&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Protecting Waters and Wetlands
in Indian Country:
A Guide for Developing Tribal
Wetland Management Programs
December 2022
EPA 840B21005
t'S,U
-------
Development of This
Guide
In 2020, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
contracted with Eastern Research Group (ERG), the
Consensus Building Institute, and Lucy Moore Associates
to coordinate and manage the preparation of this guide,
Protecting Waters and Wetlands in Indian Country: A Guide
for Developing Tribal Wetland Management Programs.
During the development process, a Tribal Roundtable of
16 tribal representatives from around the country met
with contractors, five EPA regional and headquarters
staff, and a staff member of the National Association of
Wetland Managers to ensure tribal needs, knowledge, and
perspectives were presented in this guide. EPA technical
leadership was provided by Kathleen Kutschenreuter (EPA
Headquarters) and Linda Storm (EPA Region 10). Appendix A
lists the names and affiliations of the Roundtable members.
Members of the Roundtable gathered via videoconference
nine times between November 2020 and September 2021.
The initial discussions focused on determining the scope and
organization of this guide, as well as identifying critical topics
of interest. The next set of Roundtable meetings centered on
identifying case studies, challenges, and recommendations
that could be discussed in this document. The final few
sessions of the Roundtable focused on reviewing this
draft document and making corrections and additions for
accuracy, clarity, and usefulness.
The Roundtable proved essential in the development of this
guide. Participants generously shared their experiences and
insights and contributed useful case studies and examples,
which appear throughout this document. In addition,
Roundtable members identified real-world technical,
financial, logistical, and organizational challenges for this
guide to highlight and, where possible, offered ideas for
addressing those challenges. The graphic design concept
of the guide was developed byMABU, a Native American-
owned marketing and design firm
Disclaimer:The information in this document was funded
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under Contract
68HERH19D0033. Mention of trade names or commercial products
does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
Furthermore, this document is a summary of the views of the
individual convening participants; approval for publication does
not signify that the contents reflect the views of the Agency, and no
official endorsement should be inferred.
Cover photo of wild rice in wetland by Roz Hawley.
-------
List of Acronyms
BIA:
Bureau of Indian Affairs
CEF:
Core Elements Framework
CSKT:
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes
CTUIR:
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
CWA:
Clean Water Act
CWSRF:
Clean Water State Revolving Fund
EAB:
Emerald Ash Borer
EPA:
United States Environmental Protection Agency
GAP:
General Assistance Program
GIS:
Geographic Information System
GPS:
Global Positioning System
GPTWA:
Great Plains Tribal Water Alliance, Inc.
ITEK:
Indigenous Traditional Knowledge
IK/TEK:
Indigenous Knowledge/Traditional Ecological Knowledge
MDT:
Montana Department of Transportation
NAWM:
National Association of Wetland Managers
NPS:
Nonpoint Source
NRCS:
Natural Resources Conservation Service
NWCA:
National Wetlands Condition Assessment
NWI:
National Wetland Inventory
PGP:
Programmatic General Permit
PNWTWIG:
Pacific Northwest Tribal Wetlands Working Group
PRW:
Potentially Restorable Wetland
RAM:
Rapid Assessment Method
RFA:
Request for Applications
RGP:
Regional General Permit
SMC:
Stockbridge-Munsee Community
SPGP:
State Programmatic General Permit
TAS:
Treatment in a Similar Manner as a State
TEK:
Traditional Ecological Knowledge
USACE:
United States Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS:
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
WESP:
Wetland Ecosystem Services Protocol
Wl TWWG:
WTCAC Tribal Wetland Working Group
WOTUS:
Waters of the United States
WPDG:
Wetland Program Development Grant
WPP:
Wetland Program Plan
WQS:
Water Quality Standards
WRP:
Water Resources Program
WTCAC:
Wisconsin Tribal Conservation Advisory Council
-------
Table of Contents
I. Introduction 1
A. Need for This Guide 2
B. Organization and How to Use 2
II. Getting Started: Some Basics 4
A. The 2013 NAWM Handbook 4
B. EPA's Core Elements Framework 5
C. Wetland Program Plans 6
D. Questions and Answers 9
III. Protecting Wetlands: Ingredients for Tribal Programs 10
A. Incorporating Cultural Values and Indigenous Knowledge/Traditional
Ecological Knowledge 10
B. Monitoring and Assessment 12
C. Regulatory Approaches 17
D. Water Quality Standards for Wetlands, and CWA Section 401 Authority 22
E. Voluntary Restoration and Protection 25
F. Questions and Answers About the Core Elements Framework and Wetland
Program Plans 30
IV. Getting Help 32
A. Wetland Program Development Grants 33
B. Other Sources of Funding 34
C. Tribal Collaboration Efforts and Partnerships 36
D. Funding and Sustaining Wetland Programs Questions and Answers 40
Appendix A: Roundtable Members 42
Appendix B: Case Study Summaries 43
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes | CSKT Wetlands Restoration Efforts 44
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes | CSKT Monitoring and Assessment 46
Confederated Tribes and Bands oftheYakama Nation | Lower Yakima Valley Riparian Wetlands
Restoration Project 48
-------
Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa | Development of Wetland Water
Quality Standards 50
Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa | Wildcrafting Guide and Medicinal Plant List... 51
Hopi Tribe | Wetland Program Development 52
Nez Perce Tribe | Wetland Ecosystem Services Protocol Tool 54
Pacific Northwest Tribal Wetlands Working Group | PNWTWIG 56
Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation | Wetland Reserve Easement Project 58
Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe | Improvements to Education and Outreach 61
Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians | Wetland Mapping Within the Red Lake
Indian Reservation 63
Stockbridge-Munsee Community | Story Map Project 65
Stockbridge-Munsee Community | Resolving Restoration Project Conflict 67
Stockbridge-Munsee Community | Emerald Ash Borer/Black Ash Project 69
Stockbridge-Munsee Community | Potentially Restorable Wetlands Project 71
Swinomish Tribe | Using Indigenous Science to Protect Wetlands: The Swinomish Tribe's
Wetlands Cultural Assessment Project 72
Wisconsin Tribes | Wisconsin Tribal Wetland Working Group 74
Appendix C: Funding Matrix 75
Appendix D: Additional Resources 77
-------
1
I. Introduction
This document, Protecting Waters and Wetlands in Indian
Country: A Guide for Developing Tribal Wetland Management
Programs, is for tribes interested in managing and protecting
wetlands and waters in Indian Country. To support tribal
sovereign nations in this effort, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has funded the development of
this guide as a supplement to the National Association of
Wetland Managers (NAWM) 2013 Wetland Program Plans
Handbook: A Resource to Assist States and Tribes in Developing
Strategic Approaches to Achieve Comprehensive Wetland
ProgramsJ
While each tribe has its own unique story, language, and
history, all share an abiding and deep-rooted connection to
the land. Wetlands and other waters play an important role
in ecological functions and cultural uses for tribes. Aquatic
habitats provide diverse species of plants, fish, and wildlife,
which are used to provide a great variety of food, fibers, and
medicines. There are as many native words for water as tribes
themselves. Some made their way into the English language,
like the Cree maskek, meaning "swamp," which gave us
"muskeg."Historically, tribes would have had little need to
think about protecting or restoring wetlands and waters
because the traditional ways of life did not threaten these
resources. However, living in constant touch with the natural
world resulted in an extraordinary accumulation of empirical
knowledge and experience. While some traditional ways
sadly have been lost due to the diaspora and displacement
of many tribes from their ancestral grounds, much has been
faithfully passed down from one generation to the next.
A Water Sampler
Different terms for water in different languages
A-ma (Cherokee)
Chuush (Yakama)
Ka'l (Quinault)
Kuuyi (Hopi)
Mahpe (Northern Cheyenne)
Mni (Lakota)
Nec (Northern Arapaho)
Nibi (Ojibwe)
Nfpiy(crA+) (Cree)
Ohki (Blackfeet)
To (Navajo)
A prairie pothole in the Mission Valley of the
Flathead Indian Reservation. Photo courtesy of
Tabitha Espinoza.
X ! - ' J._ J -I- . . -I -1 r r;4',„ -
• -
Current tribal efforts to protect wetlands in part reflect
these long-term historical relationships and the diversity
of tribes across the country. Tribes differ markedly in the
number of members, size and contiguity of landholdings,
climate and geography, extent and nature of aquatic
resources, environmental challenges and threats, and
financial circumstances. Tribal efforts to protect wetlands
and other waters vary widely, ranging from informal actions
to developed, multi-faceted programs. Technical capacity
and programmatic development also vary, with some tribes
protecting wetlands comprehensively and others working on
assembling the components of a basic wetland protection
program. While some tribes have EPA-approved Wetland
Program Plans (WPPs), many do not. Likewise, some tribes
have EPA-approved water quality standards and some have
obtained treatment in a manner as a state for Clean Water
Act section 401 water quality certification. Increasingly, tribes
have combined western science with Indigenous science and
Indigenous Knowledge/Traditional Ecological Knowledge (IK/
TEK) to protect aquatic resources, either as part of an EPA-
approved WPP or within their own framework. They find this
maximizes the well-being of their peoples and safeguards
important cultural practices while sustainably managing and
restoring wetlands and aquatic resources. For a discussion of
IK/TEK, see Section III.A.
1 The 2013 NAWM handbook was authored by the "Association
of State Wetland Managers,"NAWM's name until early 2022. It is
available at https://www.nawm.org/pdf lib/wetland program
plans handbook.pdf
-------
2
"Native scholar Greg Cajete has written that in
Indigenous ways of knowing, we understand a
thing only when we understand it with
all four aspects of our being: mind, body
emotion, and spirit. I came to understand when
I began my training as a scientist that science
privileges only one, possibly two, of those ways
of knowing: mind and body. But it is a whole
human being who finds the beautiful path."
—Robin Wall Kimmerer, Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific
Knowledge and] the Teachings of Plants
A. Need for This Guide
This guide aims to augment the 2013 Wetland Program
Plans Handbook by the National Association of Wetland
Managers (NAWM),2 which provides a sound foundation and
contains much information that may be useful to the tribes.
To supplement the NAWM Handbook, the tribes asked for
a document specifically designed to assist them with their
strategic wetland resource planning and management,
including guidance relevant to the unique tribal situations
and more accessible for the tribal reader. In particular,
tribal members of the Roundtable recommended that this
guide include ways of addressing the role of Indigenous
Knowledge and Traditional Ecological Knowledge (IK/
TEK), as well as the core elements of a wetland program as
identified by EPA. In addition, tribes recommended that
this supplemental handbook address a broader framework
for adding other priority elements that tribes may consider
when developing wetland programs, such as elder- youth
educational programs, outreach, or identifying potential
program funding opportunities.
Many tribes have expressed strong interest in strengthening
technical skills and programmatic capacity to increase
on-the-ground protection of wetlands and other aquatic
resources. At the same time, tribes have described a
number of financial, technical, and programmatic issues and
challenges. These complications can arise from uncertain
and fluctuating funding, as well as technical hurdles
that can make obtaining and managing data, including
GPS information, difficult. In addition, tribes have cited
ongoing and increasing threats to wetlands and other
water resources, including invasive species, hydrologic
manipulation, erosion and channelization, and long-term
impacts from climate change. Many of these threats, in
turn, can imperil culturally important resources and places,
including sacred sites. Moreover, tribes face distinct issues
related to tribal sovereignty, complicated relationships
with other jurisdictions (e.g., federal, state, intertribal), and
unique tribal governmental procedures, polices, and mission
statements.
B. Organization and How to Use
Although a free-standing document, this guide is best used
in conjunction with the NAWM Handbook. This guide is
organized into four sections:
• Section I: Introduces this guide, highlighting the
importance of wetlands to many tribal cultures and the
variation among tribal wetland protection programs
• Section II: Summarizes the foundational components of
this guide—the Core Elements Framework (CEF), WPPs,
and Wetland Program Development Grants (WPDGs).
• Section III: Describes the key considerations that
apply to tribes, such as the cultural values and uses
of wetlands, IK/TEK, wisdom and practice, strategic
considerations in the tribal context, ways of taking
advantage of the CEF, and decision-making.
• Section IV: Reviews some existing or potential areas
for assistance, including the
WPDG program, intertribal
cooperation efforts such as
the Pacific Northwest Tribal
Wetlands Working Group, and
partnerships of various kinds.
Each section contains links in the
text or footnotes where readers can
obtain more detailed or technical
information about particular topics.
Throughout this guide numerous
examples, case studies, photographs, and graphics enliven
the descriptions in each section.The case studies highlighted
in boxes provide additional insights about the topic under
2 National Association of Wetland Managers. 2013. Wetland Program Plans Handbook: A Resource to Assist States and Tribes in
Developing Strategic Approaches to Achieve Comprehensive Wetland Programs, https://www.nawm.org/pdf lib/wetland program
plans handbook.pdf.
-------
3
discussion. Several case studies illustrate the multiple
dimensions of tribal wetland protection and management
program efforts. In addition, the end of each section includes
some issues and challenges that tribes have raised either
in the past or during the development of this document,
presented in a question-and-answer format.
This guide also includes a series of appendices that provide
a list of the Roundtable members, various case study
summaries, a funding matrix, and a list of selected resources
for readers wanting additional information.
There is no prescribed way to read or use this guide. Readers
new to tribal wetland protection efforts might want to move
through the topics in order. Readers familiar with the CEF,
WPDG, and WPP development may wish to focus on the case
studies and the question-and-answer sections or scan the
table of contents to find what is of interest, keeping in mind
that tribal efforts to protect and manage wetlands are multi-
faceted, interdisciplinary, and symbiotic.
Diverse habitat structure peat system, or Pacific Northwest coastal prairie, with lodgepole pine (Pinus
contorta) buffer and emergent and aquatic bed plant communities. Photo courtesy of Linda Storm.
teiyfcN ¦¦ ¦
-------
4
II. Getting Started: Some
Basics
Tribes throughout the United States vary dramatically in
membership size, extent and contiguity of landholdings,
geography and climate, quality and quantity of aquatic
resources, environmental challenges, relationships with
states and other tribes, financial conditions, and historical
circumstances.3 Some tribes have professionally staffed
natural resource departments with multiple areas of
expertise, while others have few trained personnel or
limited technical capacity. Consequently, tribal efforts to
safeguard wetlands range from informal approaches to
more developed, multi-faceted programs. The same is true
for program development: some tribes have comprehensive
wetland protection programs and others are assembling the
components of basic programs.
Given these many factors, there is no one prescription to
follow in developing and implementing a wetland protection
strategy. The best approach will be tailored to the unique
opportunities and challenges for each tribe. In addition, the
programmatic needs and focus will change as a wetland
management program develops. A tribe in the early
stages may focus primarily on mapping and characterizing
resources. In contrast, an established program may seek to
fill gaps and pursue longer-term strategies such as sustaining
wetland protection, implementing long-term restoration
strategies, integrating community education and training,
or more fully incorporating a tribe's specific Indigenous
Knowledge and Traditional Ecological Knowledge (IK/TEK)
into its program.
While the wetland program "recipe" will vary, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) encourages tribal
wetland managers to be familiar with several common
foundational tools or resources. These include the 2013
Wetland Program Plans Handbook by the National
Association of Wetland Managers (NAWM), the Core Elements
Framework (CEF), and the range of existing state and,
especially, tribal Wetland Program Plans (WPPs).
Some Factors Informing Program Development
• Extent and characteristics of aquatic resources.
• Nature and severity of aquatic resource threats.
• Existing technical expertise.
• Staffing considerations.
• Availability of funds.
• Possible partnerships and leveraging opportunities.
• Tribal governance structure.
• Relationships with state and federal governments.
• Cultural values and priorities.
• TEK.
A. The 2013 NAWM Handbook
The 2013 NAWM Handbook provides states and tribes with
information about how to develop an EPA-approved WPP.
WPPs are voluntary plans developed and implemented by
states or tribes that typically describe strategic approaches
for wetland program management, protection, and
restoration over time. WPPs can establish priorities, set
program development goals, and provide states and tribes
with a blueprint for future action. The NAWM Handbook
includes information about the different components that
can be part of a plan and explores how a state or tribe might
develop a plan in light of the dramatic variations among both
states and tribes.
The NAWM Handbook consists of four major sections: an
overview of the planning process, a discussion of each of
EPA's core elements that may be part of a WPP (which are
identified as key elements for a comprehensive wetland
program), consideration of effective communication
approaches, and information about program funding. The
NAWM Handbook includes references at the ends of sections,
and appendices provide supplemental information that
directs readers to reports, webpages, and other resources
for more information.Tribal wetland managers, while
acknowledging the usefulness of the NAWM Handbook, have
recognized that its broad scope limits its capacity to focus on
tribe-specific issues.
3 A "federally recognized Tribe" is an American Indian or Alaska Native tribal entity with a government-to-government relationship with
the United States. Federally recognized tribes possess certain inherent rights of self-government (tribal sovereignty) and are entitled to
receive certain federal benefits, services, and protections because of their special relationship with the United States. At present, there
are 574 federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native tribes and villages.
-------
B. EPA's Core Elements Framework
While each tribe has its specific mix of factors that inform
its approach (see box on the previous page), a recurring
set of goals and program objectives underpins most
comprehensive wetland programs. EPA has summarized
these factors in the "Core Elements of Effective State and
Tribal Wetlands Programs,"also called theCEF.4 Developed
with input from states and tribes, the CEF outlines the
critical components of a state or tribal wetland program
and provides a comprehensive description and example
table or menu of program-building activities for each core
element.5 EPA's purpose in developing the CEF is to increase
the understanding of what constitutes a comprehensive
wetland program and to encourage a strategic approach
to developing wetland programs. The CEF offers an array of
actions and a menu of activities from which tribes can create
their own approach to wetland protection and management.
It does not reflect an expectation by EPA that tribes should
develop activities under all core elements; rather, tribes
should use the CEF to support their individual program
goals and available resources. Tribes may also add additional
elements to their programs, such as outreach and education,
sustainable financing/funding, or other important priorities.
Examples can be found in the Pyramid Lake Paiute and
Stockbridge-Munsee case studies in Appendix B.
EPA's CEF describes four components of a comprehensive
wetland program:
• Monitoring and Assessment: Document and track
changes in wetland acreage and condition:
• Regulatory Approaches: Permit, mitigate, and enforce:
• Water Quality Standards for Wetlands: Set benchmarks
for wetlands conditions: and
• Voluntary Restoration and Protection: Increase wetland
acreage and quality.
The CEF defines each core element and describes the goals
and potential benefits. It also provides a table with possible
program-building actions that can help tribes achieve each
core element's objectives which generally correspond to a
stage of program development.6 A suite of activities a tribe
can consider implementing based on its individual program
Early morning fog approach in a boat to the National Wetland
Condition Assessment Elk River salt marsh monitoring site, with fir trees
(Pseudotsuga menziesii) in the salt marsh and a tidal river channel.
Photo courtesy of Linda Storm
goals, available resources, and needs. Tribes can mix and
match steps from different sections based on their situation.
For example, a tribe may have a well-established monitoring
and assessment program while also being in the early stages
of developing water quality standards for wetlands.
While this guide presents all four core elements in this
basic format, each element also has its own particular set of
activities. For many tribes, the Monitoring and Assessment
core element is an essential and practical first step in
developing a wetlands program. First, it is key to inventory
and map wetlands and their geographic distribution and
extent. Then, gathering information on the different types of
wetlands, and their potential cultural values and ecological
functions, is helpful. Knowing the current geographic
location, size, and type of wetlands under tribal jurisdiction
may be a prerequisite for effectively addressing actions
and activities under the other program elements for how
to protect, manage, and restore wetlands. The Regulatory
Activities core element offers potential starting points for
a regulatory program, such as a clear jurisdictional scope,
a method to authorize impacts to aquatic resources, and a
method for ensuring compliance. The Voluntary Restoration
and Protection core element identifies many activities that
can foster partnerships with state or federal agencies, other
tribes, and nongovernmental organizations that support
program activities (e.g., wildlife protection programs, invasive
4 For a detailed treatment of the CEF, refer to the 2013 NAWM Handbook and information provided by EPA at https://www.epa.aov/
wetlands/core-elements-effective-state-and-tribal-wetland-proarams
5 The CEF applies to states as well as tribes even though this guide, in keeping with its purpose, primarily references tribes.
6 See https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-10/documents/2009 03 10 wetlands initiative cef full.pdf
-------
6
species control, cooperative ventures, or land acquisition
programs). The Water Quality Standards for Wetlands core
element often begins with monitoring wetland resources
to gather sufficient data to establish defensible regulatory
benchmarks.
Note that the four elements are not stand-alone silos but
mutually reinforce one another. For example, monitoring
and assessment activities will inform how to approach the
other three elements by ensuring status and condition of
the wetland resource is well-understood. Likewise, water
quality standards for wetlands area vital tool that can provide
a benchmark for activities under the regulatory activities
core element, including the use of the Clean Water Act
(CWA) section 401 certification authority to condition federal
permits or licenses in Indian Country.
These core elements, defined with state and tribal input,
provide a logical foundation for program development and
implementation. Some tribes will opt to invest effort in all
four core elements, while other tribes may focus on two
or three areas. At the same time, tribes may also choose to
add other elements into their WPPs, either in addition to,
as part of, or in lieu of the four core elements identified by
EPA. Additional considerations could include developing
partnerships, education programs, or climate change
adaptation measures, as well as integrating IK/TEK or other
cultural knowledge, practices, and considerations into
wetland management actions and activities.
EPA also encourages tribes to use the CEF to help guide
decisions around securing and allocating funds for wetland
programs. Securing the necessary financial resources
is a fundamental and sometimes challenging aspect of
developing and sustaining wetland programs. However, EPA
offers grant and technical assistance programs to support
tribes pursuing wetland program development (see Section
JV, "Getting Help").
C. Wetland Program Plans
WPPs are voluntary plans developed and implemented by
tribes that describe what the tribes want to accomplish over
time. Most WPPs include priorities, program goals, objectives,
and activities. WPPs provide tribes with a blueprint for future
action as well as a basis for assessing progress. A good WPP
will be tailored to the unique opportunities and challenges
that a given tribe faces and provide recommendations
forward. Wetland programs vary dramatically among both
Tribal WPP Components
• Context (e.g., existing efforts, tribal culture and history).
• Goal statement and objectives.
• Overall plan timeframe (typically 3-6 years).
• Core elements from the CEF.
• Additional tribe-specific elements.
• Specific actions to advance each element.
• Schedule for each action and metrics for tracking
each action.
• Relevant partnerships (e.g., state or federal agency,
intertribal).
• Funding strategy.
tribes and states. While there is no prescribed time period,
plan outcomes. Plans with longer timeframes are often most
beneficial as a tool for planning and communication inside
the tribe, across tribal departments, and with EPA.
While WPPs do not have to follow a set format, they typically
include certain minimum components (see box above).
WPPs normally will include one or more of the core elements
outlined in the CEF, and tribes are encouraged to add
other elements (e.g., sustainable financing) as appropriate.
Potential activities under the Voluntary Restoration and
Protection core element, for example, could include (but are
not limited to) providing technical assistance to community
members and/or landowners on how to identify and protect
wetlands; developing an invasive species control program;
identifying community outreach and communication
strategies about wetland protection priorities; taking
direct wetland protection actions through acquisition and
easement programs; and developing educational curricula
about wetland functions, cultural values, and IK/TEK.
WPPs don't need to be elaborate, complicated documents.
It is recommended that the WPP concisely identify planned
actions to create a focused and sustainable wetland program.
However, it is up to the tribal wetland program staff working
with its government and other partners to determine the
process, priorities, and contents of their WPP. The plan should
assess current and future challenges and opportunities; and
identify wetland protection, restoration, and management
priorities. Tribes with EPA-approved WPPs are more favorably
-------
7
A. A. A
Eagle Marsh in Grand Portage looking into Canada in the background. This
water body has water control structures that were put in place to try and
create more habitat for wild rice. Photo courtesy of Vallen Cook.
positioned for certain funding opportunities. For example,
the request for applications (RFA) for Wetland Program
Development Grants (WPDGs), both from the EPA regions
and the national tribal set-aside, describes two funding
tracks. Applicants with current WPPs, or who are developing
WPPs, are eligible to receive funding under the usually
better- funded Track One (see discussion of WPDG Track One
andTwofunding in Section IV.A.''Wetland Program
Development Grants").
EPA regional offices review WPPs, and EPA publishes
approved plans on its website.7 This webpage includes
the name of the tribe or state that developed the WPP,
a iink to the WPP itself, the years covered by the WPP,
and the core elements covered as part of the WPP. EPA
provided further details about the content of WPPs and the
submission, review, and approval process in an October 2009
memorandum, also posted on its website.8
Tribes that have completed WPPs have reported several
benefits. The WPP helps focus efforts on actions most likely
to benefit wetland resources. In many cases, a WPP can help
create new and stronger partnerships, as well as increase
support from tribal governments and the public for wetland
protection.
WPPs can serve as a helpful tool for communication about
wetland program management priorities and activities
between tribal program staff and managers and with tribal
community members. They also can provide continuity
if there is staff turnover. Tribes that have benefited the
most from developing WPPs have plans that include ways
to measure or evaluate success. Some tribes include a
funding strategy in the WPP to ensure they can sustain their
programs. At its best, a WPP provides the opportunity to
articulate the steps that can be taken to ensure current and
future generations of humans, fish, plants, and wildlife enjoy
the benefits of healthy wetland ecosystems and places.
A review of EPA-approved tribal WPPs reveals a diverse array
of interests and approaches in keeping with the unique
circumstances of different tribes (e.g., geography, history,
aquatic resources, environmental threats), as illustrated by
the small sampling of excerpts below.
7 https://www.epa,qov/wetlands/state-and-Tribal-wetland-proaram-plans#r1
8 https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/2009-wetiand-proaram-plan-memorandum
-------
8
Tribal WPPs Focus on Diverse Sets of Interests
(Selected Excerpts from Tribal WPPs)9
The Blackfeet Environmental Office will develop a comprehensive strategy to protect, maintain and restore wetlands and
aquatic resources on the Blackfeet Reservation for the Blackfeet People. These resources also serve as important storage
and discharge points for the Upper Missouri River watershed within the United States and the Milk and Saint Mary River
watersheds, which represent international waters flowing into Canada.
The goal of the Wetland Protection Program for the Hualapai Tribe is to maintain or increase wetland area, to maintain or
enhance wetland function, to establish wetland parameter databases and to identify wetland areas in need of protection
and/or restoration, We will use the products produced to identify land use activities that may affect wetland area and health,
identify wetlands for protection and restoration activities, and understand the potential effects of climate change on wetland
integrity of the Hualapai Reservation.
Northern Cheyenne Tribal members use certain wetland and riparian plants for medicinal and cultural purposes... Utilizing
an ethno-botanical approach, a list of plants that are of significant cultural value was developed through personal interviews
with elders. Many of these plants are hydrophytic, and therefore are located within wetland or riparian habitats.
The Wiyot Tribe respects and honors its wetland resources, biodiversity, and the functions and values they provide presently
and for future generations. The Tribe will make efforts to restore their wetlands to their authentic and fully functioning state...
The Wiyot Tribe plans to develop its wetland program through continued monitoring and assessment of wetland resource
condition to ensure wetland protection.... [and] use this information to improve understanding of baseline wetland condition,
develop benchmarks for wetlands restoration, inform development of wetland-specific water quality standards, and to
prioritize wetland restoration and protection activities.
