), national programs (e.g., National Fish Habitat Action Plan), healthy watersheds monitoring, education and outreach, and many more. Partnerships (Goals 1 & 3) Outreach and Communications (Goal 3) Ongoing Ongoing 2011 & beyond Provide technical assistance to states and local governments to implement assessments, including one-on-one workshops, webi- nars, funding, etc. (e.g., hydroecology, green infrastructure, fluvial geomorphology, integrated assessments, vulnerability) Purpose: To share the latest assessment methods Provide guidance and technical assistance to states and local com- munities on implementing healthy watersheds protection programs Purpose: To help states and local communities protect healthy watersheds Partnerships with other Federal agencies, NGOs, etc. Purpose: To collaborate on similar efforts and most effectively implement healthy watersheds identification and protection Develop healthy watersheds in-reach and outreach programs Purpose: To educate staff and the public on healthy watersheds protection and to involve them in implementing the HWI Local governments, states, NGOs, and others Local communities, states, and governments Federal agencies, NGOs, others HQ 15 ------- States Actions Healthy Watersheds Initiative I Part 3 States will be primary implementers of many healthy watershed assessments and protection programs and activities. States will play a key role in identifying and tracking healthy watersheds. They also will work closely with local governments and others implementing protection by providing assessment information and tools to protect healthy watersheds. In addition, states will implement protection programs, for example, conservation tax credits, water quality anti-degradation, and instream flow (e.g., permits or water resource policies). States will implement this by using partnerships with others, including working across state agencies. Focus Area When Action Partners Assessments (Goal 1) Protection (Goals 1,2 & 3) Partnerships (Goals 1 & 3) Outreach and Communications (Goal 3) 2011 & Inventory healthy watersheds using integrated assessments beyond developed through collaboration across state agencies and with other partners Purpose: To identify healthy watersheds across the state for protec- tion by collaborating with experts in related state programs across agencies and with other partners 2011 & Complete and implement instream flow and other hydrological beyond assessments (e.g., lake levels, groundwater) working across state agencies Purpose: To develop instream flow, lake level, and groundwater de- pendent ecosystem protections in state programs and to strengthen integrated healthy watersheds assessments 2011 & Complete and implement state-wide green infrastructure beyond assessments Purpose: To conserve green infrastructure to protect both aquatic ecosystems and drinking water supplies, our natural heritage, and to strengthen integrated healthy watersheds assessments 2015 & Complete state-wide fluvial geomorphic assessments and imple- beyond ment river and stream corridor protection programs Purpose: To protect natural stream dynamics and habitat; human infrastructure and safety; adapt to climate change; and to strengthen integrated healthy watersheds assessments 2011 & Develop and implement healthy watershed protection plans and beyond programs both at the state level and in collaboration with the local level (e.g., conservation tax credits), water quality anti-degradation, CWA Section 401 certifications, instream flow (e.g., permits or water resource policies), floodplain protection, etc. Purpose: To protect a network of healthy watersheds across the state and maintain the services they provide Ongoing Develop collaborations with other states, Federal agencies, NGOs, etc. to inventory and protect healthy watersheds Purpose: To effectively implement healthy watersheds protection with key partners and stakeholders 2011 & Develop healthy watersheds in-reach and outreach programs beyond Purpose: To educate staff and the public on healthy watersheds protection and to involve them in implementing the HWI Other state agencies Federal agencies, states, NGOs, and others Federal agencies, states, NGOs, and others Federal Emergency Management Agency, states, other partners Federal agencies, local government, NGOs, and others Federal agencies, states, NGOs, others Other state agencies, NGOs, Federal agencies, others 16 ------- Part 4 mplementation Framework Coordination and Communication Overall coordination and communication will be maintained through the HWI network of EPA Headquarters and Regional Coordinators and our Federal and state partners under the leadership of EPA Headquarters and the Lead Region. This will take the form of periodic conference calls, electronic communi- cations and national meetings. Task-specific teams will manage their own projects with communications networks. Tracking Progress Progress on the actions will be tracked through an annual report to the HWI Network and EPA management and posted on the EPA healthy watersheds website (www.epa.gov/healthywater- sheds). Additionally, the Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Wa- tersheds and the Lead Region will present an annual progress report to senior Office of Water and Regional management. Progress on some actions will be tracked through EPA's ac- countability framework: EPA's Strategic Plan and National Water Program Guidance. Determining Success Overall success is embodied in the HWI Vision statement: Protect and maintain the aquatic ecological integrity of water- sheds and supporting habitat networks to ensure that future generations may enjoy these resources and the social and economic benefits that they provide. In the long-term, success would ultimately be that: 4 States conduct integrated assessments to identify healthy watersheds. 4 States implement strategic protection and restoration programs based on integrated healthy watersheds assessments. 4 Localities and watershed organizations use data, informa- tion, and support from states to protect healthy watersheds in their comprehensive plans and land use regulations. 4 Partnerships are formed with key government, non- government, public and other stakeholders to conduct healthy watersheds assessments and protection activities at the state and local levels. 