United States

Environmental Protection

Agency

Office of Water

(4204)

EPA-840-R-00-001

June 2001

Protecting and Restoring

Americaís Watersheds

Protecting and Restoring

Americaís Watersheds

Status! Trends! and Initiatives in Watershed Management
An interagency team developed this report with input

from multiple stakeholders. The following agencies

wished to be recognized for their contributions:

Unites States Department of Commerce

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

National Ocean Service

National Marine Fisheries Service

United States Department of Defense

Army Corps of Engineers

United States Department of Energy

United States Environmental Protection Agency

United States Department of the Interior

Bureau of Land Management

Office of Surface Mining

United States Bureau of Reclamation

United States Fish and Wildlife Service 

United States Geological Survey

United States Department of Justice

Tennessee Valley Authority

United States Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration

Many stakeholders contributed information and analyses

to the report: citizens participating in watershed management at the local level; state, tribal, and federal government personnel; academic evaluators; and non-profit institutions. This report has not been formally approved by all

of the above agencies and stakeholders, and hence the

contents of this report do not necessarily represent the

views and policies of all contributors.

Acknowledgements
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Why Watersheds? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

What is a Watershed? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

What is the Watershed Approach and

Why are We Using It?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Watershed Protection and Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Addressing Watershed Problems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

How Are Watersheds Impaired? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

The National View . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Habitat Loss and Modification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Water Quantity and Flow Modification . . . . . . . . . . 15

Chemical Pollutants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Nutrients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Sediments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Pathogens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Invasive Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Thermal Modification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

What Can be Done to Address These Problems? . . . 19

How is the Watershed Approach Working? . . . . . . . . . 20

Seven Themes of Watershed Management . . . . . . . . 21

Education and Awareness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Partnerships and Coordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Monitoring and Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Planning and Prioritization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Funding and Technical Assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

What Can be Done to Improve Progress? . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Education and Awareness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Partnerships and Coordination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Monitoring and Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Planning and Prioritization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Funding and Technical Assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

The Watershed Approach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Local Leadership and Engagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Governmental Collaboration and Support . . . . . . . . 46

Websites and Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Credits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Contents "

Contents

Front Cover Art:

Quick as my Thought ï Rachel Rees ï Age #

Submitted Independently ï Susanville! California

Back Cover Art:

Untitled ï Holly Heuer ï Grade $

Santa Ynez Valley Family School ï Los Olivos! California
% Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds
We call the earth the water planet because

water covers 70 percent of its surface. In the

United States, rivers, lakes, estuaries, and

wetlands are among the Nationís most precious resources.

Americans depend on clean water to drink, to irrigate

their crops, and to run their industries. Water resources

provide opportunities for recreation such as fishing and

swimming, and wetlands even provide protection from

floods. Rivers, lakes, estuaries, and wetlands also provide

critical habitat for both aquatic and land-based wildlife.

For example, estuaries serve as birthplace and nursery for

most saltwater fish and shellfish.

The nationís water resources have immeasurable value.

However, in monetary terms, clean water plays a staggering role in the nationís economy. Each year, nearly $200

billion of food and fiber, $60 billion of manufactured

products, and over $40 billion of tourism depend on clean

water and healthy watersheds.

The nation has improved the quality of its water resources

in recent decades, but it has not sufficiently protected and

restored all waters. Today, approximately 40 percent of

the nationís major watersheds have water quality and

habitat-related problems. The sources of these problems

are widespread and complex.

$

Untitled

Holly Heuer

Grade $

Santa Ynez Valley Family School

Los Olivos! California

Introduction

Introduction

Watershed: the land area that

drains to a body of water such as

a stream! lake! wetland! or estuary
&

team that worked with local, state, and tribal partners.

The reportís descriptions and recommendations represent

the opinions of local watershed practitioners, combined

with suggestions from studies and reports by academic

evaluators and governments. These stakeholders presented their views in roundtable discussions held throughout

the country in 1999 and 2000. These Regional Watershed

Roundtables, building blocks to a National Watershed

Forum in the summer of 2001, provided opportunities for

dialogue about issues, an exchange of information, and

collaboration on watershed protection and restoration

projects. As of December 31, 2000, more than 1,000 people

had participated in regional roundtable discussions at

more than 20 locations. 

The report will explore the advantages of a watershed

approach in greater detail in the next section, ìWhy

Watersheds?î The third section of the report, ìHow are

Watersheds Impaired?î identifies major threats to the

nationís watersheds. For example, it discusses how toxic

chemicals, invasive species, runoff with excessive levels of

nutrients and sediments, and habitat loss and modification harm watersheds. Most importantly, this third section describes how human activities generate these

threats. Automobile use contributes to polluted runoff

from roads and the deposition of airborne pollutants in

watersheds. Environmentally insensitive housing developments and farming techniques can compromise wetlands and forests and increase sediment delivery to rivers.