The Yurok Tribe... is dedicated to the inventory, monitoring, assessment and protection of wetlands within the Yurok
Reservation. This Wetlands Program Plan should be considered an Adaptive Managemen t Plan, one that will be updated, as
needed, based on emerging data and analysis... Plan development will use traditional ecological knowledge; fisheries and
watershed programs experience and expertise; and our own departmental expertise in water quality, environmental
monitoring, bioassessments, and environmental regulation to contribute to restoration of the Klamath River and its fisheries.
The overall vision statement and goal for this [Coeur d'Alene] WPP is: The earth gave grandmother the knowledge to live with
the people, animals, and plants. This knowledge is to be used for our highest benefit, in turn, it will benefit all. Our lands are
essential to our way of life. Our vision is to educate and conserve our wetlands. Our goal is to protect, restore, and enhance our
wetlands. Our actions will assure that our cultural heritage will continue into the future.
9 WPPs can be found at: https://www.epa.gOv/wetlands/state-and-tribal-wetland-proaram-plans#1.
-------
9
D. Questions and Answers
Are the CEF and WPP mainly aimed at less developed
tribal programs?
While support is available to all tribes, including tribes with
developed wetland management programs, EPA maintains
a key focus on tribes actively working to begin or further
build small or"starter"programs.These tribes often depend
the most on EPA funding and technical assistance. However,
EPA assists developed programs as well. The CEF includes
objectives and associated program-building activities that
tribes can use to refine more fully developed programs.
Does the CEF have a technical assistance component?
The CEF clearly defines four core elements and outlines a
menu of program activities under each. EPA seeks to align
its technical assistance—including regional staff technical
assistance time, targeted trainings, and outreach—to
support interested tribes. The CEF helps EPA track specific
program-building actions and can help in tailoring assistance
to areas where a significant number of tribes are working.
When and how will EPA use the CEF in grant decisions?
WPDGs are EPA's primary source of financial support for
tribal wetland programs. EPA aligns the WPDG with the CEF
to emphasize program development. EPA uses the CEF to
guide program development elements and asks grantees
to reference the CEF in their proposed grant applications
and description of activities. See Section IV below for a more
detailed discussion of the WPDG program.
How can tribes do all the activities listed in the CEF without
additional funding?
Tribes are not required or expected to undertake all activities
in the CEF. The CEF is both broad and flexible. While it
provides a comprehensive menu of suggested program-
building activities to draw from, there is no expectation
that a tribe will pursue all the core elements or all the
activities under one core element. Tribes may choose the
activities best suited to help them meet their program goals.
For example, most tribes begin with the Monitoring and
Assessment core element because having information about
the type, distribution, and abundance of wetlands, and their
conditions or functions, is key to supporting other elements
of a wetland program. In addition, EPA will help develop and
support other intertribal information-sharing networks, as
well as target EPA resources to provide specific training and
technical support for program-building activities under the
CEF.
-------
10
III. Protecting Wetlands: Ingredients for Tribal
Programs
This section outlines five critical components for protecting
and managing wetlands and other aquatic resources:
incorporation of cultural values and Indigenous Knowledge/
Traditional Ecological Knowledge (IK/TEK); mapping,
monitoring, and assessment; regulatory approaches; water
quality standards for wetlands; and voluntary restoration and
protection.These components can be mixed and matched to
best meet the circumstances and needs of any particular tribe.
Examples of how tribes have worked with these components,
individually or in combination, are provided below.
A. Incorporating Cultural Values and Indigenous
Knowledge/Traditional Ecological Knowledge
IK/TEK is the knowledge held by Indigenous cultures about
the environment, the cultural practices that build on that
knowledge, and the evolving relationship between humans
and the natural world, it includes knowledge, practices,
and beliefs that have developed over generations and in
some cases centuries or millennia, passed down through
storytelling, songs, dance, and ceremonies. IK/TEK is rich in
history, culture, and ecological wisdom, and it is important
to a tribal community's health and welfare, and ultimately to
its survival. Critical aspects of tribal identity are interwoven
within the concept of IK/TEK, creating a powerful blend of
social, cultural, and environmental wisdom that gives the
community a path forward and the resilience to adapt to
change and challenges that lie ahead. Practically, IK/TEK
offers techniques and stewardship principles to guide all
activities within the natural world, including ecosystem
management practices, as well as hunting, fishing, plant
collection, cultivation, harvesting, and forestry.
Wetlands and other water resources hold an essential place
within IK/TEK.Tribes recognize the critical role of these
Other terms linked with IK/TEK or used to describe
or elaborate on the concept of IK/TEK include:
• Traditional ecological knowledge and wisdom
• Traditional knowledge
• Indigenous science/knowledge
• Native science/knowledge
• Cultural values
resources in maintaining the health and welfare of both tribal
members and the community itself. Wetlands and other
water resources nurture healthy, traditional foods; plants
used for medicinal, healing, and ceremonial purposes; reeds,
grasses, and other plant materials for weaving baskets and
making textiles; and fish and wildlife for food and recreation.
In addition, IK/TEK may offer guidance in cleaning wetlands
contaminated by a variety of pollutants. The health of these
resources affects every aspect of tribal life.
IK/TEK and western science share some important
fundamental beliefs, such as a desire to make sense of the
world around us, the importance of practical and curiosity-
driven investigations to learn better practices, and the
need to continuously update information as conditions and
knowledge change. There are also differences. In general,
western science strives to be objective and avoid value
judgments, often isolating objects of study in controllable
experimental environments. IK/TEK, on the other hand,
reflects local environmental and cultural contexts and
links the social, spiritual, cultural, and natural systems to
support and sustain community well-being.10 There are times
when the two systems are at odds, but more often, they
complement each other, providing important information
and perspectives that help create a richer and more robust
picture of the natural world and its relationship with human
activity.
With an increase in
partnerships between
tribes and non-tribal
agencies and entities,
tribal leadership and
staff a re often faced
with the important and
sometimes challenging
task of educating their
potential partners about
the meaning and role of
IK/TEK in their culture.
Often, they must do
so while honoring the
confidentiality of sensitiv
cultural information and
respecting the privacy of
tribal members. Working
with state, local, and
Dogbane (Apocynum cannabinum)
along the Clearwater River on the Nez
Perce Reservation—a plant used to
make cordage, baskets, and other fiber
materials. Photo courtesy of
Rue Hewett Hoover.
10 See, e.g., USGS,Traditional Ecological Knowledge *TEK): An Introduction and discussion ofTEK's Potential to Inform Adaptive
Management, Presentation (2012), available at: https://www.usbr.aov/uc/proaact/amp/twa/2012-04-16-twa-meetina/Attach 03c.pdf.
-------
11
"We've made assertions that have been
accepted, that the best available data includes
traditional knowledge, includes Indigenous
science... It's really revolutionizing the way
in which decisions are made and who gets a
seat at the table, and creating a space for
Indigenous knowledge holders to be respected
in these governing processes."
—Kelsey Leonard, Shinnecock Nation
federal agencies and institutions, as well as other partners,
tribal leadership may propose creative options for wetlands
management and protection. For the collaboration to
succeed, partners may need to create more flexible and
appropriate mechanisms for funding, sustaining programs,
and protecting and nurturing wetland ecosystems and
aquatic resources. There are significant examples of this kind
of partnership, as well as policy priorities to acknowledge the
critical importance of Indigenous knowledge and IK/TEK. For
example:
• On November 15, 2021, the White House Office
of Science and Technology Policy and Council on
Environmental Quality released a memorandum to
initiate new federal guidance on Indigenous Traditional
Ecological Knowledge (ITEK), which commits to
elevating ITEK in federal scientific and policy processes.
The memorandum describes ITEK as a body of
observations—including oral and written knowledge,
practices, and beliefs—that promote environmental
sustainability and responsible stewardship of natural
systems through human-environment relationships
across biological, physical, cultural, and spiritual systems.
The White House announcement and memorandum
can be found at https://www.whitehouse.aov/ceq/
news-updates/2021/11/15/white-house-commits-
to-elevatina-indiaenous-knowledae-in-federal-
policv-decisions/ and https://www.whitehouse.aov/
wp-content/uploads/2021/11/111521-0STP-CE0-ITEK-
Memo.pdf.
• On December 1, 2022, the White House Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the White House Office
of Science and Technology Policy (0STP) jointly released
a new government-wide guidance and an accompanying
implementation memorandum for federal agencies
on recognizing and including Indigenous Knowledge
in federal research, policy, and decisionmaking. The
guidance and memorandum respond to the 2021 OSTP-
CEQ memorandum discussed above, and can be found
here and here.
• The Nez Perce Tribe in Idaho worked with Dr. Paul
Adamus to adapt his functional assessment tool,
the Wetland Ecosystem Services Protocol (WESP), to
incorporate TEK. The new tool adds the tribe's cultural
functions and values to the existing ecological data
in WESP. Incorporating the cultural component into
the tool raises the rated value of each wetland based
on cultural importance.This assessment tool, which
includes ecological and cultural attributes, was badly
needed by the Nez Perce Tribe to prioritize and describe
restoration projects more appropriately. Read the full case
study here.
• The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
aware of the unique role of IK/TEK in tribal resource
management, has modified some requirements for
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) approval, and now
encourages partnering with both governmental
and private-sector entities for more broad-based
programs with multi-faceted approaches, including
the incorporation of IK/TEK in all phases of program
planning. EPA has been working to respond to the
needs of tribes, making their grant- making process
more streamlined, and encouraging partnerships and
collaborations in seeking grants.
• The Pacific Northwest Tribal Wetlands Working Group
has used EPA funding to form an effective tribal-led
collaboration, now over ten years old. Tribes share
challenges and solutions; they conduct joint trainings,
fieldwork, and resource sharing to strengthen and
nurture each member tribe's capacity to protect and
manage wetlands." Read the full case study here.
In recent years, presentations, webinars, and conferences
have brought tribal IK/TEK practitioners together with
agencies, academics, and others to exchange knowledge and
increase understanding (examples included in Appendix
D). Today, many federal agencies have IK/TEK policies,
including: the EPA; the U.S. Forest Service; the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation; and several bureaus and
offices within the Department of the Interior, such as the
Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Park Service,
the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management.
11 See additional discussion about the Pacific NorthwestTribal Wetlands Working Group on pages 56-57 of this document.
-------
12
Fond du Lac Wetland Types
Map of Fond du Lac
wetland types.
Courtesy of Rick Gitar.
B. Monitoring and Assessment
The Roundtable Workgroup recommends that developing
an effective wetland management program should begin
by taking stock and conducting an inventory of some kind.
The Workgroup also recommends some common questions
to ask, such as: Where are wetlands located? How many are
there? How large or small are they? What types of wetlands
are there? How do they relate to each other ecologically,
with the underlying hydrology, and with other landscape
features?
The next step is to assess wetland conditions and trends.
What natural resource functions do the wetlands provide?
What are their cultural uses and values? Are they healthy or
functioning well, or are they impaired in one or more ways?
What trends can be observed in terms of recovery or further
degradation?
Wetland monitoring and assessment programs can allow
tribes to establish a baseline about the extent, condition,
function, and observable trends of aquatic resources.
Monitoring and assessment play a foundational role in
the other components of wetland programs. For example,
regulatory programs may rely on monitoring to detect
whether unauthorized actions are occurring, evaluate
alternatives to avoid and minimize impacts, determine
whether permittees are complying with conditions in Clean
Water Act (CWA) section 401 water quality certifications,
and evaluate the cumulative impacts of permitted actions.
Tribes can use monitoring and assessment data to determine
compliance with water quality standards (WQS) or to
establish baseline data to develop wetland-specific WQS.
Monitoring and assessment information also helps identify
priority wetlands for protection or restoration efforts and
shape educational programs about wetlands. Finally, by
integrating wetland monitoring data with information
on other aquatic resources, monitoring and assessment
strategies can become an important bridge between
wetlands and other tribal water programs.
Monitoring involves collecting data, making observations,
and recording information about existing and changing
conditions, while assessment is the use of the collected
data to support decision-making and planning. EPA refers
to a three-tier framework for wetlands monitoring and
assessment.12 Most tribes draw on one or more of these
tiers when designing and implementing their wetlands
monitoring programs.
Level 1 consists of landscape assessments, which rely on
coarse landscape-scale inventory information, typically
gathered through remote sensing and stored in a geographic
information system (GIS) format.This approach involves
identifying wetland location and class or type using available
information such as National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Maps,
characterizing wetlands in terms of their position in the
landscape (using hydrogeomorphic classification13), and
characterizing areas that surround wetlands using landscape
metrics (e.g., percent forest cover, land use category such as
agricultural, residential, or commercial).14 Assessment results
can provide a rough gauge of wetland condition within a
watershed at the landscape scale.
12 See https://www.epa.aov/wetlarids/wetlands-monitorina-and-assessmentfor more information on EPA's Level 1,2, and 3 for
monitoring wetlands.
13 Hydrogeomorphology is a science that deals with occurrences of water with respect to landform. Hydrogeomorphology of a drainage
basin is a function of rainfall kinematics, surface topography, drainage basin morphology, and runoff, among other factors.
14 See Brinson eta IS 1993 hydrogeomorphic classification method (https://wetlands.el.erdc.dren.mil/pdfs/wrpde4.pdf), later modified by
Smith et al, in 1995 (https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA307121).
/\y Roads
/\/ Ditches/Streams
Forested Wetland
I | Scrub Shrub Wetland
I | Emergent Wetland
I | Aquatic Bed Wetland
H Lake
1 River
n Reservation Boundary
-------
13
Level 2 is the "rapid assessment" level of monitoring, where
tribes make site-specific field observations using relatively
simple metrics or measures to assess wetland condition
or functions) based upon readily observable information
at the wetland site scale. Typically, these methods involve
identifying both the hydrogeomorphic class and Cowardin
NW1 class15 of the wetland, including observing hydrology
and landscape setting, identifying dominant plant
community composition, and recording information about
habitat structure and the surrounding land-use setting of
wetlands. Rapid assessment methods typically produce a
score that describes where a wetland generally falls along
one or more gradients (e.g., the extent of human disturbance,
degree of ecological condition, or integrity).
Because of the more location-specific or regional nature of
rapid assessments, numerous rapid assessment methods
are currently in use or under development. Regulatory
programs have used Level 2 rapid assessments for many
years to help evaluate the likely impacts of proposed
development or land-use actions. Rapid assessments may
also be useful in assessing sites for wetland restoration,
management, or protection, or in evaluating the general
success of restoration, compensatory mitigation, or land-use
management. Some rapid site assessment methods may be
developed for specific purposes, such as a region-specific
Floristic Quality Assessment method like those used by some
federal agencies, states, and tribes.16 Some Floristic Quality
Assessments involve identifying all plant species present and
~ ~ ~
Wetland monitoring during 2021 National Wetland Condition
Assessment. Photo courtesy of Linda Storm.
some quantitative sampling to determine relative percent
cover of native and non-native species as a measure of
wetland quality, which would be Level 3 instead of Level 2
monitoring.
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes |
CSKT Monitoring and Assessment
With funding from the EPA Wetland Program
Development Grants (WPDGs), the Confederated Salish
and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) Wetland Conservation
Program started a comprehensive rotating basin and
watershed- based approach to wetland assessment
and monitoring in 2004. Due to the competitive nature
of this funding source, the program has started and
stopped a few times over the years due to resulting
staff turnover. As a result, the original strategy has had
to adjust. There are seven watersheds on the Flathead
Indian Reservation. At present, five of the watersheds
have been assessed and monitored twice, allowing
for limited trend analyses by comparing baseline
data to current data. Completing watershed-based
assessments on the two remaining watersheds will
enable CSKT to analyze the data for each of the seven
sub-basins and begin documenting changes on a larger
scale over time. Read the full case study here.
Level 3 consists of intensive site assessments and involves a
more rigorous approach to collecting data and measuring or
assessing wetland condition.17 Level 3 monitoring typically
involves collecting quantitative, site-specific data, including
direct and detailed measurements of hydrology, biological
communities, soils, and other measures at specific wetland
sites. Such detailed and quantitative data collection provides
more precise measures for assessing wetland condition
and understanding the ecological processes or functions
the wetland performs. Sampling may include biological
measures such as plant species inventories or amphibian,
macroinvertebrate, physical, or chemical monitoring. Level 3
15 See https://www.epa.gOv/wetlands/classification-and-tvpes-wetlands#undelined for descriptions of both the hydrogeomorphic and
the Cowardin wetland classification approaches, USFWS uses the Cowardin classes of a wetland for their NWI mapping.
16 See for example https://cnhp.colostate.edu/cwic/condition/ecoloaical/ or https://www.ncwetlands.ora/proiect/coefficient
conservatism or https://www.dnr.wa.gov/NHP-FOA
17 Note that assessing wetland condition and wetland functions involves somewhat different methodological approaches. Readers
wanting more detail can explore tools on the wetland monitoring protocols for addressing biological assessment methodologies under
different modules, such as https://www.epa,aov/nutrient-policv-data/nutrient-criteria-development-document-wetlands#wetlands.
-------
14
monitoring may be done at one time to characterize baseline
conditions of wetlands or a population of wetlands, or over
longer periods of time. Physical and chemical information is
gathered about the landscape setting; how water, nutrients,
and sediments enter and exit the site; and other aspects of
the surrounding land-use conditions. Such information can
characterize the hydrogeomorphic functions and processes
at a site. For additional information about one such approach,
the Hydrogeomorphic Method, see the Hydrogeomorphic
Approach for Assessing Wetlands Functions.
Other program elements may include building geographic
information, either through acquiring related map layers
(e.g., soils information, digital elevation) or locating special
wetland resources (e.g., designated habitat for listed species,
cold-water streams, rare wetland types, public lands).The
Wetland Mapping Consortium encourages consistent
national mapping as defined in the National Wetland
Mapping Standards and shares information about innovative
techniques and the application of GIS data.18
Some tribes have developed specific tools. For example, the
Nez Perce Tribe's WESP assessment tool determines the
functions and values (both ecological and cultural) of
reservation wetlands to make decisions and inform wetland
management actions. The tribe uses WESP to identify the
Taking stream discharge measurements at theTarnarac River to develop
nutrient loading and stream rating curves. Photo courtesy of Red Lake DNR
Water Resources Program.
functions, benefits, and values of individual wetlands;
prioritize wetlands restoration and protection; monitor the
long-term effects of wetland restoration; and predict and
evaluate impacts from changing rainfall and weather
patterns to assist in adaptation to hazards, floods, and
droughts. Among other things, WESP helps the tribe design
and evaluate future restoration projects.
Incorporating Traditional Ecological
Knowledge and Wisdom in Monitoring and
Assessment
The Tuialip Tribes emphasize the importance of
designing wetland protection efforts around traditional
ecological knowledge and wisdom. Inez Bill, Tribal
Elder and Rediscovery Program Coordinator for the
Tuialip Tribes, noted that "Following our teachings and
values, it shows the importance of our environment,
how we need to take care of it and protect it and
honor it—so it will continue for future generations—to
support us."ln 2018, theTribes rebuilt their Wetland and
Stream Inventory database to allow for easy editing
and tracking, as well as daily updates to all users of
the inventory. Across the Tuialip Reservation's 22,567
acres, the inventory captures wetland and deepwater
habitats, natural streams, modified natural streams,
and artificial streams. Within each wetland polygon, the
inventory has a range of data fields, including those for
culturally sensitive species and generation of a cultural
values score, and cultural notes. Indicators used to
develop cultural scores were developed through both
a landscape-scale GIS analysis, field-verified with rapid
assessment and quantitative data collection, as well as a
site-scale wetland cultural values assessment checklist,
which includes fields for tribal staff to document plant
use, fish/wildlife use, historical use, information about
access, and more. Learn more about the Tuialip Tribes'
Monitoring and Assessment Program here.
18 See, for example, https://www.nawm.org/134-science/wetlands-one-stop/9350-introductiori-to-wetlands-one-stop-mappina arid
https://www.fws.gov/node/264587
-------
15
EPA encourages tribes interested in monitoring and
assessment programs to pursue three objectives in a
sequence that generally corresponds to the stages of
program development:
1. Develop a wetlands monitoring and assessment
strategy that identifies approaches the tribe will use to
manage wetlands in a way that supports their vision and
objectives.
2. Implement a sustainable monitoring program consistent
with the wetlands monitoring strategy.
3. Incorporate monitoring data into tribal decision-making.
While there is no"cookbook"approach to developing a
wetland monitoring strategy, tribes typically identify the
methods or approaches they intend to use. A first step is
usually a Level 1 inventory of wetlands, often with Level 2
rapid assessment ground-truthing of some representative
sample of the wetlands inventoried. EPA provides detailed
menus of possible program-building objectives, actions,
and activities to consider under each objective.19 Tribes in
the beginning stages of a monitoring program may want to
focus on steps in Objective 1, while those with a monitoring
program underway may want to focus on the steps in
Objective 2. The actions in Objective 3 provide a suite of
applications for those tribes that already have substantial
monitoring data to use in program management decisions.
Tribal WPPs and efforts reveal a common focus on mapping,
monitoring and assessment efforts while pursuing a variety
of approaches in light of differing circumstances.
The Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa,
supported by a WPDG, developed a Comprehensive
Wetland and Assessment and Monitoring Plan in
2008 and began collecting data in 2010 using a five-
year sub-watershed cycle.The tribe seeks to maintain
and expand the current plan, facilitating sustainable
managementand conservation of tribal wetlands. To
that end, the tribe identified 12 specific activities to
accomplish at various points during the 2019-2023
timeframe.20
In 1996, the Kickapoo Tribe hired a contractor to
complete an inventory of wetlands on tribal land. Of
the 123 probable wetlands, approximately 35 were
emergent, and only nine were considered to have
minimal impacts from human development or use.
Another 24 forested wetland areas fared better as
only half were impacted by human development.
Lastly, two scrub-shrub wetlands were found on the
reservation's eastern edge. The tribe now seeks to
maintain a comprehensive inventory of wetlands and
gain a greater understanding of the functionality and
condition of wetland systems within the reservation
boundary by monitoring and assessing wetland
condition. The tribe has identified five specific actions
to undertake in the 2020-2024 timeframe, along with
possible partners and potential funding sources to
advance these goals.21
The Chippewa Cree Wetlands Program, in collaboration
with its CWA section 106 Water Quality Program, is
monitoring headwater wetland conditions and water
quality in the Upper Big Sandy Creek watershed. The
tribe will use data to assess restoration needs and
develop tribal wetland narrative and numeric wetland
water quality criteria and standards. Data will also
serve to evaluate sites for potential restoration and
finalize Tribal Wetlands WQS. Data will also be used
to collaborate with EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) to update tribal wetland regulatory
mechanisms.22
From the Chicken Ranch Rancheria WPP: "Monitoring
and assessing wetlands is the most important element
for Chicken Ranch's wetland program. It is important
for the Tribe to build its capacity to understand the
location and health of their wetlands. This is especially
true because the Tribe is planning on developing a lot
in the near future to provide needed infrastructure for
the Tribal community. It will be important to monitor
how the wetlands are impacted by development."23
19 For the monitoring and assessment program objectives, actions, and activities menu, see https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/
files/2015-09/documents/monitorina and assessment cef.pdf
20 https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2020-03/documents/fond du lac wpp.pdf
21 https://www.epa.aov/sites/production/files/2020-03/documents/final ktik wpp 2 feb 18 2020.pdf
22 https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-12/documents/fv20 wpp amendment cct.pdf
23 https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2021-03/documents/chicken ranch rancheria wetland program plan signed 2021.pdf
-------
16
Bizhiki (Bison), one of many shallow open-water
wetlands within the Red Lake Indian Reser vation. Photo
courtesy of Red Lake DNR Water Resources Program.
Mapping, monitoring, and assessment underpin and
inform almost every component of tribal wetland
programs. While some funders and decision-makers may
view ongoing monitoring and other data gathering less
favorably than activities that seem more "actionable,"
monitoring and assessment work is foundational to
wetland management and is fundable under EPA Wetland
Program Development Grants (WPDGs.) Sound planning
may help enforce the importance of mapping, monitoring,
and assessment by demonstrating the necessity of
gathering objective information to support other program
elements and make wise wetland management decisions.
However, systematic monitoring is costly and time-
consuming. In some cases, monitoring and assessment
efforts can be built over time, perhaps starting small to
demonstrate the value of the effort. Partnerships with
other tribes, state and federal agencies, and academic
research programs can also help limit tribal costs and
create efficiencies of scale. Tribes may also wish to consider
a volunteer monitoring program where there is sufficient
capacity and interest.24
Participating in cooperative national or regional workgroups
or monitoring projects can increase tribal expertise in any
or all levels of monitoring, allow for input into regional or
national monitoring plans, and ensure understanding of and
access to collected data. Tribal planners may want to consider
getting involved in regional and national workgroups. Two
examples include:
• The National Aquatic Resource Surveys.25 Under this
program, EPA and partners can complete a statistically
valid sampling of various types of waters (e.g., lakes,
rivers, streams, coasts, wetlands) on a national basis,
resampling each type every five years. The National
Wetland Condition Assessment is specific to wetlands.
• National Wetland Monitoring Assessment Work
Group.2' The mission of this workgroup is to help states
and tribes build their capacity to sustain and improve the
quantity and quality of the nation's wetlands. The work
group aims to develop and implement monitoring and
assessment tools and programs that can be integrated
into a state or tribe's overall water quality monitoring
strategies, as well as to ensure assessment-related
science is integrated into state and tribal programs.
One common pitfall for wetland programs is to end up "data
rich and analysis poor."Tribes should allocate adequate
time and develop or obtain sufficient expertise to conduct
the needed analytical tasks, which could be conducted by
internal expertise or contract assistance.
Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians |
Wetland Mapping Within the Red Lake
Indian Reservation
The Red Lake Indian Reservation is located in north-
central Minnesota. Before 2016, theTribe relied on NWI
wetland maps produced by USFWS dating back to the
1980s. Because of this, theTribe felt that it was in their
best interest to update the NWI for the contiguous
portion of the reservation to determine if the wetland
extent had increased or decreased over time. The
Red Lake Water Resources Program put together a
WPDG to conduct the task within the WPP. The tribe
wanted to update the NWI for the intact portion of
the reservation and develop a shoreline ordinance
to be followed during construction practices. Once
funds became available in 2017, the Water Resources
Program collaborated with the Red Lake Forestry
Department to obtain land cover layers from timber
cruises and logging cuts, and with USFWS to develop a
methodology that could highlight hydric soils using the
ArcMap GIS tool. Read the full case study here.
24 For more information about volunteer monitoring, see http://water.epa.aov/tvpe/wetlands/assessment/volmonitor.cfm.
25 To contact EPA about the National Aquatic Resource Surveys and NWCA, see https://www.epa.gov/national-aquatic-resource-survevs/
forms/contact-us-about-national-aauatic-resource-survevs.
26 For more information, see https://www.epa.gov/national-aauatic-resource-survevs/nwca.
-------
17
C. Regulatory Approaches
Tribal wetland and aquatic resource regulatory programs
are defined by the authority under which they operate
(e.g., tribal law, CWA §404, and CWA §401). State and tribal
regulatory programs regulating aquatic resources typically
fall into four main categories:
• Implementation of a CWA §401 certification program
that indicates whether the proposed permit or license
would be consistent with water quality standards (WQS)
and other water quality-related provisions;
• Implementation of a State Programmatic General Permit
(SPGP) or a Regional General Permit (RGP). SPGPs and
RGPs are general permits issued by the Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) that authorize activities regulated by
another entity such as a state or tribe;
• Assumption of the CWA §404 permitting authority, so
that the state or tribe issues all CWA §404 permits for
the discharge of dredge or fill of material into waters
of the United States (WOTUS) within the state's/tribe's
jurisdiction; and
• Implementation of a state or tribal permitting program
under state or tribal laws and regulations independent of
EPA or USACE review.