4 EPA, states, local governments and others document the status of healthy watersheds, ecological services benefits to the economy, and the progress towards imple- menting protective measures that maintain and increase healthy watersheds. Specific examples of success and what they might look like are on the pages that follow: I Headquarters Example of Success: EPA recognition of importance of protecting healthy watersheds (e.g., the 2071 Coming Together for Clean Water: EPA's Strat- egy to Protect America's Waters) What Success Might Look Like 4 Each EPA Regional Office develops and implements a healthy watersheds strategy. 4 EPA provides both technical and funding support to states and other entities for identifying and protecting healthy watersheds. 4 EPA integrates protection of healthy watersheds into all applicable programs to better protect and restore aquatic ecosystems. Healthy watersheds protection as an EPA priority Established funding source and associated guidance Provisions for healthy watersheds protection in EPA program guidance (e.g., CWA Section 404, total maximum daily load, water quality integrated re- ports, storm water permits, etc.) Strong partnerships with national state organizations (e.g.,ASIWPCA, AFWA, etc.), Federal agencies (e.g., Forest Service, Federal Housing Administration, USFWS, USGS, USCOE, etc.), and NGOs (e.g.JNCJCF, Trust for Public Land, etc.) Public interest, awareness and support for protecting healthy watersheds 17 ------- Healthy Watersheds Initiative I REGIONS Examples of Success: Technical Assistance Instream flow protection —EPA New England has worked with the six New England states over the past few years to help them develop policies, guidelines and regulations related to protecting instream flows and aquatic resources, with particular attention to key fish communities dependent on good water quality and adequate base flow. Watershed-based wetland mitigation—The States of New Hampshire and Maine have been working with the New England District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and EPA New Eng- land and have developed an "in-lieu fee" program for mitigation of unavoidable wetland impacts as part of the CWA Section 404 permit process. This program allows for collection of a "fee" based on the amount of impact. These fees are collected across the state then distributed for projects that replace the lost function and values, as well as implement priority restora- tion and protection projects in the watershed, as determined by a multi-agency and NGO review committee. What Success Might Look Like Prioritize National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits in headwater streams for review/issuance, and prioritize permits else- where based on ecological and cumulative impacts rather than size of the discharge or permittee Develop a set of criteria using healthy watersheds data for what we expect for "avoidance and minimization" of wetland and water quality impacts from residential development, including low impact develop- ment practices and smart growth I STATES Examples of Success: Protecting the Stream Corridor Vermont River Corridor Protection Program The Vermont River Corridor Protection Program is a program of the Department of Environmental Conservation, within the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) that seeks to restore and protect the natural values of rivers and minimize flood damage. Achieving natural stream stability over time through a reduction in riparian infrastructure can minimize cost from flood damage and improve aquatic and riparian ecological integrity. Vermont ANR provides technical assistance to communities throughout the state to help delineate river corridors, develop municipal fluvial erosion hazard zoning districts, and implement river cor- ridor easements. The primary purpose of this delineation, with respect to river corridor planning, is to capture the meander belt and other active areas of the river that are likely to be inundated or erode under flooding flows. As part of the stream geomor- phic assessment, a stream sensitivity rating is assigned to each reach based on existing stream type and geomorphic condition. Based on the river corridor delineations, Vermont ANR works with communities to develop river corridor plans that analyze geomorphic condition, identify stressors and constraints to stream equilibrium, and prioritize management strategies. By focusing on "key attenuation assets", flood and fluvial erosion hazards, water quality and habitat are improved at minimum cost. Attenuation areas are captured in the corridor delinea- tion process and include Active River Area components. The river corridor plans are incorporated into existing watershed plans, and ANR also works with municipalities to develop Fluvial Erosion Hazard (FEH) Area Districts in their bylaws or zoning ordinances. A River Corridor Easement Program also has been established to purchase river channel management rights. This prevents landowners from dredging and armoring the channel and gives the easement holder the right to establish vegetated buffers in the river corridor. So far, 19 river corridor easements have been completed and 12 municipalities have adopted FEH Area zones. For more information, go to: http://www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/wa- terq/rivers/htm/rv_restoration.htm Critical Areas Protection Washington Critical Areas Growth Management Act of 1990 Washington State adopted its Growth Management Act in re- sponse to rapid uncoordinated and unplanned growth that was threatening the environment, sustainable economic develop- ment, and the health, safety and high quality of life afforded to its citizens. The Act requires all Washington counties and cities to designate and protect critical areas and natural resource areas. Critical areas include wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas and geologically hazardous areas. Natural resource areas include forest, agricultural and mineral lands. The Act has 14 18 ------- goals that include reducing sprawl by focusing growth in urban areas, maintenance of natural resource-based industries and encouragement of sustainable economic development, and protection of the environment by retaining open space and habi- tat areas. Based on county population and growth rate, some counties (and all cities within them) are required to fully plan under the Act, while others can choose to