Demands for energy and minerals have blocked rivers

with dams, polluted waters with mine tailings, and fouled

air and water with pollutants released from coal-burning

power plants. These examples suggest that watershed

health will only improve significantly with changes to

individual land use and lifestyles and the implementation

of cleaner technologies.

The fourth section of this report, ìHow is the Watershed

Approach Working?î discusses local, state, tribal, and federal efforts to address the threats identified in the previous section. This section highlights the successes and

shortcomings of these efforts. The watershed approach

& Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

Our nation cannot solve the majority of these problems by

further regulating discharges from factories and sewage

treatment plants. Existing programs and regulations have

greatly improved the nationís waterñindustries and

municipalities have cleaned their pollutant discharges at

great expense with technological solutions. These longstanding programs will continue to be a critical element of

watershed management. Newer requirements that

address other pollutant sources (e.g., stormwater runoff)

will further improve conditions. However, the government does not regulate or control many ongoing activities

that impact watersheds.

To address the water

quality problems that

remain, our nation has

needed a more comprehensive approachñ

one that considers all

threats to a watershed.

The ìwatershed

approachî addresses

natural resource issues

that cross jurisdictions

and political boundaries. It integrates

concerns about water

quality and water

quantity and coordinates insights from the natural and social sciences. A successful watershed approach includes the support, participation, and leadership of local stakeholders and land

users. Their decisions and lifestyles profoundly impact

the nationís waters. In recent years, governments, nonprofit organizations, businesses, and citizens have used a

watershed approach to refocus their efforts to protect and

restore the nationís waters. These refocused efforts have

brought widespread positive results. 

This report considers challenges to watershed health,

recent successes of the watershed approach, and obstacles

that remain. It was developed by a federal interagency

Clean water is a critical component of

food production.
has addressed many threats to watersheds, but the nation

has not fully committed to its use. The fifth section,

ìWhat Can be Done to Improve Progress?î recommends

refinements to the implementation of the watershed

approach. Table 1 summarizes these recommendations,

the most important feature of this report. Both the fourth

and fifth sections reflect input from local watershed practitioners, academic researchers, and local, state, tribal,

and federal partners. Their input can guide efforts to

improve the watershed management process. 

The discussion in the fourth and fifth sections of this document is organized by seven key themes of the watershed

approach. These themesñeducation and awareness; partnerships and coordination; monitoring and research; planning and prioritization; funding and technical assistance;

implementation; and evaluationñprovide a useful framework for considering watershed management. A glossary

and links to relevant websites at the end of the document

should help readers understand and use the report. 

Watershed protection and restoration efforts will take

time. Population growth, organizational inertia, limited

financial resources, gaps in knowledge, and natural

Watershed Restoration Introduction '

events impede effective and lasting solutions. However,

this document can move watershed efforts in promising

directionsñit identifies successes that watershed efforts

should emulate and obstacles that they must overcome.

As watershed practitioners develop detailed plans of

action to address weaknesses in the nationís watershed

management, the recommendations in this report can

influence their work. Local citizens can explore how they

can provide better leadership and support for watershed

management efforts. Governments can explore how they

can better coordinate and enhance their technical and

financial support of local watershed efforts. 

The federal government will need to continue to advance

watershed management. For example, federal agenciesí

expertise and resources will improve watershed monitoring practices across the country. Federal agencies will also

facilitate and fund many state and local watershed-related

activities. Effective federal actions will be a critical ingredient for successful watershed protection and restoration.

Working together, citizens, businesses, watershed organizations, and government agencies can address their

shared responsibility for protecting and restoring our

nationís waters.

Future generations will enjoy the benefits of healthy watersheds.

Power generation and many other industries depend on large volumes

of useable water.
# Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

TABLE (: RECOMMENDATIONS FROM WATERSHED PRACTITIONERS

Education and Awareness

ï Ensure that key groups receive environmental education! especially local decision)makers

ï Use modern technology! multi)media campaigns! and person)to)person approaches to enhance education and

awareness programs

Partnerships and Coordination

ï Continue to develop broad partnerships for watershed protection and restoration

ï Foster greater coordination across government agencies by implementing the Unified Federal Policy on

Watershed Management

ï Continue supporting regional and local watershed partnerships with Federal Coordination Teams (also known as

Regional Watershed Coordination Teams)

ï Improve the delivery of information and support to local watershed efforts

Monitoring and Research

ï Increase coordination of existing and new watershed monitoring programs 

ï Ensure data consistency amongst all monitoring groups

ï Incorporate new indicators! such as indices of biological integrity! into watershed monitoring programs