Tribes vary in whether to include regulatory provisions as
a key element of an overall wetland protection strategy.
Some tribes view regulating wetland alteration as the
cornerstone of a wetland program, supported by other
components such as mapping and assessment, voluntary
measures, and education. Other tribes have found it more
effective to focus on non-regulatory approaches and rely
on federal programs as a regulatory backstop. A tribe with
extensive lands and numerous activities undertaken by
non-tribal parties may elect to enact provisions (e.g., bylaws,
resolutions, codes, ordinances, permitting requirements) to
regulate adverse impacts on wetlands. Conversely, tribes
with smaller populations, less land area, and fewer wetlands
may find other approaches to protect and manage aquatic
resources that are more efficient and effective. In addition,
some tribes not developing their regulatory programs may
participate actively in federal programs by commenting
on public notices or environmental impact statements.
This participation can include offering comments and
working with federal, state, and local jurisdictions exercising
permitting authority in some cases.
Discharges of dredged or fill material into WOTUS, including
jurisdictional wetlands, are regulated under CWA section
404 (33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq.). Many, though not all, tribes
coordinate to some degree with the permitting program
administered by USACE under section 404. For tribes that
have not developed their regulatory program, an initial
consideration may be the extent of responsibility the
tribe wishes to assume relative to the federal CWA section
404 program. A tribe may wish to consider evaluating its
wetlands program to fill "regulatory gaps"or enact provisions
to address any issues of specific concern. For example,
CWA section 404 jurisdiction is limited to regulating the
discharge of dredged or fill material into WOTUS. However,
other discharges and activities can impact wetlands and
other waters without involving discharges of dredged or fill
material. In addition, not all wetland areas fall under federal
jurisdiction, even though they may provide important
ecological and cultural values.
Tribes developing and implementing regulatory programs
will need to evaluate the available level of financial
and political support to determine achievable program
expectations and where they should focus regulatory efforts.
Some questions tribes may want to ask:
• Is expanded protection needed for particular types
of wetlands, or to support maintenance of certain
ecological services or cultural values?
• Are there gaps in resource protection?
• What wetlands will be protected by the tribal program,
in terms of size, type, and/or location?
• How will regulated wetlands be identified?
• Are there opportunities to partner with other parties
(e.g., other tribal, federal, state, or local agencies) to
create efficiencies, share expertise, and stretch limited
staff resources further?
Tribes interested in having a regulatory component as part of
a wetland protection strategy and WPP have several options
to consider separately or in combination. More advanced
regulatory approaches provide more comprehensive
regulatory protection, but generally cost more to administer,
require greater expertise, and may be more controversial.
Each tribe will need to evaluate its unique circumstances—
such as prevalence or rarity of aquatic resources,
development pressure and other stressors, financial and
technical capacity, and cultural factors—when deciding what
approach to take. The following pages describe a general
continuum of basic to more advanced approaches.
-------
18
Regulatory Approaches: Some Factors to
Consider
• Strength of information base (e.g., GIS mapping capacity,
wetland inventory, other land-use data).
• Technical capacity (e.g., wetland delineation training,
wetland monitoring and assessment approaches).
• Adequacy of tribal legal authority (e.g., existing tribal
ordinances, codes, or laws related to water).
• Effectiveness of existing state and federal regulatory
programs to protect wetlands of concern to the tribe.
• Tribal support and acceptance for regulatory approaches.
• Resource commitments and capacity (e.g., dollars,
staff time).
• Enforcement components and authorities.
• Relationship to other program elements (e.g., monitoring
and assessment; priority sites to protect, acquire, and
restore; cultural values and IK/TEK; education and outreach).
Look to Existing State and Federal Regulatory Programs.
In some circumstances, it may not be possible or sensible for
a tribe to develop its own regulatory measures.Tribes might
be able to achieve effective management and protection
of wetlands and other aquatic resources through other,
less resource-intensive means if they lack the technical
or financial capacity or if a rules-driven approach is not
compatible with the tribal culture. In such cases, tribes may
elect to engage with existing state and federal regulatory
programs by reviewing and commenting on public notices
or environmental impact statements, attending public
hearings, or seeking to have their interests considered by
the regulatory agencies. The effectiveness of this approach
depends, in part, upon the strength of the relationship
between the tribe and the regulatory agencies and if
regulatory agencies are receptive to addressing tribal
concerns. Where tribes have treaties with the United States,
federal regulatory agencies have a trust responsibility
to address tribal concerns. For example, in the Pacific
Northwest, treaty tribes significantly influence the outcomes
of USACE CWA section 404 permit decision-making.27
Enact Specific Tribal Zoning,
Ordinance, or Bylaw
Provisions.
Zoning or bylaw provisions
limiting defined wetland
activities may provide them
with basic protection. Types of
protection may include, among
other things, prohibiting
certain activities; identifying areas of special environmental
concern; requiring setbacks, buffer zones, or seasonal
restrictions; and using best management practices. Tribes
may include variance provisions to address exceptional
circumstances.
Use CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification
Authority If Available.
Authorized tribes28 and states have an important role
pursuant to CWA section 401. Under CWA section 401, a
federal agency may not issue a license or permit to conduct
any activity that may result in any discharge into WOTUS
unless the authorized tribe, state, or interstate agency
with jurisdiction over the location where the discharge
would originate issues a CWA section 401 water quality
certification finding "that any such discharge will comply
with the applicable provisions of sections 301, 302,303, 306,
and 307"of the CWA, or unless such certification is waived,
per 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1). If an authorized tribe, state, or
interstate agency issues a CWA section 401 certification, CWA
section 401 (d) provides that the certification shall establish
conditions, including "any effluent limitations and other
limitations, and monitoring requirements"that are necessary
to ensure the applicant for a federal license or permit will
comply with applicable provisions of CWA sections 301, 302,
306, and 307, and with any other appropriate requirement
of tribal or state law set forth in the certification. See Id.
at 1341 (d). Authorized tribes may grant (with or without
conditions), deny, or waive water quality certification with
respect to federal licenses or permits, including federally
issued CWA section 402 and section 404 permits. Unless
a water quality certification is granted (with or without
conditions) or waived, the federal agency cannot issue the
license or permit. See Id. at 1341 (a)(1). The federal agency
must include in the license or permit any conditions that the
27 https://www.nws.usace.armv.mil/Media/News-Releases/Article/754951/armv-corps-halts-aatewav-pacific-terminal-permittina-process.
28 As provided for in 40 CFR 131.4(c), tribes that have been deemed eligible for EPA treatment in a similar manner as a state under CWA
Section 303(c) can conduct section 401 certifications.
-------
19
authorized tribe, state, or interstate agency provides with its
certification. See Id. at 1341 (d). In cases where no tribe, state,
or interstate agency has authority to issue a water quality
certification, EPA is responsible for issuing certification, per
33 U.S.C. 1341 (a) (1). For more information on CWA section
401 water quality certification, please visit https://www.epa.
gov/cwa-401.
Develop and Promulgate Tribal Regulations.
A wide range of regulations governing the alteration of
wetlands may be promulgated by a tribe, relying on its
land use management authority and inherent interest in
protecting aquatic resources. Tribal regulations may parallel
provisions of CWA section 404 in protecting wetlands from
avoidable or significant adverse alteration or destruction
Regulations may also differ in any number of ways from
federal CWA requirements, depending on a tribe's priorities.
Tribes that have established their regulatory program may
have opportunities to reduce duplication between tribal
departments and federal agencies. For example, a tribe
might be able to develop joint application and/or joint
public notice processes with federal permitting agencies or
integrate tribal and federal permitting actions by developing
a regional or programmatic general permit (PGP) with USACE
(see Issue a Tribal PGP below).Tribal regulatory programs
will typically also contain an enforcement component to
address both unauthorized activities and activities that do
not comply with the terms and conditions of an issued tribal
permit. Note that the cost of enforcement may often be
higher per case than the cost to review and issue a permit.
In some cases, tribes can synergistically combine regulatory
program requirements with other objectives. The
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT), for example,
has been able to integrate regulatory provisions, restoration
goals, and effective partnerships in a mutually beneficial and
reinforcing way (see box).
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes
Wetlands Restoration and Compensatory
Mitigation Efforts
CSKT has a stringent Wetlands Conservation Plan that
it implemented to reach the goal of "no net loss" of
wetland acreage across the reservation beginning
in the late 1990s. The plan provides for mapping,
monitoring, and assessment, of the reservation's
wetland resources. Most notably though, the plan
(along with various tribal ordinances) is a regulatory
tool that holds developers accountable for unavoidable
impacts to wetlands, requiring 3-to-1 compensatory
mitigation. The Finley Flats Wetland Preserve is an
example where CSKT and the Montana Department
of Transportation (MDT) worked together to restore
wetlands. CSKT leveraged resources from settlement
monies along with funding from MDT and other sources
to restore some 200 acres of wetlands, some of which
were used as credits to mitigate for impacts of the
Highway 93 redesign project that began in the early
2000s and is still occurring today. Read the full case
study here.
Regulatory staff collectively need to have or be able to access
multiple kinds of expertise. They must be able to delineate
wetlands, apply monitoring and assessment tools, and
exercise sound judgment when evaluating proposed project
impacts based on their knowledge of aquatic ecosystems. In
addition, staff need to have in-depth knowledge of multiple
laws and regulations, as well as how to handle enforcement
WWW
Close-up of emergent and aquatic bed of a Pacific
Northwest peat system. Dominating the aquatic
bed are red toad rush (Juncus sp.) and pond-lily
(Nymphea sp.) in the foreground and Dulichium
(Dulichium arundinaceum) in the background.
Photo courtesy of Linda Storm.
-------
20
cases. Regulatory personnel often use technical mapping
equipment, including GPS and GIS data collection, to
maintain regulatory databases.
It is also important to communicate effectively with tribal
and non-tribal community members who may be unfamiliar
with permit requirements. The success of a regulatory
program often depends on both the coherence and clarity
of its structure and the skills and training of the staff. Where
regulatory responsibilities are shared across tribal agencies,
joint training may be advisable. Some tribes have also linked
their regulatory activities to education and public outreach
efforts. For example, the Northern Cheyenne Tribe identified
multiple tasks in its WPP to educate the community about its
wetland program and regulatory protection efforts, including
to:
"Perform public education and outreach about wetland
protection, regulated waters and activities, and
authorization process. The Wetlands Program has a
good relationship with the local schools as well as Tribal
departments. Numerous presentations were held over the
course of the past few years to a variety of audiences from
high school students to livestock operators. Presentations
are created and presented at agricultural workshops, school
career fairs, cultural resource trainings, and informational
sessions held with Tribal government officials. [We] educate
the public on Tribal and federal regulations to help the
public understand the importance of the regulations
Activities to this end include hosting seminars, conducting
presentations at local schools, establishing informational
booths at local events such as pow-wows and career
fairs, and writing periodic articles for publication in local
newspapers. Materials obtained from EPA Region 8 are
distributed at events listed above and are made available
on the Northern Cheyenne Tribal website. The Wetlands
Program intends to make all presentations and brochures
available for online access going into the future. The
Wetlands program also creates and updates written
material for the public. There are two brochures [about
Tribal] wetlands and wetlands program activities. The
Wetlands Program also utilizes existing information sheets
by EPA to educate the public on the regulatory processes
surrounding wetlands. These materials are made available
at our office and are used in all presentations."
Issue a Tribal Programmatic General Permit (PGP). Under
certain circumstances, USACE may be able to issue a PGP,
which relies on the tribe to review certain proposed activities
regulated under CWA section 404. Where tribal authority
is at least equivalent to federal authority for specified
actions, USACE may issue a PGP, under which approving and
issuing the permit depends primarily on review by the tribal
program. Larger projects or those where issuing a permit
would cause more than minimal impacts still typically require
both tribal and federal review. The overarching general
permit agreement is renegotiated and reissued every five
years. As tribes gain regulatory experience, USACE may add
more categories of activities to the PGP, thereby relying to a
greater extent on the tribal regulatory program. Developing
and subsequently expanding a PGP may be considered an
action step in the regulatory activities core element of a WPP.
Request Tribal Assumption of the CWA Section 404 Program.
Tribes with "treatment in a similar manner as a state"
(TAS) status may request to assume the CWA section 404
program. "Assumption"of the CWA section 404 program
describes the process whereby a tribe obtains approval
from EPA to administer the CWA section 404 program
within its borders and consequently begins administering
all aspects of the program. In such instances, USACE would
no longer administer the Section 404 program, except in
certain waters. For tribes with mature, integrated water
management programs that include the regulation of
dredged or fill material discharges into WOTUS, CWA section
404 assumption provides an option to carry out a fully
integrated and comprehensive program addressing the full
range of tribal and CWA section 404 authorities. Assumption
is not delegation; a delegated program means that a tribe is
issuing a permit or taking an action on behalf of the federal
government. In accordance with the requirements of CWA
section 404(g), a state or tribe may only be authorized to
assume the section 404 program if it has authority over
all "assumable waters"29 and demonstrates it will apply
standards consistent with and no less stringent than the CWA
requirements in operating a permitting program. A tribal
dredged-and-fill permitting program can be more protective
than the CWA requirements.
To date, only three states (Michigan, New Jersey, and Florida)
and no tribes have assumed the section 404 program. There
are several explanations for these low numbers, including
that not all waters are "assumable,"as well as a complicated
29 "Assumable" waters are essentially those not considered traditionally navigable in fact and specifically identified on a state-by-state
basis.
-------
21
application and approval process, difficulties in aligning with
federal jurisdictional and other regulatory requirements, and
the added costs incurred. However, EPA has been examining
approaches to reduce impediments to assumption. Interest
is increasing among states and tribes that wish to further
reduce duplication and to further rely on their own water
programs and environmental criteria.
Tribes may consider any of the above steps and strategies
related to regulation or developing regulatory programs
in a tribal WPP. Different levels of regulation vary greatly in
cost. Developing a CWA section 401 program and requiring
conditions on federal permits and licenses may be less costly,
for example, than administering a full permit program. In any
case, adding to, revising, or expanding a regulatory program
often requires multiple actions, including:
• Assessing tribal needs and priorities.
• Drafting potential regulatory language and guidance.
• Obtaining input from tribal members, tribal leadership,
regulated communities, and other affected parties as
rules and provisions are crafted.
Tribes have used regulatory tools in a variety of ways:
• Obtaining approval from tribal council and leadership
once rules and provisions are drafted.
• Creating administrative materials such as permit forms.
• Developing decision-making tools such as
assessment methods and permit criteria for program
implementation.
• Developing tracking systems.
• Funding, hiring, and training staff.
• Administering the program once it is developed.
Many of these actions apply to more than one step and help
build tribal long-term capacity to the desired level. Even
tribes with active regulatory programs may continually work
toward refining program effectiveness and efficiency.Tribes
may include any of the listed actions, as well as incremental
changes and improvements, in their WPPs.
In its WPP, the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe identified a key goal of reducing the amount of wetland drainage and
destruction to create suitable areas for agricultural, residential, and commercial development. In order to move in
that direction, the tribe's objectives included clearly defining the jurisdictional scope of its regulatory program and
delineating wetlands in a manner that is at least equivalent to federal jurisdiction. Moreover, the tribe proposed clear
guidance on how to identify jurisdictional waters and activities as well as develop a clear and effective set of criteria
for reviewing and responding to permit applications. The criteria would include consideration of cultural impacts and
adopt the CWA section 404(b)(1) guidelines, or more stringent review criteria, for assessing, avoiding, and minimizing,
and mitigating for impacts. The tribe also proposed establishing minimum requirements and review criteria for financial
assurance proposals for mitigation projects.
In 2006, the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa developed and enacted a Wetland Protection and
Management Ordinance, modeled after, but not assuming, the CWA section 404 program. They now regulate activities
in wetlands—including wetland dredge, fill, and drainage—and have adopted a Water Quality Certification Standards
Ordinance, which governs the processing of section 401 certifications using their EPA-approved WQS.
During 2011-2012, the Blackfeet Environmental Office revised the Blackfeet Aquatic Lands Protection Ordinance.This
ordinance is theTribe's wetlands protection regulation and requires a permit for all activities affecting water bodies
or wetlands within the reservation boundary.The wetlands program also performs homesite lease reviews for tribal
members to identify potential impacts to wetlands and floodplains, as well as pre-construction site reviews for any
projects that may impact wetlands. The tribe has also identified a critical need to monitor and protect groundwater,
surface water, and wetland quality, based on pressures from oil and gas exploration, housing developments, and
agricultural activities. The tribe states that the amended ordinance, along with the section 401 certification process, will
ensure the protection of existing wetland and riparian resources and preserve and protect water quality.
-------
22
D. Water Quality Standards for Wetlands, and CWA
Section 401 Authority
WQS are a cornerstone of the CWA. Under the CWA, states
and authorized tribes30 designate the "highest attainable
uses"for waterbodies, set criteria to protect those uses, and
establish provisions to protect waters from degradation.
State and tribal WQS approved by EPA can be established
for any WOTUS, including jurisdictional wetlands. EPA'sWQS
regulations (40 CFR parts 131 and 132) provide specific
requirements for states and authorized tribes to develop
standards that designate uses, establish protective criteria,
and establish anti-degradation provisions for all WOTUS,
including wetlands.31 States and authorized tribes have
flexibility to adopt sub-categories of uses and associated
criteria to allow for differentiation between types of wetlands
and their expected uses, functions, and conditions.
Within the context of the overall WQS program, tribes can
develop specific standards for wetlands, including criteria
that define the physical, chemical, and biological conditions
desired in tribal waters. As with water quality criteria for
other surface waters, criteria for wetlands can be narrative
or numeric. While developing narrative standards may
be relatively easy, developing specific numeric criteria for
wetlands has, for several reasons, been more challenging
than developing criteria for other types of waters. For
example, the sheer number of wetlands in a jurisdiction
compared to streams and lakes makes developing numeric
standards for wetlands challenging. Criteria for a healthy
wetland might be quite different than that for a healthy
stream or lake, particularly for parameters such as dissolved
oxygen, hydrology, vegetation types, flow regimes,
conductivity, alkalinity, soils, and pH. Tribal wetland WQS
may also use parts of tribal laws and regulations that do
not apply to instream water32 of tribal efforts to protect
waters with WQS is available at https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=EY6r810Kwac.
Currently, most tribes do not have EPA-approved WQS in
effect for CWA purposes, and even fewer have WQS for
wetlands. As of early 2022, approximately 79 tribes haveTAS
status under CWA section 303(c); EPA has approved WQS
for 46 of those tribes.33 Where EPA determines that a tribe is
eligible to the same extent as a state for purposes of WQS,
the tribe is eligible to the same extent as a state for purposes
of certifications conducted under CWA section 401, per 40
CFR 131.4(c). EPA has also developed certain tools to assist
tribes interested in developing approvable WQS, including:
• The TAS application template, which tribes can
download and customize to address all eligibility
requirements listed in EPA's implementing regulations
at 40 CFR 131.8. The template's aims to simplify tribal
applications for tribes with TAS status to administer
CWA section 303(c) WQS and section 401 water quality
certification programs.
• The Model WQS template, another document tribes
can download and customize to provide model WQS
text that, together with tribal input and guidance from
the appropriate EPA region, will simplify the process of
developing tribal WQS consistent with the implementing
regulations.The template includes language covering
designated uses, water quality criteria, antidegradation,
several general provisions, and language for WQS for
wetlands. The template provides opportunities for tribes
to tailor their WQS to reflect tribe-specific circumstances,
including a provision to protect cultural and traditional
uses.
• Templates for developing wetlands WQS. which
address the three components of WQS—designated
uses, criteria, and antidegradation—and also provide
wetland-specific terms and language so states and tribes
can tailor standards to suit the needs of the wetland, as
well as simplify WQS development.
Tribes can use WQS to determine whether tribal waters
are meeting expectations and identify whether certain
waters need protection from degradation. Moreover, under
CWA section 401, tribes with TAS status for section 401 are
authorized to certify whether federal licenses and permits
that authorize discharges (including, for example, discharges
of effluent under section 402 or discharges of dredged and
fill material under section 404) comply with the applicable
30 "Authorized tribes" in this Section D refers to those federally recognized Indian tribes with authority to administer a CWA section 303(c)
WQS program. Under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 131.4(c), a tribe that is eligible to administer WQS is likewise eligible to administer
CWA section 401 water quality certifications.
31 For a more comprehensive treatment of WQS, see https://www.epa.aov/was-tech/water-aualitv-standards-handbook. A video with
stories of tribal efforts to protect waters with WQS is available at https://www.voutube.com/watch?v=EY6r81 OKwac.
32 See, e.g., the Fond du LacTribe in Minnesota (https://www.fdlrez.com/RM/wetlandordinance.htm) and the Northern Cheyenne Tribe in
Montana (https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2014-12/documents/chevennewas.pdf).
33 https://www.epa.aov/was-tech/epa-actions-tribal-water-aualitv-standards-and-contacts
-------
23
Perched dragonfly drying itself. Photo courtesy
of Red Lake DNR Water Resources Program.
provisions of sections 301,302, 303, 306, and 307, and any
other appropriate requirement of tribal law. Pursuant to their
CWA section 401 authority, tribes can object to or impose
conditions on federal licenses and permits to prevent the
degradation of their waters, including wetlands.
Many tribes have not developed wetland specific WQS due
to a lack of technical information or monitoring data to
develop criteria for many WQS parameters. Moreover, the
water column WQS typically used for lakes and streams do
not translate well to wetland environments (e.g., a dissolved
oxygen criterion set for a free-flowing stream would be
inappropriately high in a wetland). Due to the unique
characteristics of wetlands relative to flowing surface waters,
WQS for wetlands may differ substantially from traditional
surface water WQS, with less focus on water chemistry
parameters and more emphasis on biological and physical
indices.
Tribes have addressed these issues in different ways. Some
tribes have adjusted overall standards so that they clearly
apply to wetland as well as other waters. Other tribes have
developed wetland-specific WQS that consider the special
needs of wetlands. Tribes contemplating developing wetland
WQS should follow the fundamental requirements for WQS,
as defined by EPA. Some tribal WPPs mention these issues
forth rightly. For example, the Yakama Nation WPP indicates
that some of the tribe's draft WQS "do not reflect the natural
range of reference conditions on the Reservation well, and
at present they do not include biological response indicators
(such as benthic macroinvertebrate community indices)."
Under EPA WPDG funding, the Yakama Nation worked with
a consultant to analyze macroinvertebrate samples to begin
developing a biological integrity model.34
EPA has identified five essential steps for developing WQS for
wetlands:35
1. Define wetlands as "tribal waters."
2. Identify designated uses that protect the structure and
function of wetlands.
3. Adopt narrative criteria and appropriate numeric criteria
in the WQS to protect designated uses.
4. Adopt narrative biological criteria in the WQS.
5. Include an antidegradation policy.
An important first step is to ensure that wetlands are
defined as "waters" within the tribal water quality program
and adopt a definition of wetlands within the standards
and associated policy or regulations.The legal definition of
waters, including wetlands, should be at least as inclusive
as the CWA definition. Developing wetland-specific WQS
will typically involve identifying wetland types or classes
with a description of the desired condition or function for
each wetland type or class. Defining baseline conditions
and functions requires gathering monitoring data and
analyzing the data along with existing data, as well as
obtaining baseline data on reference wetlands. Standards
should establish or identify "designated uses" (e.g., fish
habitat, recreation, cultural uses) for wetlands, which may
vary according to wetland type or class. Some tribes have
also applied relevant designated uses for other waters to
wetlands.
Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior
Chippewa | Development of Wetland Water
Quality Standards
In preparation for Fond du Lac's triennial review of its
WQS, the tribe's wetland program developed a narrative
wetland WQS. The tribe primarily used an EPA template
tool for developing narrative standards specific to
wetlands. This tool aided in preparing language to
describe wetland functions as wetland-designated
uses. The tribe's designated uses for wetlands include
baseflow discharge and groundwater recharge, flood
flow attenuation, recreation, plant and animal diversity
and abundance, and cultural opportunities, among
others. The narrative criteria essentially require that
the wetlands "maintain biological, physical, chemical
and hydrological conditions as compared to reference
wetlands."The standards also contained a tiered anti-
degradation policy. Read the full case study here.
34 https://www.epa.gOv/wetlands/state-and-tribal-wetland-proaram-plans#r1.
35 For more detailed information, see https://www.epa.aov/wetlands/wetland-water-aualitv-standards and https://www.epa.gov/was-
tech/templates-developina-wetland-water-aualitv-standards.
-------
24
Criteria are then established to describe the condition or
functions necessary to achieve or meet each designated
use. Narrative standards may describe the structure and
species composition of a wetland type and are often
constructed in a "free from"format (e.g., "free from oils and
grease, free from fill material"). Narrative standards should
be well-documented, including procedures for determining
compliance. Numerical standards define quantitative criteria
for specific chemical, physical, and biological parameters.
Such numerical standards may be complex for wetlands,
given the wide range in "normal"conditions across the
diversity of wetland types, as well as seasonal fluctuations.
In addition, unlike many other surface waters, wetlands
often exhibit low dissolved oxygen. Normal pH also varies
significantly between, for example, peat bogs and calcareous
fens. Consequently, many wetland WQS rely primarily on
narrative criteria, although some tribes have established
numerical standards. Wetland WQS generally require a
suite of measures to protect the full range of wetland types,
functions, ecological conditions, and designated uses.
One of many freshwater fens within the Red Lake Indian Reservation.
These fens provide many plant species of cultural significance.
Photo courtesy of Red Lake DNR Water Resources Program.
Confederated Tribes of the Colville
Reservation
The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation's
draft update of the WQS includes updated standards
for wetlands. Beneficial uses associated with wetlands
include aquatic life, ceremonial and religious uses,
primary contact recreation, wildlife habitat, and stock
watering. The draft water quality criteria for wetlands
are primarily narrative. For example, they state that
measurable changes from natural background
conditions are not allowed for temperature, pH,
bacteria, and total dissolved gas. In contrast, limited
increases in turbidity from background are allowed. In
addition, the draft update includes narrative criteria for
aesthetic quality, nutrient levels, radioactive substances,
aquatic biota, wildlife, instream flow, and maintenance
of wetland hydrology, substrate, and hydrophytic
vegetation. Criteria for toxic substances and anti-
degradation policy would also apply to wetlands.
In addition to identifying uses and criteria, a third WQS
component is enacting an antidegradation policy that
protects designated uses and prohibits lowering the quality
of Tier 3 wetlands considered "outstanding natural resource
waters." Once approved, tribes could apply wetland WQS
when making CWA section 401 water quality certification
decisions, including setting limits or conditions on discharges
issued under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System permits (CWA section 402) and restricting the
discharge of dredged and fill material and associated impacts
under CWA section 404 permits. Tribes can also apply
wetland WQS to other potential federal licenses or permits
(e.g., Federal Energy Regulatory Commission licenses).
Developing defensible WQS for wetlands is a data-driven
effort and depends on a robust wetland monitoring
and assessment program. Tribes can derive and support
standards using wetland function assessment or condition
measurements. Data collected through monitoring are
summarized in a national report through EPA's integrated
reporting system.This biennial report provides a national
assessment of water quality (the 305(b) report) and a list of
waters that do not meet the standards (the 303(d) list).