plan. All cities and counties, however, are required to designate and protect critical areas, and are given wide latitude on how to do so as long as they use the "best available science" and give special consider- ation to the protection of anadromous fish habitat. Washington State provides technical assistance and other plan- ning tools to assist communities with their performance-based goals. Snohomish County is an example of a local government adopting a wide variety of these techniques. For more information, go to: http://www.commerce.wa.gov/ site/418/default.aspx I LOCAL LEVEL Examples of Success: Protecting and Restoring Instream Flow Meeting Urban Water Demands While Protecting Rivers, Rivanna River Basin, Virginia (Richter B., 2007) The Rivanna River Basin contains some of the highest quality river and stream systems located in piedmont Virginia. In ad- dition to having numerous endemic and rare species, the rivers provide recreational opportunities and drinking water for the growing population of Charlottesville and the surrounding area. The Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority partnered with The Nature Conservancy to develop a new water supply plan that meets growing water demands and improves river ecosystem health. The new plan mimics natural flow regimes through con- trolled dam releases while ensuring adequate water supplies during drought. The releases are calculated as varying percent- ages of the inflow to the reservoir. For more information, go to: http://www.nature.org/initiatives/ freshwater/files/awwa Journal June07_richter.pdf Watershed-Based Zoning Watershed-Based Zoning in James City County, Virginia James City County, Virginia, completed its Powhatan Creek Watershed Management Plan in 2001. Due to the rapid devel- opment experienced in the previous two decades, the county decided to pursue a watershed-based zoning approach to pro- tect its high-quality streams from future development impacts. An impervious cover and instream/riparian habitat assessment categorized each of the county's subwatersheds as Excellent, Good, Fair or Poor. Using a combination of innovative land use planning techniques, including TDR, conservation development, rezoning, and resource protection overlay districts, the county has directed growth away from its most sensitive and ecological- ly valuable subwatershed and developed strategies to minimize further impacts in those degraded subwatersheds designated for growth. Each subwatershed also was targeted for other specific management measures to either conserve, protect or restore streams according to the level of threat imposed on each. For more information, go to: http://www.jccegov.com/ environmental/index.html 19 ------- Healthy Watersheds Initiative I Part 4 I Summary of Actions Healthy Watersheds Initiative Vision: Protect and maintain the aquatic ecological integrity of watersheds and supporting habitat networks to ensure that future generations may enjoy these resources and the social and economic benefits they provide HWI Components Integrated assessments State-wide protection strategies for priority watersheds Multi-partner implementation of conservation and protection priorities Goals/ Objectives Identify, protect and maintain net- Integrate HW into EPA programs work of healthy watersheds and supportive green infrastructure * State-wide assessments * Watershed goals strategic protection programs Policy and guidance Funding resources Progress measures Build awareness and support * Public outreach programs * Support local and regional planning commissions and governments for implementing programs EPA Strategies for Implementation Program Integration Provide Technical Assistance Action Plan | Policy/Guidance Policy statement making healthy watersheds protection a priority and an integral part of water quality and watershed programs Timeframe: 2011 HWI measures for the EPA Stra- tegic Plan and National Water Program Guidance Timeframe: 2011 & ongoing Identify funding sources and guidance to support programs Timeframe: 2011 & ongoing Annual HWI report and guide- lines for reporting activities and progress Timeframe: 2012 Integrate healthy watersheds protection into EPA programs and guidelines for leveraging and working with EPA's programs Timeframe: 2012 Regional healthy watersheds strategies Timeframe: 2011 Regional pilot demonstrations of incorporating healthy wa- tersheds protection into EPA programs Timeframe: 2011-2012 Assessments/Protection/Research * Healthy Watersheds technical document Timeframe: Fall 2011 * Integrated assessment expert workshop Timeframe: November 2010 * Healthy Watersheds research plan to identify critical research and methods needed for improved healthy watersheds assessments, including social and economic benefits assessments, and social marketing Timeframe: 2012 Multi-state or regional assessments Timeframe: Ongoing Technical assistance to states on healthy watersheds assessments Timeframe: Ongoing State inventories of healthy watersheds Timeframe: 2011 & beyond State instream flow assessments and implementation Timeframe: 2011 & beyond State green infrastructure assessments and implementation Timeframe: 2011 & beyond State fluvial geomorphic assessments and river/stream corridor protection programs Timeframe: 2015 & beyond State healthy watershed protection plans and programs Timeframe: 2011 & beyond Collaborate With Multiple Partners at Multiple Scales Partnerships * Statement of intent among partners to work together to identify and protect healthy water- sheds Timeframe: 2011 * MOUs with other Federal agencies Timeframe: 2011 & beyond Partnerships with TNC& USGS on instream flow and with TCF, SWC on green infrastructure Timeframe: 2011& ongoing Partnerships with na- tional state organizations Timeframe: 2011& ongoing Regional partnerships with other Federal agen- cies, NGOs, etc. Timeframe: Ongoing State partnerships with other states, Federal agencies, NGOs, etc. Timeframe: Ongoing Build Awareness and Support Outreach/Communications * Communications Strategy Timeframe: 2011 * Update website Timeframe: Ongoing * Webinars Timeframe: 2011 & ongoing * White paper on econom- ic and social benefits Timeframe: 2011 * Regional in-reach and outreach programs Timeframe: 2011 & beyond * State in-reach and out- reach programs Timeframe: 2011 & beyond 20 ------- publication Numbei _:PA 841-R-11-005 ------- |