ï Provide meaningful and timely watershed information to decision)makers and the public

ï Expand research in watershed management! especially efforts that evaluate environmental outcomes and improve

predictive models

Planning and Prioritization

ï Encourage consideration of watershed health in local planning and decision)making

ï Refine and coordinate national watershed assessments by integrating new and enhanced monitoring and

assessment data and by prioritizing actions and assistance programs

Funding and Technical Assistance

ï Increase financial and technical assistance from all sources to watershed protection and restoration efforts

ï Enhance program flexibility by expanding funding eligibilities! relaxing grant)making requirements! and addressing

priority needs

ï Develop education campaigns that inform watershed groups about financial and technical assistance tools

Implementation

ï Pursue both watershed protection and restoration activities

ï Ensure that watershed plans lead to action

ï Follow up projects with appropriate monitoring! maintenance! and evaluation activities

ï Provide adequate enforcement of watershed laws and regulations

Evaluation

ï Establish science)based indicators for watershed programs and projects

ï Incorporate outcome)oriented measures into assistance programs

ï Develop common federal indicators for assessing watershed health and common measures for tracking

and reporting performance 

ï Track results at local! regional! and national watershed scales
Why Watersheds? *

Watershed

Charity Scott

Age (&

Good Shepherd School Why Baltimore! Maryland

Watersheds?

What Is A Watershed?

No matter where you live, you live in a watershed.

A watershed is the land area that drains to a single body of water such as a stream, lake, wetland,

or estuary. Hills or ridgelines often bound watersheds; interior valleys collect precipitation in streams, rivers, and wetlands. These physical boundaries define the movement of

water and delineate the watershed. Watersheds, also known

as catchments or basins, describe geography at many different scales: a few acres may drain to a small stream or wetland; a few large rivers may drain into an estuary where

fresh and salt water mix; about 40 percent of the U.S. land

area in the lower 48 states drains to the Mississippi River.

Watersheds are thus ìnestedîñlarger watersheds such as the

Mississippi River basin encompass many smaller watersheds. Figure 1 depicts a typical watershed. 
erations into decision-making.

It considers local stakeholder

input and national and state

goals and regulations. A watershed approach recognizes needs

for water supply, water quality,

flood control, navigation,

hydropower generation, fisheries, biodiversity, habitat

preservation, and recreation;

and it recognizes that these

needs often compete. It establishes local priorities in the context of national goals and coordinates public and private

actions. A watershed approach

offers a blueprint for water

resource management.

A comprehensive watershed

approach improves on the fragA “watershed approach” uses hydrologically defined

areas (watersheds) to coordinate the management of

water resources. The approach is advantageous because

it considers all activities within a landscape that affect

watershed health. Ideally, a watershed approach will

integrate biology, chemistry, economics, and social considmented approach the nation has used in the past. The

United States has developed separate laws for clean

water, clean air, fertile soils, productive fisheries, healthy

forests and robust communities. It created separate agencies to administer those laws at federal, state, and local

levels and on public and private lands. These agencies

have different missions, authorities, and modes of operation. The property boundaries of landowners and the

political boundaries of states, tribes, counties, and municipalities are often unrelated to watershed boundaries. As

a result, when citizens or governments have tried to coordinate water resource protection or restoration efforts,

they have often found it difficult to do so. Evidence suggests that the watershed approach improves collaboration

and information sharing among diverse partners and

leveraging of resources.

This document frequently uses the terms protection and

restoration. Watershed protection measures reduce

Watershed Protection and Restoration

Watershed Protection and Restoration

In 1890, John Wesley Powell, second director of the U.S.

Geological Survey suggested that the federal government organize the western United States into watershed

units These watershed units would be governing bodies

and would facilitate an integrated approach to natural

resource management Although the government did

not implement his plan Powell’s perspective underscores

the importance of our relationship with the land and the

need to consider it as we protect and restore aquatic

resources

What is the Watershed Approach

and Why are We Using It?

FIGURE 1. The area hydrologically defined by a watershed is affected by many

processes and issues. A “watershed approach” coordinates their management.

Protecting and Restoring America’s Watersheds
Why Watersheds? ((

impacts to waterbodies and prevent degradation.

Protection measures include both voluntary and legally

mandated actions. Paying farmers to set aside conservation easements, for example, ensures that some lands

have limited human impacts, while water quality permits

limit pollutant releases into waterbodies. Watershed protection measures that prevent degradation before it occurs

typically cost less and succeed more often than watershed

restoration measures implemented after watersheds are

impaired. Protected watersheds are more likely to be

healthier watersheds.