-------
25
For example, in its WPP, the Red Lake Band of Chippewa
Indians describes how extensive monitoring and research
has been performed over the past decade on certain
reservation wetlands. Further, the tribe will use the data
collected to determine baseline conditions and appropriate
wetland WQS. The tribe will continue monitoring on a five-
to-ten-year rotation and plans to expand its monitoring
efforts to all feasible wetland types to develop appropriate
WQS for wetlands. This expansion requires a collaborative
effort with other tribal and state agencies to develop a
monitoring strategy for all feasible wetlands. Developing
wetland specific WQS for biological and chemical criteria will
provide the tribe with a foundation for establishing reference
wetland conditions. Wetland WQS that ensure wetlands are
treated as waters within the tribal water quality program will
be submitted to the tribal council and EPA for approval. The
draft will contain biological and chemical criteria that must
be maintained when monitoring wetlands.
To summarize, while developing WQS for wetlands can
require a significant up-front investment of tribal time and
effort, the longer-term dividends include providing a more
rigorous foundation for protecting and enhancing tribal
wetland resources, as well as providing the scientific basis for
a variety of actions. Some of these actions include:
• Permitting: WQS provide a clear basis for making water
quality-based permitting decisions under CWA sections
402 and 404 and other tribal programs, as well as
informing decisions in other areas that affect wetlands,
such as nonpoint source (NPS) pollution control
programs.
• Water quality certification: WQS provide a stronger
basis for authorized tribes to approve, condition, or deny
certifications under CWA section 401 programs (see
description in Section III.C above).
• Monitoring, assessment, and reporting: Wetland WQS
provide a benchmark against which monitoring data
can be used to assess and report on wetland function or
condition.
• Restoration and protection: Tribes can use wetland
WQS to guide restoration and protection efforts and
gauge their effectiveness.
E. Voluntary Restoration and Protection
Some tribes include voluntary restoration and protection
activities as a key component of their wetland programs.
Voluntary projects achieve important protections while
providing opportunities to build partnerships; share data;
and pool resources with agencies, communities, nonprofit
groups, and private landowners. Voluntary projects
may also offer a means to educate tribal and non-tribal
community members about the value of aquatic resources.
Voluntary efforts to restore and protect wetlands normally
receive wide and enthusiastic support. Tribes have an
opportunity to facilitate the restoration, enhancement,
or protection of wetlands to sustain or repair ecological
functions and cultural values either by acting directly or
working collaboratively with other parties. Project goals
associated with voluntary restoration may include habitat
management, water management, preservation of cultural
values, flood attenuation, recreation, or other objectives.
Wetland restoration and protection maintain critical wildlife
habitat, help meet tribal watershed management goals, and
contribute to economic well-being. In many cases, voluntary
efforts may align with other aspects of a WPP, such as
regulatory activities, water quality improvement efforts, and
the protection of cultural values and uses.
Similarly, theYurokTribe's WPP describes its approach:36
[The Yurok Tribe] will continue the ongoing wetlands
water quality study. Establishing water quality standards
requires a thorough understanding and confidence
of the conditions existing in wetlands and requires a
comprehensive multi-year monitoring effort. Existing
baseline data will be used to further characterize and
assess wetland conditions and function. Information
gained through these efforts will be used to facilitate
refinement of data collection methods, site location
planning, and data management and reporting.
Information gained through these efforts will be used
to develop Tribal Water Quality Standards for wetlands
complexes within the Yurok Reservation. [The Tribe] will
continue working towards development of regulations
and water quality standards specific to wetlands within a
Tribal Wetlands Protection Ordinance and plan. Pursuit of
TAS for CWA authority from USEPA will enhance the Tribe's
regulatory authority to protect waters within the Yurok
Reservation.
36 https://www.epa.gOv/wetlands/state-and-tribal-wetland-proaram-plans#r1
-------
26
Voluntary activities to protect wetlands may employ several
interrelated terms, including "restoration" (also referred to as
"rehabilitation" or "re-establishment"), "enhancement,"
"establishment" (sometimes referred to as "creation"), and
"preservation," which may have slightly different definitions
depending on context. "Wetland restoration"typically refers
to returning wetlands to a more highly functioning state by
manipulating their physical, hydrological, chemical, or
biological characteristics.
Restoration is the process of assisting in the recovery of an
ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed.
Wetland and aquatic habitat restoration projects typically
target degraded but not altogether lost ecosystems that
retain the potential to reacquire a higher level of ecological
function. Typically, restoration involves returning hydrology
to areas that were once wetlands and are no longer, or that
have been severely degraded or damaged. Restoration
can also include restoring other ecological processes (e.g.,
reintroducing beaver to restore hydrologic connectivity
between streams, floodplains, and floodplain wetlands).
Wetland establishment involves changing the geography
(i.e., hydrological, physical, and biological characteristics) of a
site to develop a wetland where one did not previously exist.
Wetland enhancement means altering the physical, chemical,
hydrological, or biological characteristics of an existing
wetland site to increase its functional capacity for one or
more functions, such as water quality improvement or flood
water retention, or to improve habitat for certain species
of wildlife. Wetland enhancement changes a wetland's
functional profile and normally increases capacity for some
functions while diminishing capacity for others. For example,
managing for woodcock may diminish habitat quality for
forest interior songbirds, while improving water quality
functions can degrade habitat functions.
Umatilla River Vision: First Foods to Sustain
Culture
In 2007, the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian
Reservation (CTUIR) created a "Vision for the Umatilla
River"that imagines the Umatilla basin with a "healthy
river capable of providing First Foods that sustain the
continuity of theTribe's culture."TheTribal goal:"Protect,
restore, and enhance the First Foods (water, salmon,
deer, cous, and huckleberry) for the perpetual cultural,
economic, and sovereign benefit of the CTUIR, to be
accomplished by utilizing traditional ecological and
cultural knowledge and science to inform: population
and habitat management goals and actions; and natural
resource policies and regulatory mechanisms."See also:
• Jones, K.L., et al. 2008. "he Umatilla River Vision.
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian
Reservation Department of Natural Resources.
• Ouaempts. E.J.. etal. 2018.AligningEnvironmental
Management with Ecosystem Resilience: A First Foods
Example from the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla
Indian Reservation. Oregon, USA. Ecology and
Society 23(2): 29.
Columbian black-tailed deer buck (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) at the
edge of forested wetland composed of willows (Salix hookeriana) and pine
(Pirtus contorta), with salal and ferns in foreground. Deer browse and
forage on many wetland shrub and tree species, whereas elk tend to browse
on emergent and herbaceous plants. All species of these ungulates are
culturally important to many tribes throughout the Americas for food and
materials. Photo courtesy of Linda Storm.
-------
27
Stockbridge-Munsee Community | Emerald
Ash Borer/Black Ash Project
Black ash wetlands are common on the Stockbridge-
Munsee Community Reservation and are an important
ecological and cultural species. These wetlands face
a major threat from emerald ash borer (EAB), an
invasive beetle that kills native ash trees. EAB invasion
is expected to cause water level rise and major
vegetation community shifts in black ash wetlands. The
tribe received an EPA WPDG to develop a monitoring
protocol for black ash wetlands to document pre-
and post-EAB conditions and to serve as controls to
guide and assess the effectiveness of mitigation and
restoration efforts. The tribe was awarded a subsequent
WPDG to expand the research and include sap flow
monitoring to assess the functional role of black ash
and associated tree species on the water budget of
these systems. Researchers from the U.S. Forest Service
and University of Wisconsin-Madison have partnered in
this monitoring and research. The tribe is underplanting
black ash stands with suitable replacement species
to mitigate for EAB impacts, allowing seedlings to
become established before EAB invades. The tribe has
used funding from the Natural Resources Conservation
Service's Environmental Quality Incentives Program to
offset the planting costs. Read the full case study here.
Some tribes directly undertake restoration and protection
projects. They may restore or enhance wetlands to meet
habitat goals, support floodplain restoration projects
through stormwater or floodplain management programs,
protect water quality by establishing filter strips or similar
projects through CWA section 319 NPS programs and grants,
or sustain or restore cultural values such as managing
wetlands for culturally important food, fiber, or medicine
plants. Restoration typically involves removing structures
like dikes, dams, or berms (e.g., removing dikes to restore
and reconnect river hydrology to floodplain or wetland areas
that had been disconnected), or removing exotic or invasive
plant species. Enhancement activities may also involve
removing structures, although in some cases they can
include repairing or replacing dikes or berms, water control
structures, or habitat features to modify the hydrological
function (e.g., raising or lowering water levels to achieve
management goals), as well as replanting native vegetation.
Tribes may combine any voluntary activities that increase
functions and values of wetlands with actions to protect
wetlands by removing or diminishing threats, which tribes
can then secure through legally binding agreements such
as fee simple acquisition, conservation easements, or deed
restrictions.
An accurate and up-to-date inventory of wetlands underpins
an effective restoration program and drives adaptive
management strategies. If comprehensive data are not
available, a tribe can consult existing maps and information
and expand data from there. In any case, tribes can pursue
any or all of the following objectives as they develop
voluntary restoration and protection efforts:
• Clearly and consistently define restoration and
protection goals throughout tribal territory.
• Protect wetlands from degradation or destruction.
• Restore wetland acres, condition, and function.
• Track progress over time, document results, and modify
practices as appropriate.
In some cases, the wetland inventory can include an
assessment of "restorability." For example, the Stockbridge-
Munsee Community (SMC), funded by an EPA WPDG,
mapped potentially restorable wetlands (PRWs) throughout
selected watersheds that overlapped with the reservation.
SMC contracted St. Mary's University of Minnesota,
GeoSpatial Services, to conduct the GIS-based analysis. First,
the location and type of'historic wetland"were delineated
using photointerpretation of 1938 aerial imagery. Data were
also collected on current wetlands. Historic and current
wetland boundaries and vegetation types were visually
compared, and the cause of any observed change was
documented (e.g., anthropogenic change, beaver influence).
Another method SMC used to identify PRWs relied on an
overlay analysis of several geospatial datasets, including
wetland polygons, soils, and elevation-derived hydrological
measures. Road and land use layers were then used to
identify permanently altered wetlands where restoration was
infeasible. When combined, these methods allowed the tribe
to identify 178 PRWs throughout the watershed.The tribe
has used this dataset to guide wetland restoration planning,
complete further site evaluations, and assess restoration
potential on newly acquired lands.
Where tribes include restoration and non-regulatory
protection efforts in their WPPs, these efforts should be
informed by identified needs for habitat improvement, water
quantity and quality management, recreational uses, and/or
protection and restoration of cultural values. In some cases, it
may be useful to inventory relevant federal, state, or private
wetland restoration or protection programs and explore
whether they might support or complement tribal efforts.
-------
28
Confederated Salish and Kootenai
Tribes | CSKT Voluntary Wetlands
Restoration Efforts
As the largest landowner on the Flathead Indian
Reservation, CSKT can affect conservation through
voluntary restoration and protection efforts as well
as through compensatory mitigation. The tribes
have persisted through a few key legal battles and
won settlements for damages to natural resources in
ceded lands. As a trustee, the tribes were obligated to
spend the settlements on restoring aquatic resources
within the reservation. The tribal fisheries and wildlife
programs have spent two decades purchasing and
restoring aquatic habitats on the reservation to benefit
fish, wildlife, and other tribal values. Read the full case
study here.
In addition, multiple parties may contribute to identifying
restoration and protection goals for specific watersheds
or priority areas. For instance, protecting habitat for
endangered species may differ significantly from identifying
a wetland to use as part of a stormwater management
system, which risks degrading habitat functions without
pre-treatment. In other cases, multiple goals may align, such
as when restoration to provide flood storage in riparian
areas also enhances needed hydrological function in wildlife
corridors.
Some tribes facilitate developing voluntary wetland
restoration and protection programs by forming partnerships
of various kinds, allowing different groups to share technical
information, support projects of mutual interest, and
cooperatively promote public funding and support for
voluntary wetland restoration. Tribes can participate in both
intratribal and intertribal partnerships, as well as coordinated
efforts with local, state, and federal agencies and
departments (e.g., fish and wildlife, transportation,
agriculture, forestry), and nongovernmental organizations.
Nongovernmental organizations can include conservation
groups such as The Nature Conservancy, Ducks Unlimited,
Trout Unlimited, and land conservancies.
In some cases, nongovernmental organizations, local
agencies, and private landowners may be interested in
wetland protection or restoration but lack the guidance to
proceed. Tribes may be able to help these groups obtain
information on technical issues or additional resources.
Many state and federal programs provide information and,
in some cases, funds for wetland restoration and protection
efforts that can show clear benefits.37
While voluntary restoration and preservation of wetlands
generally receive broad support, some difficulties of these
efforts may include:
• Conflicting goals: Certain enhancement projects
may favor one type of wetland function over others.
For example, impoundment of a stream may benefit
waterfowl but be detrimental to fish and some native
plant habitats. Tribes must evaluate any planned
use or expansion of wetlands to provide stormwater
management, including water quality treatment and
flood water attenuation, for the potential to cause
deleterious effects to wetland condition and water
quality, which in turn would conflict with habitat
protection and restoration goals.
• Technical challenges: Some types of wetlands can be
difficult to re-establish or impossible to restore once
altered. These can include forested wetlands, peatlands
(including bogs and fens), and other ecotypes that are
Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation |
Wetland Reserve Easement Project
In 2018, the Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation
and the Natural Resources Conservation Service
commemorated the approval of a 30-year Agricultural
Conservation Easement Program that provides for
a wetland reserve easement contract to restore the
functions and values of an existing 31.7-acre wetland
located within the reservation.This event marked the
first tribal wetland long-term contract established
in Kansas and one of only a handful throughout
the United States. It brings to reality a project first
envisioned by the Nation in 1996. The project will
restore and enhance wetland wildlife habitat and
improve overall water quality for the contract area,
and provide opportunities for educational outreach,
hunting, trapping, and recreational bird watching. A
walking path will be established for visitors to reach
the center area of the wetlands to observe the natural
wildlife in their restored habitat. Read the full case study
here.
37 The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has, for example, developed helpful materials regarding wetland restoration.
See https://dnr.wisconsin.aov/topic/Wetlands/restoration.html
-------
29
Great blue heron, called a crane by most
Pacific Northwest tribes, in Puget Sound
waters (part of the broader Salish Sea),
with kelp in the background.
Photo courtesy of Linda Storm.
highly sensitive to hydrological
alterations. Even in wetland
types where successful wetland
restoration is well documented,
scarcities of suitable water, soils, or
plant stock reduce the prospects for
success.
• Regulatory requirements:
Permits are frequently required for
wetland restoration work because
restoration often involves conducting some form of
activity within areas under tribal, state, and/or federal
jurisdiction (e.g., placing fill in wetlands, installing
temporary coffer dams to dewater areas, constructing
berms or installing structures, restoring straightened
streams to new or historical channels).
water quality and to comply with total maximum daily load
pollutant allocations in impaired waters and watersheds.
Tribes can improve water quality through total maximum
daily loads that relate to nutrient loading, temperature, or
other pollutants that can be addressed in part by restoring or
protecting wetlands in the watershed.
• Cost: Lack of funds to undertake desired wetland
restoration and preservation projects can be a significant
limiting factor. Collaboration among multiple interest
groups is one common way to address this need, seeking
to share costs, expertise, and staff time. In addition,
demonstrating program success through monitoring
and reporting on completed projects can improve
prospects for securing future funding support. While
tribes can useWPDGs to identify priority wetland sites
to restore and develop restoration plans, support for
project implementation requires other funding sources
(see Section IV below).
As a related and typically less voluntary activity, wetlands
are often restored to provide compensatory mitigation as
a condition of a permit, authorizing unavoidable adverse
impacts to aquatic habitats. Technical and policy issues
associated with compensatory mitigation generally relate
to the Regulatory Activity core element. In some cases,
voluntary restoration and regulatory program requirements
may function synergistically to achieve overall restoration
planning objectives as, for example, when different tribal
departments share maps of vulnerable or rare wetland
resources that should be prioritized for restoration or
heightened protection. Moreover, regulatory and voluntary
wetland restoration may play a role in the broader tribal
implementation of CWA programs. For example, CWA section
319 grants provide funds and technical assistance to states
and tribes to develop and implement plans to reduce NPS
pollution. Many of these projects also fund stream or aquatic
ecosystem restoration. Similarly, tribes may pursue wetland
restoration to improve impairments to lake or stream
Stockbridge-Munsee Community |
Resolving a Restoration Conflict
The Stockbridge-Munsee Community received grant
funding to remove multiple sections of an abandoned
railroad bed that the tribe had recently acquired
The presence of the rail bed embankment and
perched culverts had severely altered the hydrologic
connectivity of adjacent wetlands and a small trout
stream for over 100 years. Although approved by
tribal leadership, the project met resistance from
some members of the tribal community, who started a
petition to halt construction.The location and length of
the rail bed made it a popular road for tribal members
to use for hunting access, ATV use, snowmobiling, and
general travel. In the end, a compromise was reached
that changed the project design considerably. Instead
of removing the rail bed, the tribe installed five large
culverts to restore hydrological function. Because
the grant had already been awarded, these changes
required a lot of time and effort to adjust the project
plan and gain approval from the funding source.
The new design created additional challenges with
engineering, culvert construction, and installation.
Overall, the project successfully reconnected a large
amount of stream and wetland habitat while still
providing road use by the tribal community. However,
restoration remains somewhat incomplete as natural
hydrological function is still impacted by the new
structures and remaining rail bed. Read the full case
study here.
-------
30
Tribes have become increasingly active in compensatory
mitigation efforts. For example, several tribes have
participated in interagency review teams in the Pacific
Northwest to help inform mitigation bank design and
implementation. Moreover, some tribes are interested in
serving as long-term stewards for established mitigation
banks that provide first foods or other IK/TEK resources.
While tribes cannot use WPDG awards to develop a bank,
they can fund various foundational activities (e.g., identifying
wetland restoration priorities in a watershed, developing
IK/TEK performance or monitoring measures, identifying
IK/TEK resources appropriate for targeted wetland types)
that can lead to establishing well-functioning mitigation
banks. Further, some tribes are combining their watershed
restoration planning objectives and regulatory program
needs by developing mitigation banks or in-lieu-fee
programs (e.g., Lummi Nation's Wetland and Habitat
Mitigation Bank,38 the Tulalip Tribes'Quilceda Village In-
Lieu-Fee Program,39 or the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua's
Mitigation Bank). The CSKT case study describes one such
program here.
F. Questions and Answers About the Core Elements
Framework and Wetland Program Plans
The Core Elements Framework is helpful, but we cannot do
everything at once. What is the best way to start?
As a first step, evaluate the current circumstances that
will most significantly impact developing an approach to
managing and protecting wetlands in Indian Country,
such as:
Size of reservation or landholdings.
Tribal population and distribution.
Quantity and quality of wetlands and aquatic resources.
Sundew (Drosera rotundifolia), a carnivorous plant
found in peat system wetlands. Photo courtesy of
Red Lake DNR Water Resources Program.
Threats and stressors to wetlands and aquatic resources
in Indian Country.
Political and public support or resistance to wetland
protection efforts.
Tribal capacity (e.g., financial, technical, staffing).
Extent of existing wetlands-related information (e.g.,
maps, assessments, monitoring data).
Effectiveness of existing tribal and federal wetland
protection efforts.
This type of situation assessment and diagnosis—a "taking
stock"—will allow for an informed approach to developing
realistic strategies that have the best chance of being
effective and efficient. For example, the approach for a
tribe with extensive lands, a large population, rich aquatic
resources, and multiple resource threats will likely differ
from a tribe with limited lands and smaller and fewer
wetlands. In the first case, it may make sense for the tribe
to invest significantly in identifying and characterizing
wetland resources and coordinating tribal, local, state, and
federal regulatory efforts; in the second case, a tribe might
opt to protect its few wetlands directly through acquisition
or conservation easement rather than create some kind
of regulatory infrastructure. Additionally, a tribe with TAS
status and approved WQS may wish to focus its efforts
on developing wetland WQS and diligently exercising its
authorities under CWA section 401.
With all the information out there, how do I go about
developing a tribal wetland monitoring and assessment
program?
One place to learn more about developing a tribal
monitoring and assessment program is How Do I Develop
a Wetlands Monitoring Program? To avoid "reinventing the
wheel," identify and study what states and other tribes have
done, particularly in your ecoregion. It may also be useful to
review approved WPPs submitted by other tribes and reach
out to other tribes to learn about their wetland monitoring
and assessment strategies, what methods or protocols they
are using, and more. In some cases, it may be possible to
rely on existing partnerships or create new ones, with state
agencies, nearby tribes, or academic institutions. In addition,
it may be possible to recruit citizen volunteers to help gather
certain kinds of information.
38 https://www.iummi-nsn.aov/Website.php?PaaelD=66.
39 https://www.nawm.ora/pdf lib/epa region 10 webinar/auil ceda village in lieu fee program 062519 warner.pdf.
-------
31
We want to use a rapid assessment method (RAM) to
support our regulatory program and other wetland
management strategy efforts. There seem to be a lot of
choices. How do we decide which one is best?
Many wetland scientists and practitioners have developed
RAMs, and a good first step is to evaluate existing tools.40
Another key factor relates to how the assessment information
will be used. For regulatory decisions? Prioritizing areas
for acquisition or other protection? Some approaches will
be more useful than others depending on the intended
purposes. In some cases, RAMs have been "regionalized"to
increase their suitability for use in certain geographic areas.
In addition, some states and academic institutions have
developed geographically targeted RAMs. In deciding how to
proceed, first conduct a review of the existing literature. Next,
reach out to federal, state, and other tribal wetland program
managers and regulators in your area for advice and input
about what tools might best fit the tribe's specific situation.
Given that the CWA provides national protection for
wetlands, why should tribes consider developing their
own regulatory programs? After all, wetland regulations
are frequently controversial and operating a regulatory
program is a significant investment.
In deciding whether to regulate wetland impacts, and
defining the scope of regulation, a tribe will need to consider
the pros and cons of various options. There are several
potential advantages to tribal regulatory programs. Tribal
staff have expertise in local resource needs and are often
well-positioned to use professional judgment to allow,
prohibit, or condition alteration of wetland resources. Tribal
knowledge of priority issues and related aquatic programs,
backed by the support of the tribal council, may result in
strong and common-sense protection of wetland resources.
Moreover, tribal programs can be more efficient than federal
programs by using local staff and offices to provide a prompt
permitting decision. In some cases, tribal regulations fill
gaps in federal law, protecting small but locally or culturally
significant wetland areas or regulating activities not covered
under the CWA. Tribal programs may protect ecosystem
services and cultural values that may not be a focus of or
covered by federal law. Tribal members may also accept and
comply with tribal regulatory requirements more readily than
with federal requirements.
With staff limitations, it is difficult to enforce regulatory
requirements in remote areas of the reservation. How can
that issue be managed?
Enforcing regulatory requirements is sometimes difficult,
even for programs with sufficient staff and funding, and it
can become especially challenging in the tribal context.
Issues may arise related to either unpermitted activities
(e.g., working without authorization) or compliance (e.g.,
operating in violation of permit conditions). In areas
where the tribal community may be unaware of regulatory
requirements or where monitoring activities is difficult due
to staff limitations, it may be useful to conduct periodic spot
inspections, which can help foster a culture of compliance
Where there are widespread enforcement issues, tribes may
need to consider the pros and cons of reallocating scarce
resources to comprehensively address the concerns.
Without TAS status, can a tribe develop WQS for wetlands
and exercise section 401 authority under the CWA?
While a tribe is always free to develop WQS pursuant to its
authorities, for the WQS to be in effect for CWA purposes, a
tribe must receive TAS authority under CWA section 303(c)
to administer a WQS program and obtain EPA approval of
the tribe's WQS pursuant to CWA section 303(c). In addition,
a tribe cannot exercise section 401 authority under the CWA
unless it receives TAS status for section 401. Until a tribe
receives TAS status for section 401, EPA is the CWA section
401 certifying authority for federal permits and licenses in
Indian Country, per 33 U.S.C. 1341 (a)(1). As the certifying
authority, EPA may look to a tribe's existing water quality
requirements in other tribal laws, ordinances, or codes, in
addition to the several CWA provisions listed in section 401
as considerations.41
40 For example, see https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/wetlands-monitoring-and-assessment and https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZvPDF.cai/
PI 003GXN.PDF?Dockev=P1003GXN.PDF.
41 As of this guide's writing, EPA is developing, but has not completed, a proposed rule to establish federal "baseline"WQS for Indian
reservation waters that currently do not have CWA-effective WQS in place, with a few exceptions. Once promulgated, federal baseline
WQS will be available for EPA to use in section 401 water quality certifications, where EPA is the certifying authority. See https://www.
epa.gov/wgs-tech/promulgation-tribal-baseline-water-gualitv-standards-under-clean-water-act
-------
32
IV. Getting Help
Developing and implementing a comprehensive Wetland
Program Plan (WPP), particularly for tribes with significant
aquatic resources, can be a substantial undertaking. Tribes
may face financial constraints, constraints on available
technical expertise and staffing, data management issues,
and political support, among other challenges. A number
of tribes have WPPs approved by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), while other tribes are developing
plans. Some tribes have staff dedicated to wetlands work,
while other tribes rely on natural resource and environmental
staff to fill those needs. Many tribes are stretched thin with
limited resources and staff.
Tribes frequently identify obtaining reliable program
funding as one of the most significant impediments they
face in carrying out existing WPPs. Indeed, funding may
be the most critical issue for determining tribal capacity to
manage and protect their wetlands.Tribes without tribally
supported and funded wetland programs report that
wetland protection efforts fluctuate with funding. Moreover,
each type of grant seems to have a different application
and reporting process. An oft-repeated recommendation
from tribes has been to establish sustainable base funding
for wetland programs.42 Tribes have cited various recurring
rationales for this recommendation, including promoting
program stability, appropriately rewarding proven programs,
allowing allocation of effort to where it is most needed,
reducing transactional costs and staffing volatility, allowing
for more predictable planning efforts, and funding program
implementation actions and activities.
Actions identified in WPPs commonly require additional
staff and resources. Effective WPPs often include a multi-year
funding strategy with goals, outcomes, and benefits that can
be understood by tribal officials, funders, and other decision-
makers. As a practical matter, achieving objectives articulated
in WPPs may require and include receiving funding from
multiple sources.
While EPA does not require including "sustainable financing"
or addressing budgets or other specific financial information
in WPPs, tribes may want to consider doing so. A sustainable
financial plan involves identifying what is needed to
accomplish the work the tribe anticipates and seeking
funding sources and/or project partners to help make it
happen. As an example, theYurokTribe's WPP indicates that
it intends "to outlineYTEP's [theYurokTribe Environmental
Program's] program development needs and objectives
and better plan for future funding and coordination
opportunities."Meanwhile, the Salt River Pima-Maricopa
Indian Community tasks its senior environmental specialist
with preparing grant requests and coordinating with other
tribal departments and external agencies.
In some cases, a WPP specifically identifies grants and other
funding sources that tribes will pursue or even identify
"sustainable financing"as a separate core element. For
instance, the Goshute Reservation identified several federal
sources from EPA, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and
the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) in its WPP, as well as plans
to seek funding from the states of Utah and Nevada. The
Fort Belknap Indian Community outlines potential uses for
a Wetland Program Development Grant (WPDG) over a five-
year period, tying a potential funding source to specific tasks
in the WPP. The Hopland Band of the Pomo Indians similarly
discuss plans to use bond money and associated matching
funds for constructing fish passage improvements.
