Grantee Research Project Results
Final Report: Framework for Sustainable Watershed Management
EPA Grant Number: X3831781Title: Framework for Sustainable Watershed Management
Investigators: Najjar, Ken , Todd, Craig , Woodling, John , Young, Leroy , Hantush, Muhamed , Sloto, Ron
Institution: University of Delaware , United States Geological Survey , Monroe County Conservation District , Monroe County Planning Commission , U. S. Environmental Protection Agency , Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission
Current Institution: University of Delaware , Monroe County Conservation District , Monroe County Planning Commission , Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission , U. S. Environmental Protection Agency , United States Geological Survey
EPA Project Officer: Aja, Hayley
Project Period: October 1, 2004 through May 31, 2008
Project Amount: $102,500
RFA: Collaborative Science & Technology Network for Sustainability (2004) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Pollution Prevention/Sustainable Development , Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Objective:
The Pocono Mountains’ abundant natural resources include pristine streams that support thriving trout populations. This northeastern corner of Pennsylvania is a popular destination for vacations and outdoor recreation for the 30 million people who live less than a 3-hour drive from the New York City, Philadelphia and Harrisburg metropolitan areas. The Pocono Creek is representative of streams in the region in that it has superior water quality that supports trout due to the cold, abundant and well-oxygenated water.
The Framework for Sustainable Watershed Management (Framework) was created to address a paradoxical issue many rural communities dependent on natural resources for economic stability face -- how to develop sustainably. Using the Pocono Creek watershed as a“sustainability watershed laboratory,” the aim of the Framework is to create a mechanism that would allow for development while protecting water resources in the region using science based decision-making. The Framework introduces a program that balances growth with natural resource protection, so that future generations can treasure the highly valued natural resources of the region, while enjoying economic prosperity. Implementing a sustainable watershed management plan requires concurrent coordination and collaboration of multiple municipalities with county and state agencies as well as private sector and nonprofit groups.
Summary/Accomplishments (Outputs/Outcomes):
The Framework is a systems-based program designed to manage this complex process through technical studies, plan development and implementation strategies as well as community outreach and education. The Framework is based on three transferable “pillars” of sustainability: Technology, Planning and Education. The Framework uses science as the means of developing management strategies and provides innovative and exciting alternatives for community participation in watershed-wide outreach efforts.
The technical stage evaluates the potential impacts of rapid growth on a watershed’s water resources. The planning stage develops management strategies that balance regional growth needs with natural resource protection. The education stage introduces an innovative approach to protecting the region’s water resources through a community-wide public art event that receives extensive media coverage, has high visibility and generates enthusiastic community participation. The results of these three stages of work are described below.
A. TECHNICAL PILLAR: The technical stage assesses the effects of groundwater withdrawals and land use changes on stream conditions supporting trout habitat. Trout are used as an indicator species to evaluate habitat, baseflows and water quality. Trout are highly sensitive to pollution, including excessive silt loads, increased water temperatures and reduced dissolved oxygen levels. Results of the technical work are as follows:
Distributed Hydrologic Model Predictions:
- Recharge reduced in 26 out of 29 recharge areas
- Watershed-averaged Groundwater Recharge reduced by 31%
- Daily Base Flow reduced by 31%
- Low Flow (7Q10) reduced by 11%
- Monthly Median Daily Flow reduced by 10%
- Monthly Peak of Daily Flows increased by 21%
- Annual Maximum of Daily Flow increased by 19%
3-Dimensional Ground Water Model Predictions:
- Effects of groundwater withdrawals are related to location in the drainage area
- Groundwater withdrawals and surface water withdrawals equally affect streamflow
- Base flows decreased at build-out from 3.8 to 63% at 27 streamflow measurement sites
- Simulated additional groundwater withdrawals decreased base flows at build-out further to 46 to 96%
- Base flow decreased 25% at streamflow gauging station
Hydroecological Integrity Assessment Process Predictions:
The analysis indicates that at build-out conditions (under current zoning), significant impacts on the five major components of flow (magnitude, frequency, duration, timing, and rate of change) are found in many sub-watersheds. Flow conditions that fall within the 75%-25% planning standards are guidelines for acceptable flow conditions. Since the effects of violations (impacts falling outside the 75-25% planning standards) have an accumulative impact on each life stage, all violations within a sub-watershed are counted for determining flow alteration impacts. Therefore, violations in a calendar month that occurs in more than one life history period are counted more than once. The violation results for the 37 sub-basins of the Pocono Creek watershed show:
- Frequency of low flow violated in 31 sub-basins
- Frequency of high flow violated in 32 sub-basins
- Duration of low flow violated in 33 sub-basins
- Duration of High Flow violated in 33 sub-basins
Evaluation of Hydroecological Indices - Trout Biomass Relationships
- HIP metric – trout biomass relationships are weak and highly variable
- Limited predictive power – best across longer gradients of indices
- Existing data not sufficient to support specific flow standards
B. PLANNING PILLAR: The Pocono Creek watershed is being threatened by rapid growth. However, through this study “consistency among levels of government” has been identified as the major challenge towards integrated watershed management to address this threat. The challenge begins with coordination efforts between various regulatory agencies, governmental jurisdictions and the legal differences between land use and water laws. In addition, water laws and regulations are divided according to commonly separated practice areas such as water quality, water supply and critical/sensitive environmental areas. Compounding the matter, water laws seldom account for the critical connections between surface water and groundwater resources. Often times local or regional land use plans do not take water laws into consideration and the municipalities may receive support for infrastructure that can override the regional or local land use plans. The interactions between the public and private sectors, local, county, state and federal agencies, business interests and environmental advocacy groups that have vested interests in water quality, quantity and land use can be very unproductive at times. This project began the process of breaking down walls between the various agencies, communities and individuals within the Pocono Creek watershed.
C. EDUCATION PILLAR: The first step in the outreach for watershed community building was to “go public” locally. Getting the word out about “sustainable baseflows” requires an attention grabbing, community-wide effort. The outreach effort introduced a general “Develop Right, Save the Trout” message to the public about the relationship between development, water resources and trout. The “Trout Trails and Tales” community art project utilized fifteen five foot decorated trout statues. The sculptures were placed along the “Trout Trail” that runs through the watershed. Affixed to each Trout is a chapter of the Trout Tale that describes the linkages among the region’s trout supporting waters, land use, ecological flows and the protecting the local economy.
Conclusions:
Ecological flows in the Pocono Creek’s watershed are unquestionably threatened by land development. However, developing consistency among different levels of government is the major challenge towards integrated watershed management to address the threat. Throughout this project, there has been a significant shift in not only the public’s perception about the value of water resources, but within state and local governments as well. Pennsylvania’s Sustainable Infrastructure Task Force reported on similar challenges: legislative changes needed, watershed and regional coordination for water management, use of non-structural solutions, and infrastructure and land use planning.
The transferable management strategies and tools developed for the Framework include:
- Watershed Communities: Identification of local municipalities that share common geographical and socio-economic conditions. Watershed communities have the potential to collaborate with one another to implement management strategies and share resources.
- Watershed Management Areas (WMAs): Sub-watershed delineations (Headwaters, Transitional, and Urban) based on common geography and socio-economic character that unify neighboring watershed communities approach to water management.
- WMA Specific Management Strategies: A suite of WMA specific strategies that watershed communities can implement locally, within a regional management plan.
The “Next Steps” for the Pocono Creek watershed include a 5-point plan aimed at maintaining progress towards a sustainable watershed. These steps address: 1. Organizational capacity for a long term, multi-disciplined, inclusive oversight group; 2. Revitalization of existing planning efforts and programs as planning tools for a sustainable future; 3. Broadening the scale of future sustainability efforts in the region to include the entire Brodhead watershed; 4. Further review and analysis of the regulatory framework affecting sustainable watershed planning efforts; and 5. Continuation of an education and outreach effort on protecting ecological flows through social marketing efforts.
Journal Articles:
No journal articles submitted with this report: View all 3 publications for this projectSupplemental Keywords:
Watershed planning, sustainable water management, watershed management, critical water planning areas, sustainable watershed planning, watershed integrity, natural resource planning,Relevant Websites:
www.drbc.net Exit
www.trouttrails.org Exit
www.usgs.gov
www.brodheadwatershed.org Exit
Progress and Final Reports:
Original AbstractThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.