Watershed restoration is more difficult to define. The

Wetlands Subcommittee of the Federal Geographic Data

Committee defined wetland restoration to provide a standard for federal agency reports of their restoration activities. This group defined restoration as ìthe manipulation

of... physical, chemical, or biological characteristics... with

the goal of returning natural/historic functions.î

Similarly, in the 1992 report ìRestoration of Aquatic

Ecosystems,î the National Research Council defined

restoration as the ìreturn of an ecosystem to a close

approximation of its condition prior to disturbance.î

That report also states, ìThe term restoration means the

re-establishment of pre-disturbance aquatic functions and

related physical, chemical, and biological characteristics.î

In summary, restoration activities seek to restore healthy

aquatic communities and provide clean waters for recreation, irrigation, and public consumption. For a more

detailed discussion of watershed restoration principles,

visit the Environmental Protection Agencyís ìRiver

Corridor and Wetland Restorationî webpage

(www.epa.gov/owow/restore).

Watershed restoration can be challenging. Most restoration

efforts do not show immediate results. Some restoration

activities can even unintentionally harm the environment.

All restoration efforts require a long-term commitment. 

Addressing Watershed Problems

A watershed approach highlights relationships among

land management decisions, everyday actions, and watershed health. The next section of this report discusses

threats to watershed health such as pathogens, chemical

pollutants, and invasive species. Most are caused by commonplace activities: clearing forested lands for new housing developments; paving new roads and driveways for

transportation; over-applying fertilizers and pesticides to

lawns; overworking farmlands and timberlands; or postponing maintenance to home septic tanks. Only by understanding these problems and reducing our impacts can we

assure healthy watersheds for our use and enjoyment.

ìWhen we try to pick out anything by itself!

we find it hitched to everything else in the universe,î

John Muir

Streambank stablization projects restore vegetation to stream corridors,

reducing stream temperatures and erosion and benefiting aquatic and

terrestrial species in the watershed.
Both natural events and human activities affect

watersheds. Natural events such as storms, fires,

and droughts can suddenly alter watershed conditions at large scales. While some natural events have negative impacts, these events are often critical for long-term

ecological health. For example, a fire may damage a forest,

but it also rejuvenates the forest by spreading seeds of key

species and adding necessary nutrients to the forest floor.

Individual human activities typically have smaller and

more predictable impacts, but their cumulative impact can

be far greater. Increases in population, land development,

and economic activity increase demands for water, waste

disposal, and raw materials. These activities increase pollutant releases to water and air and degrade or fragment

natural habitats. Without appropriate management, these

changes can seriously compromise watershed health. 

(- Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

How are

Watersheds Impaired?

Seeing the Pond from the Pipe

Emily Forbes

Kindergarten

Kennesaw! Georgia

Lewis Elementary School
Assessments of watershed conditions often measure physical, biological, and chemical watershed variables, such as

soil stability, plant and animal diversity, and water quality.

Assessments can also measure watershed functions such

as nutrient cycling, temperature control, and water availability. This section briefly describes the condition of the

nationís watersheds in the context of threats to watershed

health. The remainder of the report describes the successes and obstacles of watershed approaches that address

these threats.

The National View

As required by the Clean Water Act, states, tribes, territories, and interstate commissions develop biennial assessments of streams, lakes, wetlands, and estuaries for a

National Water Quality Inventory Report to Congress. In

1998, these parties reported that about 40 percent of their

assessed streams, lakes, and estuaries were not clean

enough to support uses such as fishing and swimming

(see Figure 2).

Although these parties assessed only 23 percent of the

nationís streams and rivers in 1998, they reported that

more than 291,000 miles of rivers and streams do not fully

support aquatic life, fish consumption, swimming, and

drinking water uses. Most of the United Statesí population, more than 218 million people, live within ten miles

of an impaired waterbody. 

Figure 3 outlines the major activities that impact watersheds and the threats that result. The remainder of this

section describes the threats in greater detail. Most watersheds are impacted by more than one activity, and many

watersheds are impacted by all activities outlined in

Figure 3. Successful watershed approaches address many

threats to watershed health with a coordinated and comprehensive strategy.

How are Watersheds Impaired? ("

FIGURE 2. 1998 Impaired WatersñNational Summary

Alaska

Hawaii

Puerto Rico

Virgin Islands

No Waters Listed .$/ $)(+/ (+)-$/ 0-$/

The colors in this figure show the percentage of waters threatened within watersheds! divided by the total number of water miles in those watersheds,
Habitat Loss and Modification

Historically, this nation has not fully appreciated its

dependence on healthy ecosystems. From coastal estuaries to mountain forests, human activities such as residential and commercial development, recreation, and

resource extraction have changed, fragmented, and

destroyed natural habitats.