Beyond identifying funding sources, tribes following a
sustainable finance framework also seek out governmental
and non-governmental partners to help them complete
their work. Several WPPs include information on these
program partners. The Chippewa Cree listed several partners
from within the tribe, state and federal agencies, and
consultants to help with their sweet grass reintroduction
project. Pointing to other examples, both the state of New
Mexico and the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community
identified key federal, state, and tribal partners as well as
their anticipated roles in their WPPs.
WPDGs (see below) provide the most direct funding
opportunity for tribal wetland program development,
although they do not provide a dedicated source for program
implementation and operation. Consequently, tribes typically
need a multi-faceted approach to develop, implement,
and sustain a wetland program. This can include tapping
multiple funding sources, creating internal efficiencies, and
establishing productive partnerships with other tribes, state
or federal governments, academic institutions, and other
partners.
42 See, for example. Consensus Building Institute and Lucy Moore Associates. 2016. Tribal Wetlands Project: Arid Southwest and Rocky
Mountain Eco-Regions Assessment Report.
-------
33
Bog cranberries (Vaccinium oxycoccos),
Snoqualmie ancestral peatland. Photo courtesy of
SnoqualmieTribe (Alex Harwell).
Fingers in Many Pies: The Havasupai
Reservation Example
In its WPP (on page 7 7), the Havasupai Tribe laid out
a funding strategy: "CWA Section 7 06 Water Pollution
Control Program grants for federal assistance to support
water quality monitoring, assessment, and protection,
including wetlands. CWA Section 704(b) (3) Wetlands
[grants] to provide federal financial assistance and
are used for wetlands protection and management.
Indian Environmental General Assistance Program
(GAP) grants for environmental program development
and infrastructure for the environmental protection
department including wetland resources. The Bureau
of Indian Affairs (BIA) has trust responsibility on the
Havasupai Reservation and can provide technical
and financial (638 funds) assistance and resources
when available that include addressing Tribal wetland
resources. The Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS) can provide technical and financial assistance
when available that include addressing Tribal wetland
resources. The USFWS can provide technical assistance
and competitively-awarded financial assistance through a
Tribal Wildlife Program grant."
Tribal wetland programs must somehow pay for personnel,
lab supplies, travel, contractual work, data management,
mapping, website maintenance, outreach and education,
training, permitting (e.g., site visits, applications), vehicles
forfieldwork, overhead expenses, grant administration,
and other costs. Because many tribes have limited funds
for environmental programs, wetland programs often
seek to identify additional funding sources. A tribe may
partner with another agency on a grant, where each
entity provides part of the funding. While EPA's WPDG (see
below) has been an important source of support for many
tribal wetland programs, those funds can only be used for
program development (e.g., writing regulations but not
issuing permits in an ongoing program). Most tribal wetland
programs are therefore funded through a combination of
sources.
A. Wetland Program Development Grants
WPDGs allow applicants to develop and refine
comprehensive tribal government wetland programs. At
present, there are three different kinds of WPDG requests
for applications (RFAs). The first RFA is a national set-aside
competition for tribes and intertribal consortia. The second
is a regional competition for tribes, states, territories, locai
governments, interstate agencies, and intertribal consortia.
Finally, the third RFA is a national competition for nonprofit
organizations, nongovernmental organizations, interstate
agencies, public and private universities and colleges,
and tribal consortia. WPDGs assist tribes (as well as states,
territories, and local governments) in building programs that
protect, manage, and restore wetlands.Tribes are eligible
to respond to both regional and national RFAs. Regional
RFAs are usually announced in odd years, whereas the two
different national RFAs are typically announced in even
years.43 All WPDGs are intended to:
• Build capacity to increase the quantity and quality
of wetlands in the United States by conserving and
restoring wetland acreage and improving wetland
condition.
• Use one or more of the core elements discussed above
to achieve this goal.
43 The FY 2020-2021 RFA can be viewed here: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-10/clocumerits/ha fv20-21 wpda rfa -
2020 October 29 finai.pdf
-------
34
Tribal grant competitions focus primarily on the national
tribal set-aside and the regional WPDGs. The primary focus
of these grants is to build tribal, state, and territory wetland
programs. Since 2016, EPA has funded a national tribal
WPDG competition that has included two tracks. Track One
is for proposals to develop a WPP or carry out projects from
an EPA-approved WPP.TrackTwo is for proposals that are
consistent with one or more of the four core elements. For
the regional WPDGs, EPA regions may add specific priorities
that are compatible and consistent with the core elements
and actions in the appendix of development and refinement
actions found at https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/wetland-
proaram-development-g rants.
EPA's Wetland Grants Database contains information about
past awards of WPDGs and contains searchable and filterable
grant data, a three-year demonstration pilot program (the
"pilot grants"), grant case study narratives, and model
products created by grant recipients. Tribes may be able to
find case studies and previous awards in the database, as well
as products or deliverables from past WPDGs, that can inform
their current proposals (e.g., project design, deliverables).
Tribes may find some aspects of the WPDG program
challenging. For some tribes, the message may almost
seem to be "nothing fails like success," when, as good
performers, they are less likely to receive ongoing support.
For others, those with the greatest challenges seem to be
at a disadvantage. Some have speculated that compared
to tribes, state natural heritage programs and other state
efforts—often with highly educated staff and experts—
seem to receive a disproportionate amount of funding. One
recurring suggestion from tribes has been an approach that
includes a base funding component with a competitive
overlay. Currently, grant funds are seen as "soft money" that
cannot be relied on for long-term needs, such as funding a
wetland coordinator position through multiple years. Rolling
funds over from one year to the next would give tribes a
more secure future in protecting their wetlands. In addition,
some tribes face internal challenges that can complicate
meeting deadlines, such as difficulty gaining access from
landowners or tribal government processes.
A report prepared by the Pacific NorthwestTribal Wetlands
Working Group (PNWTWIG)44 identified obstacles tribes face
in meeting grant requirements, such as the 25 percent match
for stand-alone grants not part of Performance Partnership
Grants and high staff turnover, which might partially be a
result of grant funds being "two-year money." In some cases
(as described below), tribal wetland programs may also be
able to access funds from other sources to support WPP
implementation, such as Clean Water Act (CWA) sections 104,
106, and 319; they may also be able to get monies from other
federal agencies such as BIA and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS).
B. Other Sources of Funding
A good place to learn and remain updated about funding
opportunities is through EPA's regional Enhancing State and
Tribal Programs staff. In addition to the WPDG program, there
are several other annual or periodic sources of funding tribes
can consider. These may either be "internal" (e.g., within the
tribe's control) or "external" (e.g., grant programs). Several of
the more common government-run opportunities are listed
below. Beyond recurring, periodic government programs,
tribes may be eligible to submit proposals and compete for
support from private foundations.
Putting WPDGs to Use
The Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California has long
known the importance of wetlands. Consequently, the
tribe's beliefs and practices to protect the health of
wetlands have been transmitted from generation to
generation. Plants found only in certain wetland areas
continue to provide food and medicine, and today the
Washoe are committed to protecting the few remaining
wetlands from further degradation and restoring those
that have been destroyed or degraded. The tribe has
made significant strides in defining its wetland systems
through the support provided by three WPDGs. The
Washoe Tribe's Trust Lands are scattered throughout
two states, creating challenges for identifying and
protecting wetland resources. However, the tribe's
Department of Environmental Protection has made
significant strides in protecting its wetlands and
educating the Washoe community about these vital
resources.
44 Baerwalde, M. 2020. Summary of Barriers to Developing New or Renewing Expired Tribal Wetland Program Plans. Pacific Northwest
Tribal Wetlands Working Group.
-------
35
Five-Star Wetland and Urban Waters Restoration Grant
The Five-Star and Urban Waters Restoration Programs
support education and training through projects that restore
wetlands and streams. The program provides challenge
grants, technical support, and chances for information
exchange to enable restoration projects. Funding levels are
modest ($10,000 to $40,000), with $20,000 being the average
amount awarded per project. However, especially when
combined with partner contributions, restoration projects
funded under this program can demonstrate meaningful
environmental improvements. Importantly, they can fund
implementation of restoration projects that may have been
identified and planned under a WPDG or WPP.
Clean Water State Revolving Fund and Wetlands
In 1987, Congress amended the CWA and created the Clean
Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) to finance projects that
improve water quality. The 51 individual revolving funds
combine federal and state money to provide low-interest
loans for eligible projects. The CWSRF provides more than
$5 billion annually to public and private organizations to
improve water quality. As the loans are repaid, money can
be used again for new projects—a true revolving fund.
Wetland preservation, restoration, and creation projects have
historically been eligible for funding under the CWSRF.
Water Pollution Control Section 106 Grants
CWA section 106 authorizes EPA to provide financial
assistance to states (including territories and the District of
Columbia), eligible interstate agencies, and tribes in the form
of water pollution control grants. CWA section 106 grants
provide funding to build and sustain water quality programs.
Funding from section 106 grants, unlike WPDG monies, can
be used for program implementation purposes including
hiring staff, purchasing equipment, attending trainings and
workshops, and other aspects of implementing a wetlands
program. In addition, section 106 grants can be allocated
to monitoring and assessment programs, developing water
quality standards (WQS), and developing WPPs.45
Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Section 319 Grants for
States and Territories
Under CWA section 319, EPA provides grants and technical
assistance to support tribal environmental programs in
assessing and managing nonpoint source (NPS) pollution
problems and threats. A wide range of activities are eligible
for funding, including but
not limited to NPS training
for tribal staff, watershed
plan development,
riparian planting, livestock
exclusion fences, lake
protection and restoration
activities, ordinance
development, outreach
and education, and more.
Tribes eligible for and
receive base section 319
grants can also apply for
the periodic competitive
section 319 grants.46
Pentaquin River Watershed Alewife
Restoration and Outreach
The Passamaquoddy Tribe received a Five Star Grant
to repair two fish ladders that had been inhibiting
river herring passage within the Pennamaquan
River watershed in Maine. The project engaged 15
Tribal community members to help construct and
install improved fish ladders and restore migratory
connections to the river, tripling the current river
herring population. Project partners include Maine
Coast Heritage Trust, Maine's statewide land trust, and
Maine Sea Grant.
45 For more information on tribal water quality monitoring CWA section 106 grants, see https://www.epa.gov/water-pollution-control-
section-106-arants/tribal-arants-under-section-106-clean-water-act and https://www.epa.aov/water-pollution-control-section-106-
grants/tribal-arants-under-section-106-clean-water-act#tribaleliaible
46 For more information on tribal NPS CWA section 319 grants, see https://www.epa.gov/nps/tribal-nonpoint-source-proaram and
https://www.epa.gOv/nps/tribal-nonpoint-source-proaram#Eliaibilitv
-------
36
Protecting the Pee Posh Wetlands from
NPS Pollution
The Gila River Indian Community is located in south-
central Arizona. The Pee Posh Wetlands, which are
high-quality wetlands in the northwest corner of the
community, have been threatened by sedimentation
and floating debris originating from the suburbs of
Phoenix to the north of the reservation.
To mitigate NPS pollution to the Pee Posh Wetlands,
the Gila River Indian Community proposed measures
to prevent sediment and debris from entering the
wetlands. Sediment pollution has resulted in a
suspended sediment concentration of 98.7 mg/L, in
excess of the tribal draft standards. Floating debris
are commonly caught in native wetland vegetation.
Restoration proposed under the grant includes the
installation of both a sediment basin and a trash control
structure to prevent excess sediment and trash from
entering the wetlands. These measures are expected to
minimize the effects of sediment and debris on the Pee
Posh Wetlands.
Indian Environmental General Assistance Program47
In 1992, Congress passed the Indian Environmental General
Assistance Program (GAP) Act, which authorized EPA to
provide GAP grants to federally recognized tribes and
tribal consortia for planning, developing, and establishing
environmental protection programs and developing
and implementing solid and hazardous waste programs
in Indian Country. The goal of GAP is to assist tribes and
intertribal consortia in developing the capacity to manage
their environmental protection programs in accordance
with individual tribal needs and applicable federal laws and
regulations.
Additional funding opportunities may arise through
other federal agencies, including USFWS, BIA, the Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and the USACE.48
Furthermore, one source of funding might be through "self-
generating" revenues from tribal permit or CWA section 401
certification application fees and penalties received from
enforcement actions. For example, the Swinomish Tribe
charges a $250.00 processing fee for CWA section 401 water
quality certifications.49
C. Tribal Collaboration Efforts and Partnerships
Intertribal and intratribal collaboration efforts, partnerships,
and other cooperative arrangements can yield significant
benefits for tribes and may take numerous forms. In some
cases, tribes have created consortia or working groups
to address issues of common interest, collectively pursue
projects, or share information and expertise. Other tribes
have formed partnerships with local, state, or federal
government agencies or academic institutions. In some
cases, partnerships focus on one or more discrete issues
and are of limited duration; in other circumstances, tribes
create standing arrangements that cover multiple matters
of shared interest. Partnerships may also be "internal,"where
connections are forged between different departments
or entities within a tribal government. Including a specific
section relating to existing or planned partnerships and
collaborative efforts in a WPP can be helpful both for
planning purposes and to improve funding prospects.
Wild rice, a culturally significant food plant of critical importance to many
tribes in North America. Zizania aquatica and Zizania palustris are two
species of wild rice, called manoomin in Ojibwe. Photo by Puthuchon.
47 For more information on Indian Environmental GAP grants, see https://www.epa.aov/tribal/indian-environmental-aeneral-assistance-
proa ram-gap.
48 See, for example, Indian Environmental General Assistance Grants and https://www.nawm.org/wetland-programs/sustainable-finance/.
49 For example, see the Swinomish Tribe's CWA section 401 certification application form and fees at https://swinomish-nsn.gov/
media/122671/20210914 401wgcertifjcationappiication.pdf.
-------
37
Intertribal Collaboration
One longstanding and highly successful example of
intertribal collaboration is in the Pacific Northwest (EPA
Region 10), which covers the 271 tribes within the states
of Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. EPA Region 10
received funds to convene tribes in the Pacific Northwest
in 2009, and that initial effort eventually developed into
the Pacific Northwest Tribal Wetlands Working Group (PNW
TWIG.)50This tribally directed, self-sustaining group meets
regularly and provides valuable peer-to-peer training, largely
sustained through EPA WPDGs.The PNW TWIG exists to share
knowledge from a tribal perspective that supports restoring
and protecting wetlands and other aquatic resources. The
PNWTWIG specifically aims to::
• Promote wetland and aquatic resources training
opportunities for tribes.
• Provide a venue for sharing information and transferring
technical expertise regarding restoration, protection,
and management strategies for wetlands and aquatic
resources between staff of Pacific Northwest and Alaska
tribes.
• Support development and implementation of wetland
and aquatic resource monitoring strategies.
• Increase awareness of the cultural importance of
wetlands and aquatic resources.
In 2011, the Yakama Nation hosted the first PNWTWIG
training, which focused on techniques and design of the
National Wetlands Condition Assessment (NWCA), with
training provided by EPA Region 10 technical staff. Since
then, tribes and their partners have convened semi-annual
workshops and trainings across Washington, Idaho, and
Oregon. These gatherings have grown to include both
field and office presentations and focus on the issues and
efforts of the host tribe. Each WPDG that has supported the
PNWTWIG includes funding for travel so tribes can meet
in person. More than 40 tribes from throughout the region
have participated in the PNWTWIG, which typically holds
two meetings per year, hosted by different tribes. The host
tribe sets the agenda for the two- or three-day meeting,
which opens with a cultural ceremony and includes field trips
focused on the host tribe's current projects (e.g., restoration
projects, monitoring protocols). Examples of meeting
themes include developing mitigation banks, developing
WPPs, increasing technical capacity, and monitoring and
assessment.
Another example of sustained intertribal coordination is the
Wisconsin Tribal Conservation Advisory Council (WTCAC),
which established a forum in 2001 for the 11 federally
recognized Native American tribes in Wisconsin.51 WTCAC
aims to identify and solve natural resource issues on tribal
lands by working cooperatively on important conservation
issues of mutual interest to its members. A number of
years later, in 2015, the Council established a wetland
subcommittee to identify tribal wetland program needs, thus
establishing the WTCAC Tribal Wetland Working Group (Wl
TWWG), the first tribal working group in EPA Region 5. Its
objectives are to promote training opportunities for tribes;
provide for information sharing and transfer of technical
expertise regarding restoration, protection, assessment,
and management of aquatic resources; and foster a more
widespread awareness and appreciation of the cultural
importance of wetlands. Its first meeting was at the 2016
Wisconsin Wetland Association Annual Science Conference,
and the Wl TWWG was made an official subcommittee of
WTCAC in March 2017. Since its inception, the Wl TWWG
has had multiple meetings and received funding from EPA
Region 5 for training on wetland assessments (e.g., Wetland
Rapid Assessment Methodology 2.0, Sampling Protocol for
Wetland Floristic Quality Assessment). Additional upcoming
activities include restoration site visits and training, basic
wetland delineation training, and a tribal wetland video
series.
In some cases, wetland issues are—or can become—part
of an already established collaborative effort. For instance,
the Great Plains Tribal Water Alliance, Inc. (GPTWA), an
independent corporation, serves as an advisory committee
on water issues to the Great Plains Tribal Chairmen's
Association. Established in 2006 by the Standing Rock,
Oglala, and Rosebud SiouxTribes, GPTWA now includes the
Flandreau Santee SiouxTribe as well as other tribal nations
in the Great Plains region. Committed to preserving the
member tribes' reserved water rights in the Missouri River,
the GPTWA mission statement is long term, promising that,
"As its sacred obligation, the Great Plains Tribal Water Alliance
will provide technical and policy recommendations for the
protection of all water resources for the next 7 generations."
50 https://pnwtwia.wordpress.com/.
51 https://www.wtcac.org/.
-------
38
Beautiful elephant heads (Pedicularis
groenlandica) and camas [Camassia quamash)
meadow located on Musselshell Meadows.
Photo courtesy of Rue Hewett: Hoover.
Other examples of tribal collaboration include:
• Tribes work together in "stream teams"on project
monitoring, stream sampling, and stabilization. Stream
teams move from one tribal location to the next for
monthly or quarterly working meetings.
• The Institute for Tribal Environmental Professionals,
based in Flagstaff, Arizona, is a useful forum for tribal
training and information exchange.
• The United Southeast Tribes is a regional forum for tribal
networking on environmental issues.
• Three Oklahoma tribes have initiated a pilot project
to explore their capacity for cooperation in method
sharing and other technical issues. Each tribe contributes
a share of its CWA section 106 monies to support the
effort, focusing on skills exchange relating to geographic
information systems (GIS), cultural resources, natural
resources, and more.The plan is to invite non-Indian
partners as appropriate. A related effort is the Tribal
Environmental Coalition of Oklahoma, a potential forum
for sharing wetland information.
• The Northwest Indian Fish Commission is an
organization composed of multiple staff and member
Pacific Northwest treaty tribes. The focus is on protecting
treaty resource rights, including protecting and restoring
Endangered Species Act-listed anadromous or salmonid
fish runs in and around the Puget Sound of Washington
State while also considering broader watershed
protection issues.
• Similarly, the Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission
is an organization composed of multiple staff and
member tribes that have usual and accustomed
territories in the Columbia River basin.
Collaboration with Outside Partners
Tribes have collaborated successfully with non-tribal
partners.52 EPA Regional Tribal Operations Committees also
provide important forums and opportunities for tribes to
gather with EPA, exchange information, and offer guidance.
Some states, such as Washington, have a wetland monitoring
and assessment workgroup, including members from
federal, state, tribal, and academic organizations. In certain
circumstances, tribes may draw on the expertise of state fish
and wildlife biologists, NPS managers, or state floodplain
engineers. Such coordinated efforts make sense in terms of
resource management and make effective use of limited staff
resources. For example, the Blackfeet Nation has coordinated
development of WQS with the Montana Department of
Environmental Quality by examining baseline water quality
sampling data from new permit applications and the
monitoring studies conducted in past years. This effort has
helped the tribe integrate wetland WQS into monitoring and
assessment plans and regulatory permit reviews.
As noted above (see text box, page 27), the Prairie Band
Potawatomi Nation and NRCS commemorated the approval
of an Agricultural Conservation Easement Program Wetland
Reserve Easement, the first tribal wetland long-term contract
established in Kansas, and one of only a handful throughout
the United States. The tribe entered into a 30-year contract
with NRCS to restore the functions and values of an existing
wetland located on the Prairie Band Potawatomi Reservation.
The Stockbridge-Munsee Community (SMC) used an EPA
WPDG award to improve outreach and education efforts for
their water resources programs, particularly within the tribal
community. SMC created a series of ArcGIS story maps, which
are a method to combine maps, narratives, photos, and
videos to convey information in an engaging and interactive
way. SMC contracted St. Mary's University of Minnesota,
GeoSpatial Services, to assist with website design and the
creation of the story maps that display:
• SMC's history and cultural connection to water.
• An overview of SMC water resources and the water
resources programs.
• A summary of the SMC potentially restorable wetland
(PRW) mapping project.
• An interactive map of stream quality and PRWs within
the watershed.
52 See Appendix B for case study descriptions.
-------
39
• Highlights from past water resources projects.
• An overview of the Miller Creek stream and wetland
restoration project.
There may also be opportunities to interweave wetland
management with other resource programs important
to a tribe and its partners to achieve more widespread
benefits. Explicitly defining these links in a WPP encourages
collaboration. Some possible areas where either "internal"
collaboration between tribal departments or"external"
partnerships with outside parties may be fruitful include:
• Incorporating wetland issues in CWA section 319 NPS
programs, and specifically in developing watershed
plans. Restoring, enhancing, or establishing wetlands
and riparian areas can increase protection of other
waters as well.
• Considering wetlands creation, restoration, and
protection within the landscape in total maximum daily
load programs to reduce or manage NPS loading from
the specific sources in the watershed.
• Including wetlands in integrated programs that report
and list impaired waters.
• Integrating wetland and floodplain management
programs, such as wetland restoration, to address
restoring stream hydroperiods and connectivity.
• Protecting critical habitat for waterfowl and other
wildlife, including other birds, reptiles, amphibians, and
mammals. This may also include provision of habitat
corridors linking other aquatic and natural areas.
• Restoring wetlands as part of an Endangered Species Act
watershed-based recovery plan to, for example, restore
habitat for salmon and other anadromous fish.
• Safeguarding rare community types, such as bogs, fens,
and vernal pools.
• Considering wetland functions in agricultural
and silvicultural areas, including water storage,
evapotranspiration for local rainfall, green belts
• along stream systems, and for some types of timber
production.
• Supporting economic contributions through hunting
and fishing, bird watching, canoeing, and kayaking, and
other activities.
• Maintaining and restoring culturally significant wetland
places for their traditional foods, fibers, and medicine
plant communities, and for the myriad ecological and
cultural benefits they provide.
Although the benefits of partnerships and other
collaborative efforts are clear, some challenges exist to
creating and sustaining effective collaboration. There may
be significant differences in levels of expertise, experience,
and resources among participating tribes.Tribal procedures,
decision- making processes, and timelines sometimes
conflict. Typically, it is important to have certain people
willing and able to take the lead in forming and sustaining
such a collaborative effort through its founding stage. Staff
turnover and administration changes can be a stumbling
block for consistency of effort. Some tribes may be interested
in collaborating but are too isolated or do not have the time
and money required to travel—especially smaller bands
with fewer resources. Some tribes do not have a contiguous
land base or a reservation, limiting their ability to relate to
other jurisdictions. Finally, for some tribes, their uniqueness,
history, or cultural beliefs and practices may inhibit
collaborating too closely with other tribes or inhibit trust in
other entities.
Bee pollinator on wapato (Sagittaria latifolia)
flower, Snoqualmie Valley. Photo cour tesy of
SnoqualmieTribe (Alex Harwell).
-------
40
D. Funding and Sustaining Wetland Programs Questions
and Answers
Is there a place where I can review the range of tribal
projects that EPA has funded under the WPDG program ?
Yes. A list of previously funded projects is posted at EPA's
Wetland Grant Database, located at https://iaspub.epa.gov/
a pex/wad/f? p= 101.
It would seem that EPA has a number of specific
requirements associated with WPDG applications. Where
can I find the most up-to-date information?
Tribes should monitor the relevant EPA websites and also
develop a solid working relationship with the EPA tribal,
wetland program, and grant coordinators in their regions.
A good place to start is https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/
wetland-prog ram-development-grants-and-epa-wetlands-
grant-coordinators. Developing a relationship with EPA
regional tribal coordinators and regional tribal leads for EPA's
Enhancing State and Tribal Program initiative is especially
important because requirements can change over time.
Agency staff can provide technical assistance and often have
more up-to-date or complete information than may appear
on the website.
Must a tribe have TAS status in order to receive a WPDG?
Tribes must be federally recognized but having "treatment
in a similar manner as a state" (TAS) status is not required.
Intertribal consortia must meet the requirements of 40 CFR
§35.504(a) and (c).53 The Tribal WPDG RFA describes the grant
selection and award process for eligible applicants.
Where can I learn what activities are eligible or ineligible to
be funded under a WPDG?
A list of example actions that are eligible for funding under
each WPDG RFA is under the "Program Building Activities"
menu for each core element at https://www.epa.gov/
wetlands/wetland-prog ram-development-grants-eligible-
activities.
Will WPDG funding support implementation of wetland
programs?
No. WPDG funds cannot be used for wetland program
implementation. An implementation project is accomplished
through routine or ongoing established practices or
through routine tasks. An implementation project does
not involve developing a program, providing a pilot study,
transferring data or information, or advancing the state of
knowledge. Importantly, however, monitoring and mapping
typically always involves some kind of information transfer
or advancing the state of knowledge. Monitoring and
mapping projects, and even ongoing monitoring work, are
therefore eligible for WPDG funding and are not considered
"implementation.
It looks like EPA has two "applicant tracks" for funds. How
does a tribe know what is the better track under which to
apply?
There are two separate tracks for eligible applicants. Eligible
tribes can submit applications under either Track One or
TrackTwo, while eligible intertribal consortia can only submit
applications under TrackTwo. Applicants under each track
will only compete with other applicants for awards in the
same track. A tribe seeking to develop a WPP, or a tribe
that already has an approved WPP, should submit under
Track One. If the application includes developing a WPP, it
is beneficial to include additional tasks to develop one or
more of the core elements (e.g., developing a WPP and a
pilot project to inventory wetlands in Indian Country). A tribe
that does not have a WPP and does not plan to develop one
must submit underTrackTwo. Intertribal consortia also must
submit underTrackTwo. While there is no preference given
to applications under either track, Track One typically has a
larger pool of funds. As a general rule, tribes should contact
EPA for guidance and input before EPA issues a solicitation
because, once it is out and the competitive process is
underway, EPA is restricted from providing any type of
special assistance to an applicant
53 http://www.ecfr.aov/cai-bin/text-idx?SID=ee8aaaeb886b62da5acc07bba026ab76&mc=true&node=se40.1.35 1504&ran=div8
-------
41
Does the WPDG program have a match requirement? If so,
can the match be reduced?
Yes. There is a minimum non-federal 25 percent cost share/
match requirement for standalone grants (i.e., grants that
are not part of a tribe's Performance Partnership Grant).
In their application, all applicants must describe how they
will contribute the required match. In certain instances,
the match requirement may be waived if the tribe is able
to demonstrate the need for doing so. EPA announced the
waiver of match funding requirements for tribal grants
authorized under Performance Partnership Grants on
September 30,2021.54
Can BIA funds be used to meet the match requirement?
