Watershed-Based Planning in the Rio Puerco; a Community-Driven...
Transcript of Watershed-Based Planning in the Rio Puerco; a Community-Driven...
-
Watershed-Based Planning in the Rio Puerco; a Community-Driven Process
Meg Hennessey
Watershed Scientist and Project Manager - (505) 827-2867 [email protected]
Watershed Protection Section; Surface Water Quality Bureau; New Mexico Environment Department (NMED)
mailto:[email protected]
-
Making Watershed- Based Plan (WBP): The Basics
Q: What is a WBP? - A living document that identifies pollutant sources and estimates which Best Management Practices (BMPs) can remove the impairment(s) so a waterbody can meet the TMDL.
- Creates a “laundry list” of projects that could implement BMPs
- Must meet the EPA’s “Nine Elements” in order for the listed projects to be eligible for 319 funding.
A:
Image: NYSDEC
-
Surface Water Protection in New Mexico
Assessed Waters
Impaired Waters
TMDL developed
Watershed-Based Planning Process
Restoration Implementation
-
Making Watershed- Based Plan (WBP): The Basics
Q: Why would youcreate a WBP?
- To get Clean Water Act (CWA) section 319 (restoration funds).
- 319 projects can improve water quality, riparian health, stormwater runoff, risk of wildfire and post-fire flooding
- The WBP also lays out a long-term, holistic plan to improve water quality. This plan can complement or improve upon existing work.
- It cannot be used to fund the requirements of MS4 permits. However, the WBP can encompass BMPs planned under the MS4
A:
Forest thinning Image: USFS De-channelizing a stream Image: USFWS
-
Making Watershed- Based Plan (WBP): The Basics
Q: Who usually makes a WBP?
- In New Mexico the standard process has been to hire a local contractor who collects data, facilitates public meetings, and writes the plan.
- Plans can cost between $50k-$100k- The process usually takes 2-3 years from when the contract is awarded
A:
-
How do you make a WBP?
Usually in New Mexico:
- Request for Proposals from NMED
- 319 funding is awarded to a contractor
- Anywhere from $50k- $200k
- 2-3 years to collect data & draft the WBP
- NMED reviews the draft & submits to EPA
- When completed, the watershed is eligible for On-the-Ground Implementation
Rio Puerco WBP (2018):
- NMED wrote the plan in-house with RPMC
- No funding other than NMED staff time andmatching volunteer hours
- 12 mo. to complete, 3 for EPA review & accepted
- Accepted by EPA in January 2018
- August 2018: an On-the-Ground 319-funded project is moving forward
-
The Process
- NMED staff identified strong watershed groups in areas with TMDLs
- Staff made scoping trips to assess the severity of impairment and what BMPs could be needed
- Watersheds with Watershed Restoration Action Strategies (WRAS) were prioritized
- Ultimately the candidate was most influenced by the advice of the local watershed group and the body of previous work in the region
-
The Process
-
The Process
-
The Process
- Known contributors of pollutants (sediment & nutrients) were identified by stakeholders
- EPA-approved models were used to identify additional pollutant loading sources
- BMPs & funding sources were recommended from the WRAS, NMED staff, and stakeholders
- Load reduction estimates were calculated using STEPL
- Monitoring, Milestones, and Education components compiled from stakeholders.
-
The Process – Factors that Assisted with Success.
- The impairments on this reach- sediment & nutrients- each had easily accessible models that stakeholders could understand (PSIACH & STEPL).
- The historical data in this watershed (including a WRAS) had already identified, validated, and gathered stakeholders approval of many BMPs.
- The management committee has a long history of outreach in the area, and had internal goals for education milestones which were easily included to fulfill Element E.
-
Pros & Cons
- High levels of stakeholder investment increases support for follow-up projects.
- NMED staff writing the plan in-house means much less time from TMDL to Implementation
- Good feedback was gained for future in-house WBPs and increasing restoration areas.
- Large amount of area became eligible for restoration funds.
- Lack of funds meant pollutant sources were not monitored with real samples. Instead stakeholder input and models were used.
- Models are not perfect; few are adapted to New Mexico’s environment.
- Loading estimates will likely need to be updated when project monitoring provides more accurate data.
-
Future Strategies
- NMED staff are working on two WBP as TMDL alternatives, as are several states around the country.
- Ground-truthing data will be needed to ensure accuracy while creating the TDML and the WBP together. As well, NMED staff from the two teams will need to coordinate closely.
- Timing and milestones will need to meet the TMDL requirements. This may be a challenge given the normal timeline for creating a WBP in New Mexico.
-
Questions/Discussions
- Has anyone here written a Watershed-Based Plan as a TMDL alternative?
- What strategies worked well for you? What would you improve?