Habitat loss has severe impacts and can be permanent.

For example, coastal wetlands converted to commercial or

residential uses provide neither nursery habitat for estuarine fish nor protection from hurricane storm surges.

Wetland losses have also contributed to significant

declines in waterfowl populations. Forest losses impact

many plant and animal species in both aquatic and terrestrial habitats. Forest and wetland losses increase overland

flow and reduce filtration of sediments and pollutants,

increasing the likelihood that pollutants will reach

streams, rivers, and estuaries.

Habitat modification is less obvious, but it is detrimental

nonetheless. For example, when communities build roads

over streams, they modify the stream habitat. Road culverts prevent fish passage and seriously impact fish populations. Anadromous fish, species that migrate from

freshwater to saltwater and back to freshwater, cannot

breed successfully if culverts block their migration routes.

Anadromous species may have value for recreational and

commercial fishermen or they may provide a critical food

supply for commercially valuable fish. 

Urban streams often provide good examples of habitat

modification. When communities straighten and channelize urban streams and line them with concrete, they modify the vegetative and physical structure of the riverine

habitat, increase river velocities during rainstorms, and

decrease river volumes during dry periods. Straightened

and channelized streams also carry more sediments and

chemical pollutants to their receiving waters. 

The examples of road construction and stream urbanization demonstrate how habitat modification can affect flow

(% Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

Habitat Loss and Degradation

Water Quantity and Flow Modification

Chemical Pollutants

Nutrients

Sediments

Pathogens

Invasive Species

Thermal Modification

Activities that Impact Watersheds

Resulting Threats

R

ecreation and

To

uris

m

ï

W t a

s Ur e es and

T

r

a

n

s

fe

rs

ï

Forestry ï Agriculture ï W

a

s

te

Disposal ï

ops nar T

tr at oi

n

ï

Po

w

er G

e

n

e

ration

ï

Industrial Discharges

ï

Urba

niz

a

tio

n ï Resource

Ext ar

t c

noi

FIGURE 3. Threats to Watershed Health
rates, stream ecology, and the characteristics of the waterbody itself. Appropriate engineering techniques and other

mitigating measures that consider the natural structure

and function of watersheds can reduce these impacts.

Water Quantity & Flow Modification

People, plants, and animals depend on sufficient water

flows in rivers and streams. If stream flows are low, fluctuating, or blocked by physical barriers, these changes can

affect many plant and animal species. These changes can

also affect recreational opportunities. American rivers

suffer from these problems because our citizens have

devised many methods to capture, control, store, and

divert water. These alterations support drinking water

supplies, hydropower, irrigation, flood control, manufacturing uses, and recreation.

For example, in the last century the United States has led

the world in dam construction to block and harness

rivers. Few human actions have more significant impacts

on a river system than dam construction. Dams change

upstream and downstream habitats, water temperatures,

water quality, and sediment movement. They also block

or slow the movement of materials and organisms

throughout a watershed. 

Chemical Pollutants 

When chemical compounds are introduced into a watershed, they can compromise drinking water systems, contaminate fish, and degrade water quality. Chemicals reach

waterbodies from many sources, including factories, wastewater treatment plants, cars, boats, lawns, and crop fields.

For example, insecticide concentrations in urban and suburban waters commonly exceed guidelines for aquatic life

protection. Homeowners, commercial properties, and golf

courses most commonly apply these insecticides.

Acid mine drainage from abandoned mine lands threatens

natural resources, public health, and community vitality.

How are Watersheds Impaired? ($

WETLAND LOSS RATES

The lower %# states have lost more than $+ percent of

their wetlands (over (++ million acres) since ('#+, The

U,S, Fish and Wildlife Service recently estimated that

the United States still loses over $+!+++ acres of wet)

lands each year, States and tribes most often identify

road construction! residential development! and the

conversion of lands for agricultural use as the leading

reasons for loss, Although the nation is far from its

goal of gaining (++!+++ acres of wetlands annually! the

annual rate of loss has been decreasing in the last five

decades as indicated by the adjacent chart,

$++!+++

%++!+++

"++!+++

-++!+++

(++!+++

+

(*$+s)(*'+s (*'+s)(*#+s (**+s

FIGURE 4. Wetland Acres Lost Annually 

If coastal rivers and streams are

dammed or otherwise altered by

human activities, anadromous

fish cannot swim upstream to

reproduce.

In the nationís coal fields

and hard rock mining

areas, sulfur-bearing minerals in abandoned mines

and refuse piles contaminate adjacent and downstream waters with acidic

and metal-laden waters.

The contamination often

eliminates all aquatic life

and compromises drinking waters.