What about other EPA grant funds?
In general, most BIA assistance funds can be used for match.
Tribes should check with their BIA contacts to determine
whether their funds can be used as match for other federal
grants. EPA GAP, CWA section 319, or CWA section 106
funds cannot be used as match for these EPAWPDGs. Note,
however, that salaries coming from other federal (i.e., non-
EPA) grants can be used as cost share/match. Salaries paid
from another federal source may count as match for a grant if
allowed by the grant program source.
Intertribal cooperation sounds good in theory, but what's
the best way to start and sustain ?
There is no set process to create and sustain intertribal
cooperation. Existing successful collaborative efforts have
shown that participating tribes need to have a shared set of
interests. These might include:
• Obtaining training in specific topics of interest, such as
mapping, monitoring and assessment, wetland WQS
development, and more.
• Comparing approaches to current wetland protection
challenges.
• Grappling with common impacts or threats to wetlands.
• Sharing complementary skills.
• Developing consistent approaches (e.g., mitigation
policies, CWA section 401 certification condition
templates).
• Looking for ways to create economies of scale (e.g., one
training for multiple tribes).
In addition, it is true that good collaborative efforts do not
necessarily arise spontaneously or become naturally self-
sustaining. Experience has shown the value and importance
of having two to three people who are strongly committed
to bringing tribes together and have the interpersonal skills
needed to champion the effort within their own leadership,
to other tribes, and to other potential partners. A single
champion may have a difficult time cheerleading the
effort and carrying the multiple responsibilities, including
organization and logistics.
Finally, it is important to think carefully about the
"infrastructure" needed to sustain such efforts. For instance,
who will be responsible for hosting meetings and the
associated logistics? Will duties rotate among member tribes?
What competitive advantages for funding opportunities
might be realized by working in concert with other tribes?
In short, intertribal collaboration efforts will most likely
make sense and yield mutual benefits when tribes share
substantive issues of concern and interest, several people are
determined to make it happen, and tribes put the process
and procedural issues (e.g., who does what when, travel,
funding) in place.
54 See September 30,2021, memo from Michael Osinski, Director of Grants and Debarment, at
https://www.epa.gov/arants/rain-2022-a01
-------
42
Appendix A: Roundtable Members
Matt Baerwalde, Snoqualmie Indian Tribe
James Duffield, Hopi Tribe
Tom Elliott,Yakama Nation
Tabitha Espinoza, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes
Rick Gitar, Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa
Rue Hewett Hoover, Nez Perce Tribe
Mike Jones, Mohican Nation—Stockbridge-Munsee Band
Kathleen Kutschenreuter, EPA Headquarters
Kerstien McMurl, Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma
Robyn Mercer, Pyramid Lake PaiuteTribe
Tyler Orgon, Red Lake Band of Chippewa
Toney Ott, EPA Region 8
Verna Potts, Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation
Kelly Schott, Meskwaki Nation; Sac & FoxTribe of the Mississippi in Iowa
Benjamin Simpson, Penobscot Indian Nation
Tiernan W. Smith, St. Regis MohawkTribe
Maria Stelk, National Association of Wetland Managers
Linda Storm, EPA Region 10
Rachel Vaughn, Southern Ute Indian Tribe
Kerryann Weaver, EPA Region 5
Yvette Wiley, Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma
-------
43
Appendix B: Case Study Summaries
-------
The Finley Flats Wetland Preserve. Photo courtesy
ofTabitha Espinoza.
CATEGORIES:
Regulatory programs
Restoration, including voluntary
restoration and compensatory
mitigation
Traditional Ecological Knowledge
Location: North of Interstate 90
between Missoula and Kalispell, fertile
valleys and towering mountain peaks
of northwestern Montana surround the
Flathead Reservation.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: 1.3 million acres
Population: CSKT has -8,050 enrolled
members; about 5,000 live on or near the
reservation.
Size of Wetlands: The Flathead
Reservation contains about 980 miles of
rivers and streams, 90 lakes, and extensive
wetlands.
EPA Region: 8
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
WPP developed under a Wetland Program
Development Grant for 2021-2025,
incorporating four of four core elements
(available here)
Tribal Website: https://csktribes.org/
Case Author: Tabitha Espinoza, CSKT
wetlands program
Confederated Salish and Kootenai
Tribes | CSKT Wetlands Restoration
Efforts
As the largest landowner on the Flathead Indian Reservation, the
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) can affect conservation
through voluntary restoration and protection efforts as well as through
compensatory mitigation.
CSKT has reserved rights dating back to 1855, when the Hellgate Treaty was
signed The tribes have a right to fish in "all usual and accustomed places." Built
into that right are the assumptions that the fish exist and that the habitat exists to
support them. So, when an entity damages habitat for culturally important species
in CSKT's aboriginal territories, the tribes'treaty rights have been infringed upon
The tribes have persisted through a few key legal battles and won settlements
for damages to natural resources in ceded lands. As a trustee, the tribes were
obligated to spend the settlements on restoration to aquatic resources within the
reservation.
CSKT also has a stringent Wetlands Conservation Plan, which was implemented
to reach the goal of"no net loss" of wetland acreage across the reservation
beginning in the late 1990s. The plan provides for monitoring, assessment, and
mapping of the reservation's wetland resources. Most notably, though, the plan
(along with various tribal ordinances) is a tool that holds developers accountable
for unavoidable impacts to wetlands. Wetland impacts must be mitigated at
an average ratio of 3:1. That means for every acre of wetland impact, 3 acres of
wetlands are preserved, restored, enhanced, or created.
Since establishing the Wetlands Conservation Plan, the tribal fisheries and wildlife
programs have spent two decades purchasing and restoring aquatic habitats on
the reservation for benefits to fish, wildlife, and other tribal values. In working
to identify potential restoration sites, the tribal wildlife program consulted with
the Selis-Qlispe Culture Committee, who shared traditional place-names. Often
descriptive in nature, these place-names revealed rich site-specific information
about what the various places were like in the generational memory of the tribes
-------
45
and guided the restoration process. Additionally, for many
re-acquired pieces of land, tribal programs consulted with
the two Culture Committees to rename mitigation parcels
in the native languages.The CSKT wildlife program has
been successful in reintroducing northern leopard frogs and
trumpeter swans to places in their former range. See details
about the efforts of the wildlife program here.
Along with various habitat restoration projects in key
watersheds supporting bull trout and Yellowstone cutthroat
trout, the CSKT fisheries program has built a series of
filtration ponds along Mission Creek to remove pesticides
and other contaminants before the stream enters the
Lower Flathead River, which is very important culturally and
ecologically and is explicitly protected by numerous tribal
ordinances.
An important partner to CSKT in wetland mitigation has been
the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT). Together,
the two governments have successfully implemented various
projects of different configurations, as well as facing many
challenges. The Finley Flats Wetland Preserve is an example
of a collaborative project designed to restore wetlands. The
tribes leveraged resources from settlement monies along
with funding from MDT and other sources to restore some
200 acres of wetlands there, some of which were used as
credits to mitigate impacts of the Highway 93 redesign
project that began in the early 2000s and is still underway.
Key Takeaway
Look to your treaties, look to your cultures, and be creative.
Additional Resources
Learn more about CSKT's wetlands conservation program:
http://csktnrd.ora/ep/wetlands-conservation-proaram
-------
46
WW
Wetland assessment work on the Flathead Indian
Reservation. Photo courtesy of the Confederated
Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Nation.
m
CATEGORIES:
Assessment
Grant-supported projects
Location: North of Interstate 90
between Missoula and Kalispell, fertile
valleys and towering mountain peaks
of northwestern Montana surround the
Flathead Reservation.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: 1.3 million acres
Population: CSKT has -8,050 enrolled
members; about 5,000 live on or near the
reservation.
Size of Wetlands: The Flathead
Reservation contains about 980 miles of
rivers and streams, 90 lakes, and extensive
wetlands..
EPA Region: 8
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
WPP developed under a Wetland Program
Development Grant for 2021-2025,
incorporating four of four core elements
(available here)
Tribal Website: https://csktribes.org/
Case Author: Tabitha Espinoza, CSKT
wetlands program
Confederated Salish and Kootenai
Tribes | CSKT Monitoring and
Assessment
With funding from the EPA Wetland Program Development Grants (WPDGs),
the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) Wetland Conservation
Program started a comprehensive rotating basin watershed-based approach
to wetland assessment and monitoring in 2004.
Due to the competitive nature of this funding source, the program has started and
stopped a few times over the years and staff turnover has been prominent. As a
result, the original strategy has been jolted and revised a bit over time.
The current structure of wetland monitoring on the Flathead Indian Reservation
is to evaluate and report on wetland assessment, function, and condition by
watershed. As funded, the Wetland Coordinator, a CSKT botanist, and a mapping
contractor monitor, assess, and evaluate wetland conditions in a given watershed
every other year, building on previous work. Staff revisit five monitoring sites
from previous assessment periods and select 15 new wetland sites for vegetation
and wetland assessment surveys in the watershed. Selected wetlands represent
the full range of human disturbance, ownership, and wetland types found in the
watershed, including compensatory mitigation sites when present. There are
multiple steps to select sites, leading to a stratified sampling of the watershed.
Wetland assessment and monitoring components include:
• Plant communities. A complete floristic list and percent cover by species will
be recorded for each wetland site for determining vegetation metrics.
• Wetland classification. Wetland classes will be determined using both the
hydrogeomorphic classification and Cowardin National Wetland Inventory
classification systems.
• Wetland function. The Montana Department of Transportation's Rapid
Assessment Method (2008) will be used to evaluate wetland functions. Rapid
assessments evaluate the general condition of wetlands using observable
field indicators and are useful when funding, time, or staff is not available for
intensive monitoring
-------
47
There are seven watersheds on the Flathead Reservation.
At present, five of them have been assessed and monitored
twice, allowing for limited trend analyses by comparing
baseline data to current data. Completing watershed-based
assessments on the two remaining watersheds will allow
CSKT to analyze the data for each of the seven sub-basins
and begin documenting changes over time on a larger scale.
This effort was funded by an EPA Region 8 WPDG and began
in fiscal year 2022. Upon project completion, CSKT's dataset
will be more complete and allow for trend analysis in all
seven watersheds before setting goals and implementation
strategies for wetland conservation into the future.
Key Takeaways
• Don't get discouraged by ups and downs.
• Hire staff with grant-writing skills.
-------
Yakama Nation Wildlife Program managed
properties. Photo courtesy of Yakama Nation.
V . 1
.vVVissv""
, Toppenish Creek •
m^s
x/PS".
m
YN Wildlife Program Properties
CATEGORIES:
Wetland restoration
Tribal land management
Traditional resource use
Location: The valley bottom portion
of the Yakama Nation's Reservation is
adjacent to the Yakima River and Satus
and Toppenish Creeks, in south-central
Washington state.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: 1,371,918 acres, not including
traditional territories outside the
reservation,
Population: ~10,000 enrolled members
Size of Wetlands: 4,530 acres of valley
bottom National Wetland Inventory
wetlands under tribal management-
several thousand more acres under
federal and private management
and under tribal management in the
reservation's Closed Area.
EPA Region: 10
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
WPP developed for 2014-2018, currently
outdated
Tribal Website:
https://www.vakama.com/
Case Author: Bridger Cohan, wildlife
program wetlands restoration biologist
Confederated Tribes and Bands of the
Yakama Nation | Lower Yakima Valley
Riparian Wetlands Restoration Project
The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation are reclaiming
stewardship of valuable wetland and floodplain habitats on their reservation
through acquisition, restoration, active management, and monitoring.
The Yakama People have, since time immemorial, used wetlands and floodplain
areas for hunting and for gathering many culturally important species. Flooding
from dams and conversion to agriculture destroyed many wetlands on the Nation's
reservation and ceded territories following European colonization. However,
starting in 1991, the Nation entered into a series of agreements with the Bonneville
Power Administration to "fund activities on the Yakama Indian Reservation that
are necessary to partially mitigate wildlife and wildlife habitats adversely affected
by the construction of Bonneville, The Dalles, John Day, and McNary Dams and
their reservoirs."This Lower Yakima Valley Riparian Wetlands Restoration Project
has enabled tribal management of wetlands and floodplains with the reservation
boundary, as well as the implementation of many innovative wetland restoration
projects. Specifically, the project pursues four main goals:
1. To permanently protect 27,000 acres of floodplain lands along the Yakima
River, Toppenish Creek, and Satus Creek within the agricultural portion of the
Yakama Reservation.
2. To enhance those lands to realize a net increase in native fish and wildlife
habitat values.
3. To adaptively manage those lands to ensure permanent fish and wildlife value.
4. To monitor the habitat conditions to ensure the desired habitat value is
reached and maintained.
To date, the project—administered by the Yakama Nation Wildlife, Range, and
Vegetation Resources Management Program—has acquired 21,630 acres of habitat
and manages those lands according to tribal priorities and values. Some were
relatively intact wetlands, grassland, or shrub-steppe that had passed into private
-------
49
ownership under the Allotment Act, while others were
purchased as agricultural fields and restored. These lands
now provide valuable wildlife habitat; offer opportunities for
tribal members to gather tule reeds (Schoenoplectus acutus
andS. tabemaemontani), wapato (Sagittaria latifolia), and
other important plants; and are a central part of a tribally
managed hunting season.
Project lands also provide opportunities for projects that
improve the health of local watersheds, such as side channel
reconnection efforts or using managed wetlands to trap
and clean agricultural runoff. An example of the former
project type was partially implemented in 2019, creating
inlet structures that will funnel water from the Yakima
River into a disconnected side channel that is scheduled
for restoration as part of future work. Another upcoming
project will use water from the North Drain, an agricultural
wasteway with poor water quality, to supplement over 900
acres of managed wetlands at the mouth of Satus Creek. This
work will not only improve habitat for migrating waterfowl,
but also keep sediment, nutrients, and other agricultural
pollutants out of Satus Creek, which hosts an important
run of Endangered Species Act-listed Middle-Columbia
steelhead {Oncorhynchus my kiss).
Through targeted land acquisition and management, as
well as specific restoration projects, the Yakama Nation
has improved tribe members'opportunities to exercise
traditional hunting and gathering practices on their
reservation. The project has also enabled the Yakama
Nation to manage wildlife populations and hunting on the
reservation without state interference, preserving tribal
sovereignty. Project staff contribute to environmental
decision-making in the Yakima basin more broadly as well,
helping the Yakima Nation to advocate for its interests in its
ceded territories, in addition to protecting critical habitats on
the reservation.
Key Takeaways
• Sovereignty and control of land is key to true tribal
management.
• Small-scale but targeted restoration can have a large impact
on the landscape.
• Be clear-eyed about working within current watershed
and landscape conditions, but with the goal of maximizing
benefits to native species and traditional cultural practices.
Additional Resources
An older but still informative look at project restoration, with
videos: https://va kamafish-nsn.gov/restore/proiects/xapnish
The former Wetland Program Plan: https://www.epa.gov/sites/
default/files/2019-03/documents/vn draft wetland program
plan 9-30-13.pdf
-------
A spruce bog on the Fond du Lac Reservation.
Photo courtesy of Rick Gitar.
CATEGORIES:
Water quality standards for wetlands
Location:The Fond du Lac Reservation,
which was established in 1854 by
treaty with the U.S. government and to
which the U.S. government has a trust
responsibility, is situated in northeastern
Minnesota, adjacent to the city of
Cloquet.The reservation is located about
20 miles west of Lake Superior and the
city of Duluth.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: 101,000 acres
Population: -4,300 enrolled members
Size of Wetlands: The Fond du Lac
Reservation contains 4,662 individual
wetland entities based on the Cowardin
Classification System; wetlands total
43,873 acres and 43.4% of the reservation
land area.
EPA Region: 5
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
WPP developed under a Wetland Program
Development Grant for 2019-2023,
incorporating four of four core elements,
following development of EPA-approved
water quality standards (available here)
Tribal Website: https://wwiAy.fdIrez.com/
Case Author: Richard Gitar, Water
Regulatory Specialist/Tribal Inspector,
Fond du Lac Office of Water Protection
Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior
Chippewa | Development of
Wetland Water Quality Standards
In preparation for Fond du Lac's triennial review of their water quality
standards (WQS), the Wetland Program developed narrative wetland WQS.
The Wetland Program primarily used EPA's template tool (available here) to
develop the narrative standards. In addition to wetlands becoming a designated
use of the WQS, the template aided in preparing language for using wetland
functions as wetland designated uses. This was then combined with the standard
"free from"language to complete the narrative standards.
Key Takeaway
It was important to Fond du Lac to
include wetlands in their standards
because nearly all of the Clean Water
Act (CWA) section 401 water quality
certifications granted on the reservation
have involved wetland impacts from
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits.
Creating wetland WQS has allowed Fond
du Lac to include these standards as part
of the CWA section 401 water quality
certifications and include conditions
specific to the protection of wetland
designated uses.
Additional Resources
Fond du Lac's WQS are available here.
Chapter 7, page 34, contains the wetland
standards language.
-------
CATEGORIES:
Traditional Ecological Knowledge/
cultural uses of wetlands
Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior
Chippewa | Wildcrafting Guide and
Medicinal Plant List
Several members of the Fond du Lac Environmental Program, including
the Environmental Education Coordinator, Wetland Specialist, and Water
Regulatory Specialist, developed the Wildcrafting Guide and Medicinal Plant
List, available here, for use in various classes with students.
Since created, the list has been used for several classes on medicinal plants
sponsored by Fond du Lac's 13 Moons Program, which is designed to bring the
Ojibway Culture back to its people through hands-on learning.
This effort began as a list of plants encountered during a medicinal plant walk
conducted by Rick Gitar, Water Regulatory Specialist, in the summer of 2014. Later,
others added plants to the list that they were either familiar with or had used
medicinally themselves. This was often done as part of several additional medicinal
plant walks taken with students (both youth and adults) who were willing to
Location:The Fond du Lac Reservation,
which was established in 1854 by
treaty with the U.S. government and to
which the U.S. government has a trust
responsibility, is situated in northeastern
Minnesota, adjacent to the city of
Cloquet.The reservation is located about
20 miles west of Lake Superior and the
city of Duluth.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: 101,000 acres
Population: -4,300 enrolled members
Size of Wetlands: The Fond du Lac
Reservation contains 4,662 individual
wetland entities based on the Cowardin
Classification System; wetlands total
43,873 acres and 43.4% of the reservation
land area.
EPA Region: 5
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
WPP developed under a Wetland Program
Development Grant for 2019-2023,
incorporating four of four core elements,
following development of EPA-approved
water quality standards (available here)
Tribal Website: https://wwvAy.fdIrez.com/
Case Author: Richard Gitar, Water
Regulatory Specialist/Tribal Inspector,
Fond du Lac Office of Water Protection
share their knowledge of medicinal
plants while on these walks. The
idea was to provide interested Band
members with a guide and plant list
of local medicinal plants they could
use without having to fumble through
a larger plant book with unrelated
species or plants that were not in the
area.
The plant list is centered on plants
found in northeast Minnesota and
northwest Wisconsin. However, nearly
all of the species on the list have a
much larger range and can be found in
many other states as well.
Key Takeaway
The process of creating the Wildcrafting
Guide and Medicinal Plant List—as well
as the list itself—served to engage Band
members, lifting up the Ojibway Culture
through learning and doing, and created
a locally and culturally specific plant
reference book that will continue to serve
Band members.
Additional Resources
Wildcrafting Guide and Medicinal Plant
List, available here.
-------
52
High-altitude spring in White Ruin Canyon.
Photo courtesy of Jim Duffield.
CATEGORIES:
Assessment
Water quality standards for wetlands
Wetland Program Plan development
Location;: The Hopi Reservation in
northeast Arizona lies in the Little
Colorado Watershed, the Dinnebito Wash,
and the Moenkopi Wash.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: -1.6 million acres
Population:-14,041 tribal members
EPA Region: 9
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
WPP developed under a Wetland Program
Development Grant for 2015-2019,
incorporating four of four core elements
(available here)
Tribal Website:
https://www.hopi-nsn.aov/
Case Author: Jim Duffield (retired),
hydrogeologist, Hopi Tribe Water
Resources Program
Hopi Tribe | Wetland Program
Development
In FY 2012 the Hopi Water Resources Program (WRP) applied for and received
a grant under section 104(b)(3) of the Clean Water Act. The WRP created a
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) by addressing the components of the Core
Elements Framework (CEF) and applying them to the unique culture and
waters of the Hopi lands.
The CEF consists of four elements: Monitoring and Assessment, Regulatory
Activities, Voluntary Restoration and Protection, and WQS for Wetlands.
WRP focused first on Monitoring and Assessment, developing a monitoring
design from data review, a wetland inventory, and a classification system of Hopi
wetlands. WRP selected core indicators that represented wetland health/condition,
and a wetlands bioassessment quality assurance project plan was created to
standardize new monitoring techniques.Tribal employees were trained in field
methods to monitor indicators and increase the scientific capability of Hopi WRP.
The tribe used these data to address the second section of the CEF, Regulatory
Activities, and design a comprehensive jurisdictional range for the Tribal Wetland
Program.
Goals for the third element of the CEF, Voluntary Restoration and Protection, were
set with the input of other tribal programs such as Wildlife and Ecosystems and
the Range Program. By providing guidance on management techniques and
restoration methods within a watershed context, the tribe was able to standardize
methods and more easily compare results in Hopi restoration and protection goals
Reservation-wide.
Using outputs from the first three elements, WRP created a set of WQS for
wetlands, addressing the fourth core element. These standards included the
adoption of a definition of"wetlands"and their delineation on lands within Hopi
jurisdiction.
-------
53
The Hopi Tribe WPP included five key points:
1. An overall goal statement for the program over the time
period covered by the WPP.
2. An overall timeframe for the WPP.
3. A list of planned actions consistent with the CEF for the
program to carry out over the WPP's timeframe.
4. A schedule for the achievement of each action.
5. A list of more specific activities to be accomplished
under each action.
Key Takeaway
Interfacing with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and
understanding the guidance for developing a WPP, and how it
fits in with the particular context of your tribe and the wetlands
your tribe is protecting and managing, is essential.
-------
The Nez Perce Tribe's Musselshell Meadows, a
culturally important camas (Camassia quamash
ssp. quamash) harvesting wetland. The Nez
Perce's name for camas is q'emes. Photo courtesy
of Rue Hewett Hoover.
CATEGORIES:
Assessment
Traditional Ecological Knowledge/
cultural uses of wetlands
Nez Perce Tribe | Wetland Ecosystem
Services Protocol Tool
The Nez Perce Tribe Wetlands Program has adapted a functional assessment
tool, the Wetland Ecosystem Services Protocol (WESP), created by Dr. Paul
Adamus, for tribal use on the Nez Perce Reservation.
This tool will be used to determine the functions and values (both ecological and
cultural) of reservation wetlands to make decisions and prioritize actions in the
tribe's approach to future wetland management.
Location: The Nez Perce Reservation
is located in the Columbia Snake River
Plateau east of Lewiston, Idaho.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage:The current Nez Perce
Reservation encompasses 770,470
acres, with tribal lands having originally
occupied a vast territory of approximately
13 million acres in the present-day states
of Idaho, Oregon, and Washington.
Population: -3,510 enrolled members
Size of Wetlands: More than 300
wetlands. Many are small, with over a
third less than 1.25 acres.The majority
are classified as palustrine emergent
wetlands according to the Cowardin
classification and as riverine according to
the hydrogeomorphic classification.
EPA Region: 10
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
WPP developed under a Wetland Program
Development Grant for 2020-2025,
incorporating four of four core elements
(available here)
Tribal Website: https://nezperce.org/
WESP-NP addresses 17 specific functions,
individual wetland:
• Water storage and delay (WS)
• Thermoregulation (5FT)
• Sediment retention and
stabilization (SR)
• Phosphorus retention (PR)
• Nitrate removal and retention (NR)
• Carbon sequestration (CS)
• Organic nutrient export (OE)
• Aquatic invertebrate habitat (INV)
• Fish habitat (FA)
not all of which are applicable in each
• Amphibian and reptile habitat (AM)
• Waterbird habitat (WB)
• Songbird, raptor, and mammal
habitat (SBM)
• Pollinator habitat (POL)
• Native plant diversity (PD)
• Cultural significance (CRI)*
• Wetland sensitivity (Sens)
• Wetland stress (STR)
It is anticipated that this tool will have several uses for the Tribe's Natural Resource
divisions and other tribes and agencies in the region as a tool for identifying
functions, benefits, and values of individual wetlands; prioritizing wetlands
restoration and protection; evaluating restoration results; monitoring the long-
term effects of wetland restoration; predicting and evaluating impacts from
Case Author: Rue Hewett Hoover,
water resources, wetland specialist,
Nez Perce Tribe
* In addition to adapting and calibrating this model to the Nez Perce ecosystems
(Reservation and Ceded Lands), a cultural importance function was added, which has
never been included before.
-------
55
changing rainfall and weather patterns to assist in adaptation
to hazards, floods, and droughts due to climate change; and
incorporating cultural value into the evaluation of wetlands.
The Nez Perce Tribe Wetlands Program staff have worked
with Dr. Paul Adamus to adapt the tool for use on the
reservation and add a cultural component using the tribe's
Traditional Ecological Knowledge.
With this tool, the Wetlands Program has started prioritizing
wetland restoration projects with other tribal departments.
Incorporating the cultural component into the tool will
raise the rated value of each wetland based on cultural
importance. This functional assessment tool, which
incorporates ecological and cultural attributes, was
something the tribe was lacking and needed to assess
wetlands. It will be helpful to apply as guidance in Nez Perce
tribal programs to help them design and evaluate future
restoration projects.
Key Takeaways
• WESP-NP provides a science-based, landscape-level view
of a wetland's various ecological services. All wetlands are
important, but not all are equal—functional assessment
(FA) enables distinction between wetlands on a functional
basis, based on both the effectiveness and value of each
function.
• FA results can be used as a decision-making tool for
regulators in wetland regulatory approval processes, as well
as for proponents in project planning and design.
• WESP-NP is a tool for determining compensation
requirements for wetland alterations and also for evaluating
wetland restoration success.
• The field component of WESP-NP is quite rapid and
efficiently executed.
• Repeatability, or consistency, of scores using WESP-NP has
been found to be within ± 0.6 points or less on a 0 to 10
scoring scale.
• Numeric scores facilitate inter-wetland comparison,
ecological ranking of wetlands, and change overtime
analysis (i.e., pre- and post-alteration or restoration/
enhancement).
• Results can be analyzed in individual functions (e.g., nitrate
removal) or grouped functions (e.g., terrestrial support)
Additional Resources
Adamus, P.R. 1983. A Method for Wetland Functional
Assessment. Volume II: Methodology. FHWA-IP-82-24. Federal
Highway Administration.
Adamus, P.R., E.J. Clairain, R.D. Smith, and R.E.Young. 1987.
Wetland EvaluationTechnique (WET).Volume II: Methodology.
US USACE.
Adamus, P.R., E.J. Clairain, Jr., D.R. Smith, and R.E.Young. 1992.
Wetland EvaluationTechnique (WET).Volume I: Literature
Review and Evaluation Rationale. USACE.
Adamus, P.R.,T.J. Danielson, and A. Gonyaw. 2001. Indicators for
Monitoring Biological Integrity of Inland Freshwater Wetlands:
A Survey of North American Technical Literature (1990-2000).