Mercury contamination

prevents human consumption of fish in many
lakes, streams, rivers, and coastal areas. Fish consumption advisories for mercury have more than doubled in

number from 1993 to 1998, affecting nearly 2000 waterbodies nationwide. In January 2001, the Food and Drug

Administration issued a nationwide advisory recommending pregnant women and women of childbearing

age not eat certain kinds of marine fish, including shark,

swordfish, and some mackerel due to high levels of methyl

mercury found in these species. Coal-burning power

plants and urban runoff are significant sources of mercury.

Our nation has effectively managed discrete point sources

of chemical pollution, but widespread nonpoint sources of

chemical inputs to waterbodies from property owners,

resource users, and everyday activities continue to threaten watershed health.

Healthy marine and freshwater environments require the

nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus. However, human

activities can contribute excessive amounts of these nutrients to a waterbody, causing overwhelming aquatic plant

growth. The plant growth consumes large amounts of

oxygen and prevents sunlight penetration of the water

column. This process, eutrophication, threatens all water

organisms. It reduces oxygen, impairs water clarity, and

displaces key species. Excessive nutrients can also spur

harmful algae blooms that can kill fish and potentially

harm people. For example, Pfiesteria outbreaks and some

red tides can introduce toxins that poison fish and shellfish and threaten the health of humans that come in contact with affected waters.

The U.S. Geological Survey’s National Water Quality

Assessment indicates that streams and groundwater in

agricultural or urban areas almost always contain levels of

nitrogen and phosphorus that can cause excessive plant

growth. The l998 National Water Quality Inventory lists

nutrients as a leading cause of water pollution. States

reported that excessive nutrients have degraded more

than 3.4 million acres of lakes and reservoirs and 84,000

miles of rivers and streams. The National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration’s National Estuarine

Eutrophication Survey found moderate to high eutrophic

Nutrients

Impervious surfaces increase surface runoff and accompanying

volumes of sediments, nutrients, and chemicals.

Protecting and Restoring America’s Watersheds

Waters downstream

of abandoned mines

and refuse piles can

be contaminated with

acids and metals. In

this photograph, the

orange color of the

water dramatically

identifies this

contamination.

FIGURE 5. Impervious cover and Surface Runoff
conditions in 65 percent of the estuaries in the survey. 

In agricultural areas, runoff containing fertilizers and

manure elevates nutrient levels, while in urban areas

nutrients typically come from failing septic systems and

the excessive fertilization of suburban lawns, golf courses,

and commercial developments. In some estuaries, air

deposition of nitrogen contributes a significant portion of

the nitrogen found in the water. Nitrogen is released into

the air by the combustion of fossil fuels in cars, power

plants, and factories, and returns to the watershed in rainwater and air currents.

Excessive nutrients in our coastal waters are a leading

cause of hypoxic zonesñareas with little or no oxygen. A

hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico has eliminated most

aquatic life in an area averaging 5,000 square miles during

the summers from 1996-2000. In Long Island Sound,

another hypoxic area may have killed millions of shellfish

in the summer of 2000. 

Nutrient contamination can also impact drinking water

resources. Excessive nutrient concentrations can cause

unpleasant tastes and odors, increase drinking water

treatment costs, and violate drinking water standards.

Sediments

Sediments are eroded soils transported by wind and

water. Excessive volumes of sediments entering waterbodies can diminish water clarity, alter habitats, impair

fish spawning success, and increase drinking water treatment costs. Timber harvesting, mining, agriculture, and

construction can introduce excessive sediments if improperly managed. These activities remove vegetation and

manipulate soils, allowing wind or water to carry loosened sediments to nearby waterbodies. 

Increases in impervious surfaces exacerbate this problem

(see Figure 5). Impervious surfaces include buildings,

concrete sidewalks, and asphalt driveways and roads.

Increases in impervious surfaces decrease infiltration of

How are Watersheds Impaired? ('

FOREST LAND ROAD TRENDS

Improperly managed forest land roads can erode and

increase sedimentation in watersheds, In (**#! the

Forest Service constructed only -($ miles of new roads!

one)tenth of the construction in (*##, In addition! the

Forest Service has decommissioned -$!+++ miles of

roads in the past decade,

The Forest Service receives only about -+ percent of

the funds necessary to fully maintain Forest Service

roads and meet intended safety! service! and environ)

mental standards, As of December -+++! the Forest

Service estimates it has a road maintenance and repair

backlog of approximately eight billion dollars,

rainwater into soils and increase surface runoff. Increases

in surface runoff increase soil erosion and sediment transport to streams, rivers, lakes, and estuaries. 

Pathogens

Pathogens are microorganisms that cause disease.

Pathogens in freshwater and estuarine environments

include both bacteria and viruses. Citizens can be

exposed to aquatic pathogens when they drink water, eat

fish or shellfish, or come into contact with surface waters

during work or recreation. Gastroenteritis, hepatitis, and

cholera are examples of diseases associated with waterborne pathogens. The Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention estimate that waterborne microbial infections

cause up to 940,000 illnesses and 900 deaths each year in

the United States.

Potentially harmful bacteria can enter waters from sewage

treatment plant discharges, stormwater outflows, boat discharges, malfunctioning septic systems, and runoff from

poorly managed animal feeding operations. Once released

in the water, pathogens disperse, contaminating the water

column, bottom sediments, and aquatic life. Although
some communities regularly monitor shellfish harvesting

areas and bathing beaches, communities cannot detect all

pathogen outbreaks before the public is at risk. Enhanced

prevention provides the only practical solution.

Invasive Species

Species are considered invasive if their presence in an

ecosystem will cause environmental harm, economic

harm, or harm to human health. Invasive species can displace native species, alter predator-prey relationships,

destroy crops, and decrease ecosystem resiliency. Invasive

species are usually non-native species, and they are often

exotic species from another part of the world. Native

species can also be characterized as invasive if they dominate their ecosystem due to human induced changes to

that ecosystem.

When species are moved outside their normal range into a

new region, they can create havoc. Species are unintentionally transported in cargo bays, in ballast waters, and

(# Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

INVASIVE SPECIES: HOW BIG IS THE PROBLEM?

ï Scientists have linked invasive species to '+ percent

of this centuryís extinctions of native aquatic species,

ï By one recent estimate! invasive species cost private

landowners more than (++ billion per year in treat)

ment costs and lost productivity, This estimate does

not consider public costs of wildlife loss! displacement

of threatened and endangered species! and reduced

opportunities for fishing! hunting! camping! and other

recreation, 

ï Invasive species control has been considered one of

the top priorities of the U,S, Fish and Wildlife Service

since (***,

ï Five hundred scientists recently asked political leaders

to make aquatic nuisance species control a priority

issue,

Zebra mussels introduced from Europe have invaded the waters

of 20 states in the U.S. since 1988. They have overwhelmed

pipes used for municipal and industrial water supply, and

studies suggest that their invasion may severely impact native

mussel populations.

Concentrated animal feeding operations are large agricultural

enterprises that keep and raise animals in confined situations.

Poorly managed concentrated animal feeding operations can

threaten watersheds with pathogens, excessive nutrients, and

chemical pollutants.
on the clothes of tourists, or they are intentionally imported and exported for landscaping, aesthetics, animal control, and recreation. Not all non-native species become

pests in new locations, but the gypsy moth, nutria, zebra

mussel, hydrilla, sea lamprey, and kudzu are examples of

non-native invasive species that have caused massive economic and ecological losses. When their new ecosystem

lacked the natural controls of their native ecosystems,

these invasive species overran millions of acres of rangelands, forestlands, riparian areas, and waterbodies. 

Thermal Modification

Many activities can cause thermal modification, or temperature change. Industrial sites or power generation

plants often discharge warm water. The removal of

streambank or aquatic vegetative cover reduces shade

and increases stream temperatures. Dams may increase

or decrease water temperatures depending on their

design and operation. For example, a large dam with a

deep storage reservoir and deep release point may discharge cool waters, while a dam with multiple release

points may discharge mixed warm and cool waters.

Stormwater management programs can also cause temperature changes by altering the volume and timing of

stormwater delivery to waterbodies. 

Increased or fluctuating temperatures can harm fish and

other aquatic organisms whose life cycles and breeding success are inextricably linked to water temperature. Thermal

modification has eliminated many fish species and other

aquatic organisms from streams across the nation. 

How are Watersheds Impaired? (*

What Can Be Done to

Address These Problems?

The threats discussed in this section impair a significant

percentage of the nationís watersheds. What can be done

to address these problems?

Water resource management has traditionally focused on

specific sources of pollution such as sewage discharges,

certain chemical pollutants such as dioxins or heavy metals, or narrowly defined water resources such as a river

segment or wetland. While these approaches have successfully addressed many specific problems and should

receive continued support, they often fail to address widespread problems that degrade watersheds. 

In the past decade, many water resource practitioners

have increased emphasis on watershed approaches to

address land and water resource problems. They have

considered the human activities that generate threats to

watershed health. These practitioners have tried to integrate appropriate scientific, programmatic, and political

perspectives to remedy these problems. The next section

of this report describes progress of these watershed

approaches.
T his section examines local, state, tribal, and federal use of the watershed approach to address the

threats presented in the previous section. How

well is the watershed approach working? This section

reports the successes and shortcomings of selected local

watershed efforts and governmental programs to date.