EPA843-R-01 -Fall 2001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EPA). https://nepis.epa.aov/Exe/ZvPURL.cai?Dockev=P1007Z4S.
txt.
Adamus, P., and K.Verble. 2020. Manual for the Oregon Rapid
Wetland Assessment Protocol (ORWAP, Revised): Version 3.2.
Oregon Department of State Lands, https://www.oreaon.gov/
dsl/WW/Paaes/ORWAP.aspx.
Adamus, P., K.Verble, and L. McCallister. 2020. Oregon Rapid
Wetland Assessment Protocol (ORWAP, Revised): Version 3.2
Calculator Spreadsheet, Databases, and Data Forms. Oregon
Department of State Lands. https://www.oreaon.aov/dsl/WW/
Paaes/ORWAP.aspx.
Adamus, P.R. 2013. Wetland Ecosystem Services Protocol for
Southern Alberta: Calculator Spreadsheet and Manual. Alberta
Environment and Sustainable Resource Development.
-------
56
W
The Wallooskee-Youngs Restoration Project site,
sponsored by the CowlitzTribe. Photo courtesy of
Snoqualmie Tribe (Matt Baerwalde).
-ft"
H
CATEGORIES:
Education
Intertribal cooperation
Partnerships with federal or state
agencies, academic institutions, or
others
Wetland program plan development
Location:Tribal lands across the Pacific
Northwest region
Participating Tribes: Over 40 different
tribes, native villages, and tribal
organizations have participated in the
PNWTWIG.
EPA Region: 10
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
Tribal WPPs submitted to and approved
by EPA can be found on EPA's website,
here, in the Region 10 section.
TWIG Website:
https://pnwtwiq,wordpress.com/
Case Author: Matt Baerwalde,
Snoqualmie Indian Tribe, former TWIG
Lead and current Steering Committee
member
Pacific Northwest Tribal Wetlands
Working Group | PNWTWIG
The Pacific Northwest (PNW) Tribal Wetlands Working Group (TWIG) is a group
of Native American tribes that have common interests in wetlands and aquatic
resources.
Since 2010, the PNWTWIG has met at workshops or trainings about twice per year
to share wetland and aquatic resource restoration and monitoring techniques,
tribal approaches, and learn from one another on reservations across the
Northwest.These workshops and trainings are open to PNW tribes and are aimed
at improving Wetland Program Plans and the condition of wetlands in the region.
Self-governance, tribal heritage, and cultural identity are directly dependent
upon water quality and associated traditional resources, which for many tribes
was guaranteed by treaty. However, the geographic isolation of tribal wetland
and aquatic resource management professionals hampers the cohesiveness of an
important professional support network.
The TWIG started with a conversation in 2009 at an Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) training and the discovery that tribal staff wanted to meet more
regularly to talk more about WPPs. In 2010, Scott O'Daniel from the Confederated
Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation stepped in as the first TWIG lead; that
position has since passed to Matt Baerwalde from the Snoqualmie Indian Tribe (in
2017) and now to Kelsey Payne (2021), also from the SnoqualmieTribe.
The TWIG is guided by the TWIG lead and the TWIG Steering Committee, which
was designed to be small in order to increase efficiency and responsiveness and
to represent the diversity of tribes active in the group. The Steering Committee is
open to any interested TWIG participant, and the TWIG aims to refresh committee
membership while retaining institutional knowledge. The volunteer structure
of the TWIG relies on intertribal partnerships to guide the completion of the
workplans outlined in the EPA grant agreements that support the group's activities.
Over the past decade, the TWIG has built many partnerships necessary to hold
each workshop and training event and guide the group's work.
-------
57
TWIG programming is reflective of tribes'needs and
current challenges. Training topics are decided by polling
participating tribes; content for workshops is organized
and presented by the hosting tribes, according to the issues
they are working on, along with their collaborators and
with support from the TWIG lead. Examples of themes from
past workshops included the role of wetlands in stream
temperature regulation, climate change influence on high
meadows, urban encroachment on floodplain wetlands, and
incorporating tribal values into rapid assessment methods.
For over ten years, the PNWTWIG has facilitated
collaborative, science-based decision-making while
encouraging peer relationships and creating opportunities
that facilitate natural resource management policies
and methods consistent with tribal values. Tribal WPPs
are locally developed efforts, centered on a particular
tribal community's traditional patterns of using wetlands
and aquatic resources. Outcomes of TWIG's efforts have
contributed to a significant increase in the number of tribes
creating WPPs and increased collaboration between EPA and
the PNW tribes.
Key Takeaways
• The TWIG supports EPA Region 10 tribes (which includes
271 tribes in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington
in protecting wetlands and aquatic resources by
sharing knowledge and expertise, in large part through
collaboratively designing and hosting meaningful
workshops and trainings that help tribal staff learn, grow,
and share.
• Tribal wetlands and aquatic resources staff have found value
in theTWIG as a venue for information sharing and transfer
of technical expertise regarding restoration, protection, and
management strategies for wetlands and aquatic resources,
from a tribal perspective.
• The TWIG works to support ongoing development and
implementation of tribal wetland and aquatic resource
monitoring strategies, and increased awareness of the
cultural importance of wetlands and aquatic resources,
through regular outreach to regional tribes and working in
collaboration with EPA Region 10 wetlands staff.
Additional Resources
PNWTWIG website: https://pnwtwia.wordpress.com/
SSpring 2021 WPP training recordings:
• Part 1: https://voutu.be/7Z77wUatl0o
• Part 2: https://voutu.be/Tvx LbYMhHE
-------
A small drainage (i.e., input) that flows from
the north into the larger Prairie Band wetland
restoration project. Vegetation shown includes
reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), black
willow (Salixnigra), and bush false indigo
(.Amorpha fruticosa). Photo courtesy of Frank
Norman.
CATEGORIES:
Assessment
Education
Grant-supported projects
Mapping, inventory
Partnerships with federal or state
agencies, academic institutions, or
others
Regulatory programs
Restoration, including voluntary
restoration
Traditional Ecological Knowledge/
cultural uses of wetlands
Location: Northeast region of the state
of Kansas
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: -77,440 acres
Population: -5,000 enrolled members
Size of Wetlands: Over 120 acres of
wetlands and nearly 2,000 acres of
potential wetland restoration areas exist
within the exterior boundary of the Prairie
Band Potawatomi Reservation.
EPA Region: 7
Prairie Band Potawatonv Nation
Wetland Reserve Easement Project
The Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation and the Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) commemorated the approval of an Agricultural Conservation
Easement Program-Wetland Reserve Easement (ACEP-WRE) contract on
Monday, December 17,2018, in an event held at the Prairie Band Casino &
Resort.
The contract approval marked a momentous event in Kansas as the first tribal
wetland long-term contract established in Kansas, and one of only a handful
throughout the United States. The Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation entered into
a 30-year contract with NRCS to restore the functions and values of an existing
wetland located on the Prairie Band Potawatomi Reservation.The Nation learned
about the ACEP-WRE program opportunity through involvement in watershed
restoration and protection strategies with local agencies, county extension, and
others. Being involved with local stakeholders in meetings, at conferences, and
through networking has led to many partnerships over the years.
The wetland restoration area consists of 31.7 acres. The project was initiated in
1996 under the direction of the Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation Planning and
Environmental Protection department according to the department's director,
Virginia LeClere. Over the course of many years, and many staff contributing to the
project, it became a reality.
The site consisted of many types of wetland plants and appropriate hydrology
present, but the one significant determining factor in selecting the site was
that a majority of the land was not in production and had lain fallow for years.
The wetland restoration site will serve multiple purposes, such as flood control,
increased habitat, educational opportunities, and recreational and cultural uses.
The primary objectives of this project are to restore and enhance wetland wildlife
habitat and improve the overall water quality for the contract area. The Prairie
Band Potawatomi Nation aspires to restore the values and functions of the
degraded wetland by restoring hydrology and enhancing the wetland and
-------
59
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
First WPP approved by Tribal Council
in January 2015, for 2015-2018; plan
developed under a Wetland Program
Development Grant for 2019-2023,
incorporating four of four core elements
(available here)
Tribal Website:
https://www.pbpindiantribe.com/
Case Author: Verna Potts, Senior
Environmental Technician, Prairie Band
Potawatomi Nation
adjacent upland buffer area for pollinators. This wetland restoration helps the
Nation meet its overall conservation goals by meeting a set of objectives:
1. To establish a net gain wetland policy and a no destruction of wetlands policy
for tribally owned lands.
2. To integrate wetlands management with other resources issues on a
watershed basis.
3. To access, characterize, and identify wetland within the reservation, including
past, present, and potential wetlands.
4. To develop a classification system and water quality standards to protect
wetlands functions and values.
5. To provide technical assistance and other incentives to landowners
implementing management practices that conserve, enhance, and restore
wetlands on private property.
This area will also be used for educational outreach and provide opportunities
for hunting, trapping, and recreational bird watching. A walking path will be
established for visitors to reach the center area of the wetlands in order to observe
the natural wildlife in their restored habitat.
The WRE program has provided the Nation with the opportunity to enroll acres
into their program to restore marginal agricultural lands. A financial incentive
is allocated based on criteria set forth by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
And through the tribe's partnership with their local NRCS agency, a wetland
management plan was also provided to the Nation for this site. This will assist
theTribe in future maintenance and planning for potential enrollment of other
wetlands. The primary goal of this effort is conservation and net gains of wetlands
on the Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation's reservation.
A very important component of protection and sustainability of tribal natural
resources is listening and learning from tribal elders. Valued Traditional Ecological
Knowledge is not taught byway of a book or an educational institution; it is
learned by taking the time to visit and listen to the elders and incorporating that
knowledge into developing and practicing sound management decisions for our
limited natural resources. Elders will honor and respect water in our ceremonies
and pass on this wisdom. Wetlands have been instrumental in the survival of our
people. For instance, during the age of war and relocation, Indigenous people
would seek shelter in places like wetlands to survive. Wetland plants and animals
also provide food and medicines that are only located in wet habitats. Wetland
protection and restoration are key to ensuring that future generations benefit from
this precious resource.
The WRE project ensures the wetland will remain in conservation for a term of 30
years. This measure was taken to prevent wetland losses and degradation. This
site will be monitored and assessed every five years to gauge the effectiveness of
the restoration project. And the Nation will showcase this site to encourage other
agricultural and landowners to appreciate the benefits of wetlands.
-------
60
"The Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation is thankful for the
opportunity to return this portion of land back to its natural
wetland condition and for the area's high potential to provide
environmental education. We look forward to having our
youth and the community visit the site and experience direct
learning about the unique attributes a wetland provides for
water resources and the environment,"said Joseph Rupnick,
Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation Chairman.
Key Takeaway
Under Clean Water Act section 319, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) funds activities to protect and/
or restore wetlands for nonpoint source water quality
improvement, and EPA encourages such dual-purpose, wetland/
water quality improvement activities. Strategic planning,
by way of integration of water programs goals, objectives,
and developing a comprehensive planning process, is a
key component of our wetlands and section 319 programs.
Collaboration and partnership are very essential to building a
network of shared goals. Developing and fostering partnership
among states, tribes, community, and others has enabled the
Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation's water programs to advance
and implement wetland restoration and enhancement.
-------
CATEGORIES:
Education
Traditional Ecological Knowledge/
cultural uses of wetlands
Location:The Pyramid Lake Indian
Reservation is located 35 miles northeast
of Reno, Nevada, in a remote desert area
in the counties of Washoe, Lyon, and
Storey.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: -477,000 acres
Population: -2,300 enrolled members
Size of Wetlands: The Wetlands Program
has monitored 22 wetlands since the
early 2000s and has recently added
new sites that were inventoried in 2021,
coming to a total of 36 wetlands. The
majority of these wetlands are small in
size and characterized as riverine, slope,
or depressional.
EPA Region: 9
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
WPP developed under a Wetland
Program Development Grant for 2015-
2018, incorporating three of four core
elements; the plan was then updated for
2018-2021, and the program is currently
updating and revising the plan for
2022-2025
Tribal Website: https://plpt.nsn.us/
Case Author: Robyn Mercer, wetlands
specialist
Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe |
Improvements to Education and
Outreach
The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe is located about 35 miles northeast of Reno,
Nevada. The reservation encompasses the entirety of Pyramid Lake, which is a
desert-terminal lake that sits at the bottom of the LakeTahoe andTruckee River
Watersheds. The Wetlands Program is funded entirely through a Wetland Program
Development Grant (WPDG).The program adds a new project through each new
grant cycle, while also continuing annual work through other components. The
tribe's most recent WPDG, which ended September 30,2021, contained one new
component focused on developing a wetlands story map through ArcGIS. The
Wetlands Program needed new and innovative ways to reach the community; this
is crucial in gaining support for program work, and in spreading information about
wetlands, their history and cultural uses on the reservation and the program.
The tribe's Wetlands Program work has also consisted of larger projects that used
community outreach events.
Vital to the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe's Wetlands Program is the continued and
expanded work being done in education and outreach. Building an education
and outreach component into the Wetland Program Plan was essential in gaining
community support and has improved the Wetlands Program in several ways
Education and outreach are useful for sharing information and getting tribe
members, as well as outside community members, involved in this work.
Education and outreach components that have been incorporated into the tribe's
program, through the WPDG, include;
• Development of the water quality website, which houses the Wetlands
Program information page.
• Visits to local schools to give presentations and conduct activities.
• Partnering with the Project WET (national water education program)
• Volunteer and outreach events (typically for restoration activities at a wetland,
as well as seed collection events).
-------
62
• Using the Pyramid Lake Museum for outreach and
information sharing.
• Conducting the Annual Youth Camp, a collaborative
effort for the tribe's entire Natural Resources
Department.
• Developing the tribe's interactive wetlands story map
through ArcGIS.
In 2019, the Wetlands Program received funding through
a WPDG to develop an interactive story map through the
ArcGIS online platform. The Wetlands Program saw a need for
additional outreach and education material to reach more
people on a user-friendly platform. The website needed
major updates, but overall was not sufficient for the amount
of information the program desired to share.The ArcGIS
story map platform is interactive, can be used on any device,
and is user-friendly.Through the development process,
the Wetlands Program collected historical documents,
gathered cultural resources and materials, and determined
the deliverables and outcomes for the story map itself. The
tribe wanted the story map to be an educational, interactive
public outreach tool that includes the Paiute culture and
history.
With the education and outreach materials and efforts, the
Wetlands Program has seen growth in community support
for the program. In addition to sharing information, the
program holds outreach and volunteer events, which
typically involve restoration activities; these events have
significantly helped in getting large projects finished and
allow participants to see first-hand the work the Wetlands
Program is doing.
Key Takea ways
• Education and outreach can help gain support for your
wetlands program and current and future work.
• Education and outreach can be achieved through many
different activities.
• Sharing your experiences through innovative outreach
platforms can not only increase community knowledge,
but also be useful resources for other scientists/programs/
tribes/etc.
• To utilize ArcGIS story maps, you do not need to be an
advanced user of ArcGIS, Basic knowledge of ArcGIS is
sufficient, and if you have no experience in ArcGIS, it is still
possible to create a usable and efficient story map.
Additional Resources
The Pyramid Lake PaiuteTribe's Wetlands story map shares
general information of wetlands, details the Wetlands Program
and its work, shares historical and cultural aspects of wetlands
on the Pyramid Lake Indian Reservation, and shares public
outreach past and future events to get the community involved.
The story map is interactive and gives the user a unique
experience when reading through the page. The link for the
story map can be found here.
In addition to the story map, the Pyramid Lake Water Quality
Program (which houses the wetlands program) has its own
website. Here, various projects and information about water
quality can be found, as well as additional information on
the Wetlands Program, including a link to the story map. This
website can be found here.
WW
Pyramid Lake PaiuteTribe watershed boundaries
map. Courtesy of Robyn Mercer
-------
Aerial photograph of Zagime (Mosquito), one of
many shallow open-water wetlands within the
Red Lake Indian Reservation. Photo courtesy of
Red Lake DNR Water Resources Program.
CATEGORIES:
Assessment
Grant-supported projects
Mapping, inventory
Partnerships with federal or state
agencies, academic institutions, or
others
Location:The Red Lake Reservation is
located across nine northern Minnesota
counties. The reservation encompasses
Lower Red Lake and a major portion of
Upper Red Lake. Lower Red Lake is the
largest Minnesota lake fully within its
borders.The Red Lakes and surrounding
wetlands are situated at the headwaters
of the Red Lake River, which flows from
the east and discharges west into the Red
River in Grand Forks, North Dakota.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: More than 835,000 acres
Population: ~10,000 members
Size of Wetlands: -541,000 acres,
classified into six types: shallow open-
water, emergent, wet meadows, scrub-
shrub, forested, and various combinations
of the five mentioned
EPA Region: 5
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
WPP developed under a Wetland Program
Development Grant for 2016-2020,
incorporating four of four core elements
(available here)
Red Lake Band of Chippewa
Indians | Wetland Mapping Within
the Red Lake Indian Reservation
The Red Lake Indian Reservation is located in north central Minnesota. Before
2016, the tribe was relying on wetland maps (from the National Wetland Inventory
or NWI) produced by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) dating
back to the 1980s.
The tribe felt that it was in its best interest to update the NWI for the contiguous
portion of the reservation to determine if wetland extent has increased or
decreased over time.
The Red Lake Water Resources Program put together a WPDG in order to conduct
the task within the WPP. Within the Plan, the Water Resources Program had stated
the desire to update the NWI for the contiguous portion of the reservation and
develop a shoreline ordinance guideline to be followed during construction
practices.
In 2016, the Red Lake Water Resources Program submitted a WPDG proposal and
was awarded the grant to fulfill this wetland mapping database and shoreline
ordinance. Once funds became available in 2017, the Water Resources Program
collaborated with the Red Lake Forestry Department to obtain land cover layers
from timber cruises and logging cuts and the USFWS to develop a methodology
that would highlight hydric soils using the ArcMap GIS tool.
After months of computer processing and physically digitizing hydric soils, the end
result was an updated NWI layer that the Red Lake Water Resources Program could
use to help inform the tribe and the Planning Department of where wetlands are
located. This new NWI layer was also used to help develop the shoreline ordinance
for new construction practices. The shoreline ordinance is similar to most county
construction ordinances, but the Water Resource Program developed more strict
guidelines to follow to help ensure that wetlands and bodies of water were given
sufficient buffer zones.
-------
64
Tribal Website:
https://www.redlakenation.org/
Case Author: Tyler Orgon, biologist, Red
Lake Band of Chippewa Indians
Key Takeaways
• Depending on the size of your reservation or the area
of interest, it would be wise to collaborate with a local
university or use a private contractor. This project took
approximately a year and half of computer processing,
digitizing, and ground-truthing roughly 10% of the
identified wetlands for one FTE. Keep in mind that the
contiguous portion of Red Lake Indian Reservation is
approximately 675,000 acres.
• You need reliably good internet and server speed. Also,
you're going to want a computer that has high processing
speed and storage if you're not using a local server.
• Lastly, you need to be an intermediate to advanced user of
ArcMap to undertake this type of project.
Additional Information and Graphics
Kloiber, S.M., R.D. Macleod, A.J. Smith, J.F. Knight, and B.J.
Huberty. 2015. A Semi-Automated, Multi-Source Data Fusion
Update of a Wetland Inventory for East-Central Minnesota, USA.
Wetlands 35:335-438. https://doi.oro/10.1007/s13157-014-
0621-3.
Rampi, L.P., J.F. Knight, and K.C. Pelletier. 2014. Wetland
Mapping in the Upper Midwest United States: An Object-Based
Approach Integrating Lidar and Imagery Data. Photogrammetric
Engineering and Remote Sensing 80(5): 439-449.
https://doi.Org/10.14358/PERS.80.5.439.
Federal Geographic Data Committee. 2009. Wetland Mapping
Standard. FGDC-STD-015-2009. https://www.fgdc.gov.
-------
Welland Restoration in the Stockbridge Munsee Community
65
Map of' PRVv S'tes inmuniy Watershed
.} \
Example story map, showing an interactive map
of potentially restorable wetlands within the
Stockbridge-Munsee Community's watershed.
Photo courtesy of Stockbridge-Munsee
Community.
in SttJfWsriiig? M-aiw
Ccvmmindty lands and in fhc
lurrneruting waivtkIhhI ha**
Iswn Mtfitfftal *imI HMfipvd
and can be visited nr. Ihr
ground to vtriry their
IxrtMitHi]«» wrfJand
rraoraisn sues
Explore Ihf map to tlrw
lOT-Midm if r pctliMHiiiily
rcMorable wetland*.
...%
5*
* * ^
• •« i* j
» : '*
CATEGORIES:
Education
Grant-supported projects
Partnerships with federal or state
agencies, academic institutions, or
others
Location:The Stockbridge-Munsee Band
of Mohican Indians Reservation is located
in Shawano County, Wisconsin. Original
tribal lands were on the East Coast in New
York and Massachusetts.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: 25,330 acres
Population: ~1,600 members
Size of Wetlands: 6,500 acres, 26% of
land base
EPA Region: 5
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
WPP developed under a Wetland Program
Development Grant for 2015-2020,
incorporating three of four core elements
(available here); updated plan for 2022-
2026 in progress.
Tribal Website:
https://www.mohican.com/
Case Author: Mike Jones, Stockbridge-
Munsee Community Wetland Specialist
Stockbridge-Munsee Community
Story Map Project
The Stockbridge-Munsee Community (SMC) was awarded an EPA Wetland
Program Development Grant to improve outreach and education efforts for
their Water Resources Programs, particularly within the tribal community.
Education and outreach are important components of a successful tribal wetland
program, as they help communicate goals, highlight accomplishments, and build
community support. The SMC Wetland Program had felt that improvement was
needed to better engage with the tribal community and decided to focus on
incorporating digital media. To accomplish this, SMC created a website containing
a series of ArcGIS story maps that highlighted the efforts of the programs.
Story maps combine maps, narratives, photos, and videos to convey information
in an engaging and interactive way. They have become a popular communication
tool throughout many different industries. While story maps can be relatively
simple to create, SMC contracted St. Mary's University of Minnesota, GeoSpatial
Services, to assist with website design and incorporating more advanced features.
The final website included six different story maps:
SMC history and cultural connection to water.
Overview of SMC water resources and the Water Resources Programs.
Summary of the SMC potentially restorable wetland (PRW) mapping project.
Interactive map of stream quality and PRWs within the watershed.
Highlights from past water resources projects.
Overview of the Miller Creek stream and wetland restoration project.
The website also includes links to several SMC management plans and assessment
reports for those seeking more in-depth information. The site is currently
being updated and expanded to highlight the work of the entire SMC Ecology
Department.
-------
66
Stockbridge-Munsee Wetland Restoration Projects
Web application showing wetland restoration projects conducted by the Stockbridge-Munsee Water Resources Program.
A story map H 10 &
+_
¥
f 4
Q
Key Takeaways
• Using multiple types of media can
strengthen education and outreach
efforts and help reach a broader
audience,
• Story maps provide an interactive
and visually appealing means of
communicating all aspects of a
wetland program, They can work
well to complement other outreach
media, such as newspaper articles
and newsletters,
• Story maps also offer a lot of
flexibility and can be as simple
or complex as needed to convey
information about a wetland
program, Basic story maps can
be created with little to no GIS
experience.
Stockbridge-Munsee Community story map
introductory page. Photo courtesy of Mike Jones,
Stockbridge-Munsee Community.
Additional Resources
Story map introduction:
https://storvmaps.arcqis.com/
-------
67
Large culvert installed through an abandoned
rail bed to restore the hydrology of a trout stream
on Stockbridge-Munsee Community land. Photo
courtesy of Alex Brauer, Stockbridge-Munsee
Community.
CATEGORIES:
Restoration, including voluntary
restoration
Education
Conflict resolution
Location: The Stockbridge-Munsee Band
of Mohican Indians Reservation is located
in Shawano County, Wisconsin. Original
tribal lands were on the East Coast in New
York and Massachusetts.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: 25,330 acres
Population: -1,600 members
Size of Wetlands: 6,500 acres, 26% of
land base
EPA Region: 5
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
WPP developed under a Wetland Program
Development Grant for 2015-2020,
incorporating three of four core elements
(available here); updated plan for 2022-
2026 in progress.
Tribal Website:
https://www.mohican.com/
Case Author: Mike Jones, Stockbridge-
Munsee Community Wetland Specialist
Stockbridge-Munsee Community |
Resolving Restoration Project
Conflict
The Stockbridge-Munsee Community (SMC) received grant funding to
remove multiple sections of an abandoned railroad bed that the tribe had
recently acquired.
The presence of the rail bed embankment and perched culverts had severely
altered the hydrologic connectivity of adjacent wetlands and a small trout stream
for over 100 years. The original project called for the removal of just under 1 mile
of rail bed to reconnect about 258 acres of wetland and 2 miles of stream habitat.
Although approved by tribal leadership, the project met resistance from some
members of the tribal community and a petition was started to halt construction.
The location and length of the rail bed made it a popular road for tribal members
to use for hunting access, ATV use, snowmobiling, and general travel. Some also
argued that it was important for access for future timber harvest.
To address concerns, the tribe's hydrologist and wetland specialist held a public
meeting. Although only a small number of people attended, the meeting provided
a forum for community members to voice their opinions and give specific reasons
why they were against the project. It also gave Environmental Department staff
the opportunity to explain the ecological benefits of the project and clear up some
misconceptions. Following the public meeting, the Tribal Council voted to suspend
the project as initially proposed. Conversations continued between Environmental
Department staff, petitioners, and the Tribal Council to evaluate options for
compromise.
In the end, a compromise was reached that changed the project design
considerably. Instead of removing the rail bed, SMC installed five large culverts to
restore hydrology. Because the grant had already been awarded, these changes
required a lot of time and effort to adjust the project plan and gain approval
from the funding source. The new design created additional challenges with
engineering, culvert construction, and installation.
Overall, the project was successful in reconnecting a large amount of stream and
wetland habitat while still providing road use by the tribal community.
-------
68
However, restoration remains somewhat incomplete, as
natural hydrology is still affected by the new structures
and remaining rail bed. The culverts also require additional
maintenance, such as clearing beaver dams, which would not
have been an issue if the rail bed had been removed.
While the tribe has several committees that provide project
review for projects affecting tribal lands, there is no formal
process for soliciting input from the tribal community. In this
case, having an efficient and consistent system for involving
the community in project planning may have allowed for
issues to be addressed early on and incorporated into the
project proposal.
Key Takea ways
• It is critically important to consider all stakeholder views
when beginning project planning, especially in large
projects that have potentially large impacts on the
community.Take the time to solicit input through things
like surveys, public meetings, or flyers.
• Try to come up with multiple project options to present
to the community. This can sometimes help people better
envision the project and make a more informed choice.
• Understand and respect that people have many different
values and priorities and be willing to make compromises.
It is easy to become too focused on ecological impacts
and benefits without considering how others may view a
project.
• Including the community early on also provides an
opportunity for community members to take more
ownership of a project so they have a vested interest in
seeing it succeed.
~ ~
Aerial photo of the abandoned rail bed post-
restoration. Photo courtesy of Mike Jones,
Stockbridge-Munsee Community.
-------
69
Under planting site in a riparian black ash wetland
to mitigate the effects of the invasive emerald
ash borer on Stockbridge-Munsee Community
land. Photo courtesy of Mike Jones, Stockbridge-
Munsee Community.
CATEGORIES:
Assessment
Grant-supported projects
Partnerships with federal or state
agencies, academic institutions, or
others
Restoration, including voluntary
restoration
Location:The Stockbridge-Munsee Band
of Mohican Indians Reservation is located
in Shawano County, Wisconsin. Original
tribal lands were on the East Coast in New
York and Massachusetts.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: 25,330 acres
Population: ~1,600 members
Size of Wetlands: 6,500 acres, 26% of
land base
EPA Region: 5
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
WPP developed under a Wetland Program
Development Grant for 2015-2020,
incorporating three of four core elements
(available here); updated plan for 2022-
2026 in progress.
Tribal Website:
https://www.mohican.com/
Case Author: Mike Jones, Stockbridge-
Munsee Community Wetland Specialist
Stockbridge-Munsee Community
Emerald Ash Borer/Black Ash
Project
Black ash wetlands are common on the Stockbridge-Munsee Community
(SMC) Reservation and are an important ecological and cultural species.
These wetlands face a major threat from emerald ash borer (EAB), an invasive
beetle that kills native ash trees.
EAB invasion is expected to cause water level rise and major vegetation
community shifts in black ash wetlands.
SMC was awarded an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Wetland
Program Development Grant (WPDG) to develop a monitoring protocol for black
ash wetlands to document pre- and post- EAB conditions. SMC established 12
long-term sites to monitor water level, water temperature, trees, shrubs, and
herbaceous vegetation. Each site also has been included as a survey location
for SMC's annual EAB trap survey. The monitoring sites will serve as controls to
guide and assess the effectiveness of mitigation and restoration efforts. SMC
was awarded a subsequent WPDG to expand the research and include sap flow
monitoring to assess the functional role of black ash and associated tree species
on the water budget of these systems. Researchers from the U.S. Forest Service and
University of Wisconsin-Madison are partners in this monitoring and research.
To mitigate EAB impacts, SMC is underplanting black ash stands with suitable
replacement species, allowing seedlings to become established before EAB
invades. Currently, priority underplanting sites are located along trout streams,
where native brook trout will likely suffer from the loss of shading from the ash
canopy. Funding from the Natural Resources Conservation Service's Environmental
Quality Incentives Program has been used to offset the planting costs. SMC has
worked with the Wisconsin Natural Resources Conservation Service to develop
new standards and payment rates that better reflect actual costs and make future
underplanting more financially feasible. Annual species-specific survival data will
help guide future underplantings by choosing the best possible replacement
species. While it is infeasible to complete these plantings in all the black ash
swamps on the reservation, the hope is that these efforts will reduce the complete
loss of these systems and protect the wetlands most vulnerable to change.
-------
70
Key Takeaways
• Invasive species are a major threat to wetlands, and major
efforts are required to limit those impacts.
• Monitoring wetlands is critical to documenting natural
conditions and identifying threats, such as invasive species,
so early action can be taken to protect the wetlands.
• Partnering with outside agencies and/or universities is
incredibly valuable, especially in research-focused projects.
These partnerships allow tribes to take advantage of
expertise and resources that most tribes do not have.
-------
GIS-based wetland delineation based on
historical aerial photos used to identify
potentially restorable wetlands. Photo courtesy
of GeoSpatial Services, Saint Mary's University of
Minnesota.
CATEGORIES:
Assessment
Grant-supported projects
Mapping, inventory
Partnerships with federal or state
agencies, academic institutions, or
others
Location:The Stockbridge-Munsee Band
of Mohican Indians Reservation is located
in Shawano County, Wisconsin. Original
tribal lands were on the East Coast in New
York and Massachusetts.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: 24,000 acres
Population: ~1,470 members
Size of Wetlands: 6,500 acres, 28% of
land base
EPA Region: 5
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
WPP developed under a Wetland Program
Development Grant for 2015-2020,
incorporating three of four core elements
(available here)
Tribal Website:
https://www.mohican.com/
Case Author: Mike Jones, Stockbridge-
Munsee Community Wetland Specialist
Stockbridge-Munsee Community |
Potentially Restorable Wetlands
Project
The Stockbridge-Munsee Community (SMC) was awarded an EPA Wetland
Program Development Grant to map potentially restorable wetlands (PRWs)
throughout eight HUC-12 sub-watersheds overlapping the SMC Reservation.
SMC contracted St. Mary's University of Minnesota, GeoSpatial Services, to conduct
the GIS-based analysis.
Multiple processes were used to map the PRWs. First, "historic wetlands" were
delineated using photointerpretation of 1938 aerial imagery. Historic and current
wetland extents and vegetation types were visually compared and, when possible,
the cause of any observed change was documented (e.g., anthropogenic change,
beaver influence).
Another method for identifying PRWs was to use overlay analysis of several
geospatial datasets, including wetland polygons, soils, and elevation-derived
hydrological rasters. Road and land
use layers were then used to identify
permanently altered wetlands where
restoration was infeasible. Very small
polygons were eliminated from the
dataset for the same reason.
When these methods were combined,
178 PRWs were identified throughout
the watershed. SMC has used this
dataset to guide wetland restoration
planning and has completed further
site evaluations. SMC staff used
Wisconsin's Wetland Rapid Assessment
Methodology to assess 50 of the PRWs
and get a better understanding of
site conditions. They also use these
locations to assess restoration potential
on newly acquired lands.
Key Takea ways
• Restoration is a key component
of the SMC Wetland Program
Identifying PRWs helps guide those
restoration efforts.
• Partnering with St. Mary's University
allowed the tribe to utilize the
University's extensive expertise in
wetland-related GIS analysis. Tribal
staff did not have the necessary
skills or time to complete that type
of analysis, so this partnership was
critical to creating a useful final
product.
-------
The Swinomish Tribe is using traditional
knowledge to incorporate cultural values into
their wetland monitoring and management.
This is one of many wetlands for which they have
identified the culturally significant plants.
Photo courtesy of Kari Neumeyer.
CATEGORIES:
Assessment
Education
Mapping, inventory
Regulatory programs
Traditional Ecological Knowledge/
cultural uses of wetlands
Location: Swinomish Reservation is on
the southeast peninsula of Fidalgo Island.
Size of Tribal Lands/Reservation
Acreage: ~10,350 acres
Population: -1,440 enrolled members
Size of Wetlands: The reservation
includes 54 wetlands across 7,450 acres of
upland and approximately 2,900 acres of
tidelands.
EPA Region: 10
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
The Swinomish Tribe does not have an
active WPP approved by EPA.
Tribal Website:
https://swinomish-nsn.gov/
Case Author: Todd A. Mitchell,
Environmental Director, Department of
Environmental Protection, Swinomish
Indian Tribal Community
Swinomish Tribe | Using Indigenous Science
to Protect Wetlands: The Swinomish Tribe's
Wetlands Cultural Assessment Project
"Traditional" wetland physical assessment modules do not adequately
identify tribal cultural values of wetlands and thus wetlands may not be
adequately protected for cultural uses.
The Swinomish Wetlands Cultural Assessment Project has developed a cultural
resource scoring module that can be incorporated into wetland assessments to
better inform wetland protections.
This project built on a 1999 wetlands inventory that identified 54 wetlands on
the Swinomish Reservation and assessed 36 for functions such as flood and
stormwater control, base flow and groundwater support, and shoreline and
erosion protection.
Local native knowledge was gathered about the traditional uses of 99 native
wetland plant species, pulling from 1950s interviews with Skagit River tribes'
elders, 2003 interviews with Swinomish elders, and other sources. The list of 99
plants were categorized by type (trees, shrubs, ferns, aquatics, and grasses), and a
cultural scoring matrix was developed based on the presence of traditionally used
plants in several use categories, including construction, ceremonial, subsistence,
medicinal, common use, plant rarity, and place of value for each wetland. The
combined score of the cultural and physical modules provides an overall wetland
score that relates to prescribed buffer protection widths.
With this local native knowledge incorporated into wetland assessments, the
Swinomish Tribe is protecting and preserving Swinomish Reservation wetlands for
both cultural uses and ecological functionality through its wetland protection law.
-------
73
Key Takeaway
The Swinomish Tribe hopes this innovative method can serve as a model in combining traditional cultural values with scientific
methods to help promote the breadth of knowledge their ancestors possessed into modern practical environmental protection.
The Swinomish Tribe is working to have this collection of research benefit the community, not only to help protect wetlands and
associated plants, but also to protect and reinvigorate the knowledge of traditional uses of those plants and places. To facilitate
the work, the tribe is developing tribal community outreach materials, including a guide on traditional plant uses to distribute the
collected information back to the community through the materials and curriculum for high school Indigenous science classes.
Additional Resources
Mitchell,T. 2005. Native Uses ofWetlands and Natural Resources Planning:The Swinomish Indian Tribal Community's
Wetlands Cultural Assessment. Practicing Anthropology 27(1): 11-14. https://swinomish-nsn.gov/media/5313/practicina
anthropology 27.1.pdf.
Mitchell,T„ and N.J. Casper. 2018. Using Traditional Ecological Knowledge to Protect Wetlands: The Swinomish Tribe's Wetlands
Cultural Assessment Project. Salish Sea Ecosystem Conference. 73. https://cedar.wwu.edu/ssec/2018ssec/allsessions/73.
Mitchell,T. A., N.J. Casper, L.Thomason Logan, E. M. Colclazier, and K.J.R. Mitchell, 2022. Using Traditional Ecological Knowledge to
Protect Wetlands: The Swinomish Tribe's Wetland Cultural Assessment. Manuscript submitted for publication.
-------
CATEGORIES:
Education
Intertribal coordination
Location: 11 native tribes in Wisconsin
Member Tribes:
Bad River Band of Lake Superior
Chippewa Indians
Forest County Potawatomi
Community
Ho-Chunk Nation
Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake
Superior Chippewa Indians
Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake
Superior Chippewa Indians
Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin
Mole Lake Band of Lake Superior
Chippewa Indians
Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin
Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior
Chippewa Indians
St. Croix Chippewa Indians of
Wisconsin
Stockbridge-Munsee Indian
Community
EPA Region: 5
Wetland Program Plan (WPP) Status:
Tribal WPP submitted to and approved
by EPA (available here, in the Region 5
section)
Working Group Website:
https://www.wtcac.org/
Case Author: Randy Poelma,
Environment Sciences Program Manager,
Ho-Chunk Division of Environmental
Health
Wisconsin Tribes | Wisconsin Tribal
Wetland Working Group
In 2001, the Wisconsin Tribal Conservation Advisory Council (WTCAC)
established a forum for the 11 federally recognized Native American tribes in
Wisconsin.
The Council aims to identify and solve natural resource issues on tribal lands by
working cooperatively on conservation issues that are important at the tribal,
state, and national levels.The Council established a wetland subcommittee
to identify tribal wetland program needs, thus establishing the WTCAC Tribal
Wetland Working Group (Wl TWWG), the first tribal wetland working group in U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 5.
The group's objectives are to promote wetland resources training opportunities
for tribes; provide for information sharing and transfer of technical expertise on
restoration, protection, assessment, and management and increase awareness
and appreciation of the cultural importance of wetlands beyond the tribes. Their
first meeting was at the 2016 Wisconsin Wetland Association Annual Science
Conference, and the Wl TWWG was made an official subcommittee of WTCAC in
March 2017.
Key Takeaway
The Wl TWWG is helping tribes broaden
their capacity to protect these culturally
important resources.
Since its inception, the Wl TWWG has
had multiple meetings, submitted and
received noncompetitive grant funding
from EPA Region 5, and held training
on wetland assessments (i.e., Wetland
Rapid Assessment Methodology 2.0,
Time-Meander Sampling Protocol for
Wetland Floristic Quality Assessment), as well as basic and advanced wetland
delineation training. Additional upcoming activities include onsite restoration site
visits and training, coordination meetings, hydric soils training, and a potential
tribal wetland video series
-------
75
Appendix C: Funding Matrix
The chart below identifies several recurring national governmental grant and funding sources that may be especially relevant to
supporting tribal wetland protection and management programs. Please note that there are numerous other potential funding
sources that may be offered on a state or regional scale. Non-governmental sources of support through foundations or corporations
may also be available. Funding cycles, application rules, match requirements and flexibility, and eligible projects and activities may
change year to year, so it is essential to contact the funding organization for the most up-to-date information.
Program Name
Funder
Match?
Useful to Know
Wetland Program
Development Grants
U.S. EPA
Yes (25% or
5% with
hardship
waiver)*
Contact the EPA Regional Enhancing State and Tribal
Programs coordinator for updated information. See
https://www.epa.aov/wetlands/wetland-proaram-
development-a rants.
CWA Section 319 Funding
U.S. EPA
Yes (40% or
10% with
hardship
waiver)*
Base grant funding and periodic competitive grants; funds
activities related to nonpoint source pollution control; to be
eliaible. tribes must haveTAS status. See httDs://www.eoa.
aov/n ds/3 19-a ra nt-oroa ra m-states-a nd-territories.
General Assistance Program
U.S. EPA
No
Funds for planning and establishing environmental protection
programs in Indian Country; for capacity building rather than
implementation. See httDs://www.eoa.aov/tribal/indian-
environmental-aeneral-assistance-Droaram-aao.
Five-Star and Urban Waters
Restoration Grant Program
NFWF
Yes (1:1)
Most awards are $10-$40K.They can fund restoration
projects; five partners are required, including the applicant.
The match requirement can be met by in-kind services. See
https://www.nfwf.ora/proarams/five-star-and-urban-waters-
restoration-arant-proqram.
CWA State Revolving Fund:
Clean Water Indian Set-
Aside
U.S. EPA
No
Low-interest loans provided by states; can be used for wetland
restoration or preservation, green infrastructure.
See httDs://www.eoa.aov/cwsrf.
CWA Section 106 Grants
U.S. EPA
Yes (5%)
May be used for monitoring and assessment and
development of water quality standards, among other things;
must haveTAS authority. See https://www.epa.aov/water-
pollution-control-section-106-arants.
Agricultural Conservation
Easement Program
NRCS
No
Financial assistance to purchase agricultural land easements
that protect the agricultural use and conservation values. See
httDs://www.nrcs.usda.aov/wDs/Dortal/nrcs/main/national/
Droarams/easements/aceo/.
North American Wetlands
Conservation Act Grant
Program
USFWS
Yes
Funds protection, restoration, and/or enhancement of
wetlands and associated upland habitats for the benefit of
wetlands-associated miaratorv birds. See httDs://www.fws.
aov/service/north-american-wetlands-conservation-act-
nawca-a rants-us-standard.
* For tribal grant applications submitted as part of a Performance Partnership Grant, no match is required. See "Class Exception to the
Cost Share Requirements forTribal and Intertribal Consortia Performance Partnership Grants (PPGs) at 40 CFR 35.536"(https://www.
epa.gov/arants/rain-2022-a01).
-------
76
Program Name
Funder
Match?
Useful to Know
Tribal Wildlife Grants
USFWS
No
Funding includes wildlife and habitat conservation planning;
laboratory and field research; mapping, field surveys, and
monitoring; preservation; education; and salaries, equipment,
consultant services, subcontracts, and travel. See
https://www.fws.aov/service/tri ba l-wild life-a ra nts.
National Fish Passage
Program
USFWS
Yes (50% goal
but flexible)
Works with local communities, including tribes, on a voluntary
basis to restore rivers and conserve our nation's aquatic
resources by removing or bypassing barriers to fish passage.
See httDs://www.fws.aov/service/fish-Dassaae-technical-and-
olannina-assistance.
-------
77
Appendix D: Additional Resources
Core Elements Framework
• EPA, Core Elements of an Effective State and Tribal Wetlands Program: https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/core-elements-
effective-state-and-tribal-wetland-proarams
Wetland Program Plan Development
• Association of State Wetland Managers, Wetland Program Plans Handbook: A Resource to Assist States and Tribes in
Developing Strategic Approaches to Achieve Comprehensive Wetland Programs (2013): https://www.nawm.org/pdf lib/
wetland program plans handbook.pdf
• EPA, State and Tribal Wetland Program Plans webpage: https://www.epa.gov/wetla nds/state-a nd-tri ba l-wetla nd-
prooram-plans
• EPA, Building State and Tribal Wetland Programs: Core Elements Framework, Wetland Program Development Grants Changes,
and Wetland Program Plans memorandum (2009): https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/2009-wetland-program-plan-
memorandum
Funding
• NAWM, Sustainable Financing webpage: https://www.nawm.org/wetland-programs/sustainable-finance/
• EPA, Wetland Program Development Grants and EPA Wetlands Grant Coordinators webpage: https://www.epa.gov/
wetlands/wetland-prog ram-development-grants-and-epa-wetlands-grant-coordinators
• EPA, Wetland Grants Database: https://ordspub.epa.gov/ords/wgd/f?p=101:50
• EPA, Wetland Program Development Grants—Category Definitions webpage: https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/wetland-
program-development-grants-categorv-definitions
• EPA, Fiscal Year 2020 and Fiscal Year 2021 National Wetland Program Development Grants request for applications:
https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-10/documents/ha fv20-21 wpdo rfa - 2020 October 29 final.pdf
• EPA, RAIN-2022-GO1: Class Exception to the Cost Share Requirements for Tribal and Intertribal Consortia Performance
Partnership Grants (PPGs) at40 CFR 35.536 memorandum (September 30,2021): https://www.epa.gov/grants/
rain-2022-g01
• EPA, Tribal Grants under Section 106 of the Clean Water Act webpage: https://www.epa.gov/water-pollution-control-
section-106-grants/tribal-grants-under-section-106-clean-water-act
• EPA, Tribal Nonpoint Source Program webpage: https://www.epa.gov/nps/tribal-nonpoint-source-program
• EPA, Indian Environmental General Assistance Program (GAP) webpage: https://www.epa.gov/tribal/indian-environmental-
general-assistance-program-gap
• EPA, EPA and Other Federal Grants That Include Wetlands Restoration webpage: https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/epa-and-
other-federal-grants-include-wetlands-restoration
Mapping, Monitoring, and Assessment:
• NAWM, Wetland Mapping Consortium Webinars webpage: https://www.nawm.org/index.php
• Colorado Wetland Information Center, Ecological Condition Assessment Methods webpage: https://cnhp.colostate.edu/
cwic/condition/ecolooical/
• EPA, Wetlands Monitoring and Assessment webpage: https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/wetlands-monitoring-and-
assessment
— A necessary foundation for development of wetland-specific water quality standards (WQS) is an understanding of
existing wetland types and characterization of desired quality/condition. This is usually achieved through wetlands
monitoring and assessment.
-------
78
• EPA, Application of Elements of a State Water Monitoring and Assessment Program for Wetlands (April 2006):
https://www.cramwetlands.ora/sites/default/files/Wetland Elements Final.pdf
• EPA, Wetland Monitoring & Assessment: A Technical Framework: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-01/
documents/wetland monitoring assessment a technical framework.pdf
• EPA, How Do I Develop a Wetlands Monitoring Program? webpage: https://www.epa.oov/wetlands/how-do-i-develop-
wetlands-monitorina-proaram
• EPA, Review of Rapid Assessment Methods for Assessing Wetland Condition (March 2004): https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZvPDF.
cai/P1003GXN.PDF?Dockev=P1003GXN.PDF
• EPA, Benefits and Applications of Wetland Bioassessments webpage: https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/benefits-and-
applications-wetland-bioassessments
• EPA, Wetland Bioassessment Resources webpage: https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/wetland-bioassessment-resources
• EPA, Nutrient Criteria Development Document: Wetlands webpage, featuring different wetlands monitoring modules:
https://www.epa.goV/nutrient-policv-data/nutrient-criteria-development-document-wetlands#wetlands
• EPA, Volunteer Monitoring Can Protect Wetlands webpage: https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/volunteer-monitoring-can-
protect-wetlands
• EPA, National Wetland Condition Assessment webpage: https://www.epa.gov/national-aauatic-resource-survevs/nwca
• EPA, Impacts on Quality of Inland Wetlands of the United States: A Survey of Indicators, Techniques, and Applications of
Community Level Biomonitoring Data (EPA/600/3-90/073, August 1990, now out of print):
— "Because of the lack of appropriate comparative studies of wetlands, the report does not provide biocriteria for
wetlands, evaluate or prioritize potential indicators of wetland condition, nor endorse specific techniques for
wetland biomonitoring and data analysis. Its intended use is mainly as a technical source document for future
design, testing, and reporting of indicators."
— "[This report] describes (a) how existing resource data might be applied in the designation of "uses" for wetlands, (b)
ambient biological criteria for wetlands might be developed or modified, and (c) how wetlands might be periodically
sampled (and data interpreted) to estimate their relative ecological condition, compliance with biological criteria, or
need for restoration."
• EPA, Methods for Evaluating Wetland Condition (March 2002-December 2008)
— These modules are a starting point to help states and tribes establish biological and nutrient water quality criteria
specifically refined for wetlands. They provide information that will help states and tribes develop biological
assessment methods to evaluate both the overall ecological condition of wetlands and nutrient enrichment.
• NC Wetlands, Developing Coefficients of Conservatism to Facilitate Floristic Quality Assessment of Wetlands in the
Southeastern United States: Project Summary: https://www.ncwetlands.org/proiect/coefficient conservatism/
• USFWS National Conservation Training Center: https://www.fws.gov/training and course guide: https://www.fws.gov/
media/nctc-course-guide
Water Quality Standards
• Environmental Law Institute, State Wetland Program Evaluations: Phases l-IV (2005-2007): https://www.eli.org/research-
report/state-wetland-prooram-evaluation-phase-iv
— This set of reports details findings of a multi-phase study designed to describe and analyze seven components of
state wetland programs—including WQS.The reports identify seven states with wetland-specific elements to their
WQS and provide a short overview of each program.
-------
Environmental Law Institute, State Wetland Protection: Status, Trends, and Model Approaches (March 2008):
https://www.eli.org/research-report/state-wetland-protection-status-trends-model-approaches
— Section III provides a summary of states with wetland-specific WQS, including a table that breaks out which elements
(designated uses, criteria, and/or antidegradation) those states have developed.
EPA, Wetland Water Quality Standards webpage: https://www.epa.aov/wetlands/wetland-water-qualitv-standards
EPA, Templates for Developing Wetland Water Quality Standards webpage: https://www.epa.gov/was-tech/templates-
developina-wetland-water-aualitv-standards
EPA, Water Quality Standards Handbook (updated 2017): https://www.epa.gov/wos-tech/water-gualitv-standards-
handbook
EPA, Our Water, Our Future video (2003): https://www.voutube.com/watch?v=EY6r810Kwac
EPA, TAS Application Template for Water Quality Standards and Water Quality Certifications: https://www.epa.gov/wqs-tech/
water-q ua litv-sta nda rds-tools-tri bes#ta b2
EPA, Model l/l/QS Template for Waters on Indian Reservations: https://www.epa.gov/wos-tech/water-gualitv-standards-tools-
tribes#tab3
EPA, Water Quality Standards for Wetlands: National Guidance (July 1990): https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZvPURL.
cgi?Dockev=00001 PW6.TXT: available as Appendix D of the Water Quality Standards Handbook, second edition (August
1994): https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2014-10/documents/handbook-appendixd.pdf
— This document provides program guidance to states on how to apply WQS to wetlands. This guidance reflects the
level of achievement EPA expected states to accomplish by the end of fiscal year 1993. Phase 1 activities presented
in this guidance include the development of WQS elements for wetlands based on existing information and science.
Phase 2 involves the further refinement of these basic elements using new science and program developments.
EPA, An Approach for Evaluating Numeric Water Quality Criteria for Wetlands Protection (July 1991):
https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-10/documents/an-approach-evaluating-numeric-wqc-wetlands.pdf:
available as Appendix E of the Water Quality Standards Handbook, second edition (August 1994): https://www.epa.gov/
sites/default/files/2014-10/documents/handbook-appendixe.pdf
— "This report provides an overview of the need for standards and criteria for wetlands and a description of the
national numeric aquatic life criteria....[It] provides a possible approach...for detecting wetland types that might not
be protected by direct application of national numeric criteria"and for making modifications based on site-specific
guidelines.
EPA, Questions and Answers on: Antidegradation (August 1985): https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZvPURL.cgi?Dockev=200137AI.
TXT: available as Appendix G of the Water Quality Standards Handbook, second edition (August 1994): https://www.epa.
Qov/sites/default/files/2014-10/documents/handbook-appendixQ.pdf
— "This document provides guidance on the antidegradation policy component of WQS and its application. The
document begins with the text of the policy as stated in the water quality standards regulation, 40 CFR 131.12 (40
FR 51400, November 8,1983), the portion of the Preamble discussing the antidegradation policy, and the response
to comments generated during the public comment period on the regulation. The document then uses a question-
and-answer format to present information about the origin of the policy, the meaning of various terms, and its
application in both general terms and in specific examples."
— Question 13 addresses the application of antidegradation policy in the case of wetland fill permits under Clean Water
Act section 404.
-------
80
Wetlands Restoration
• Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Wetlands Restoration and Management webpage: https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/
topic/Wetlands/restoration.html
Traditional Ecological Knowledge
• White House announcement and memorandum on IndigenousTraditional Ecological Knowledge: https://www.
whitehouse.aov/cea/news-updates/2021/11/15/white-house-commits-to-elevatina-indiaenous-knowledae-in-federal-
policy-decisions/and https://www.whitehouse.gOv/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/111521-OSTP-CEQ-ITEK-Memo.pdf
• EPA, The National EPA-Tribal Science Council Traditional Ecological Knowledge Workshop—June 2013: EPA Caucus Report Out:
https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-10/documents/tsc-epa-caucus-tek-workshop-report-out-final-draft.pdf
— This workshop was held in Syracuse, New York, hosted by the Onondaga Nation and the State University of New
York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry's Center for Native Peoples and the Environment. Presentations
and discussions by tribes, tribal elders, federal agencies, and tribal colleges and universities provided an overview
of current uses ofTEKthat specifically focused on climate change, environmental decision-making, and tribal
agriculture and subsistence practices.
• USGS, Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK):An Introduction and Discussion ofTEK's Potential to Inform Adaptive
Management presentation (2012): https://www.usbr.gov/uc/proaact/amp/twg/2012-04-16-twa-meetina/Attach 03c.pdf
— This 2012 event considered origins and definitions of TEK, where western science and TEK are complementary, and
barriers to integrating TEK in environmental management.
• EPA, Environmental Justice forTribes and Indigenous Peoples webinar series (2020 and 2021): https://www.epa.gov/
environmentaliustice/environmental-iustice-tribes-and-indiaenous-peoples
— This webinar series focused on implementing the agency's environmental justice policy with respect to tribes
by enhancing environmental justice integration, building capacity, and providing technical assistance. Two of
the sessions (9-15-2021 and 10-19-2021) dealt with traditional knowledge, looking at both federal agencies'
considerations and the tribal experiences working with federal agencies to include traditional knowledge in
management of resources.
Intertribal Workgroups and Consortia
• Code of Federal Regulations, Section 35.504: Eligibility of an Intertribal Consortium: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/
chapter-l/subchapter-B/part-35/subpart-B/subiect-aroup-ECFR7560dab1b022383/section-35.504
• Environmental Law Institute, Report on Lessons Learned from the Experiences ofTribal Wetlands Working Groups. Prepared
for EPA Region 5, Water Division. EPA Contract No. GS-10F-0330P. November 2021. Contact EPA Region 5 Wetlands
Program for a copy.
• PNW TWIG, Pacific Northwest Tribal Wetlands Working Group website: https://pnwtwig.wordpress.com/
• WTCAC, Wisconsin Tribal Conservation Advisory Council website: https://www.wtcac.org/
------- |