Many perspectives inform this report. The information

and opinions in this chapter and the next reflect comments from local watershed stakeholders and studies

from university scholars and state, tribal, and federal governments. Two groups deserve special recognition for

contributing ideas to this report. A series of Regional

Watershed Roundtable discussions has provided invaluable insights from diverse groups of watershed stakeholders. These roundtable discussions, building blocks to a

National Watershed Forum in the summer of 2001, provide opportunities for dialogue about issues, an exchange

of information, and collaboration on watershed protection

and restoration projects. As of December 31, 2000, more

than 1,000 people had participated in Regional Watershed

Roundtable discussions at more than 20 locations. 

The second group, a Watershed Reinvention workgroup,

identified opportunities to orient federal programs and

processes on a watershed basis and make these programs

-+ Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

How is the Watershed

Approach Working?

Waterfall

Jennie Fong

Grade ((

Archbishop Mitty High School

San Jose! California
more flexible, collaborative, and innovative. Federal

watershed practitioners from all agencies and departments that impact water quality participated in the workgroup. The workgroupís recommendations highlight

opportunities for flexibility, collaboration, and innovation

in watershed management efforts. The federal watershed

practitioners developed their recommendations after considering the experiences of the workgroup participants,

analyzing agency programs, and evaluating recent studies

from private organizations and academic institutions.

Although local watershed stakeholders, government

agencies, and academia consider the watershed approach

from different perspectives, they make similar recommendations for national watershed protection and restoration

efforts. 

Seven Themes of

Watershed Management

Seven themes of watershed management are commonly

found in local watershed efforts and can frame a discussion of watershed approaches (see Figure 6). The seven

themes are the following:

ï Increasing public education and awareness

ï Developing new partnerships and coordinating efforts

ï Collecting necessary information through monitoring

and research

ï Establishing appropriate plans and priorities

ï Obtaining funding and technical assistance

ï Implementing solutions

ï Evaluating the results

Assessing the results of watershed management efforts in

the United States remains more subjective than quantitative. Therefore, this report highlights examples of successes and shortcomings for each of the seven themes of watershed management using input from multiple sources.

Education and Awareness

Education and awareness efforts inform citizens, corporations, and governments about watershed health and also

about management activities that address watershed

threats. Education programs inform the public about the

impacts of individual, daily decisions on watershed

health. They help citizens understand connections

between watershed health and their quality of life. 

Many watershed education programs have been very successful. For example, the Blackfoot Challenge education

program and Project NEMO (Nonpoint Education for

Municipal Officials), highlighted in this section, are excellent examples of watershed education efforts that influence behavior. 

Watershed practitioners believe that peer education programs are the most effective way to change local land

management practices. Many programs, including the

Department of Agricultureís Natural Resource

Conservation Service extension program (the nationís

largest conservation technical assistance program), rely on

How is the Watershed Approach Working? -(

Monitoring

and

Research

Partnerships

and

Coordination

Education

and

Awareness

Evaluation

Implementation

Planning

and

Prioritization

Funding

and Technical

Assistance

FIGURE 6. Seven Themes of Watershed Management 
person-to-person interaction to educate landowners and

implement projects that improve watershed health. 

The federal government increasingly uses advanced technologies to distribute information and services for watershed management. For example, the Watershed

Information Network (www.epa.gov/win) organizes information and services for watershed practitioners. The network provides information about major laws governing

water resources and links to watershed partners, including

federal and state agencies and local watershed groups. It

provides descriptions, application procedures, and deadlines for funding and technical assistance programs. In

addition, the network provides information about on-line

and in-person training. For example, the network contains

links to the Environmental Protection Agencyís Watershed

Academy (www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/wacademy),

an educational resource that offers many on-line training

modules. Individuals can use the modules at their own

pace to learn about topics including ecology, watershed

planning, and best management practices.

-- Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

ìThe way we perceive the nation as

individual resource users! researchers and decision)makers 

has a direct and major impact on how we

perceive problems and solutions,î

New Strategies for Americaís Watersheds 

Education programs inform landowners about the impacts of

individual, daily decisions on watershed health.

DESIGNING EDUCATION EFFORTS WITH

MULTIPLE COMPONENTS

THREATS: SEDIMENTS! NUTRIENTS! THERMAL

MODIFICATION

Private land use practices in the Blackfoot River water)

shed (Montana) have increased sedimentation! nutrient

loads! and temperatures in the river, In response! stake)

holders in the Blackfoot watershed designed a compre)

hensive collection of education and awareness programs, 

The Blackfoot Challenge! a grassroots organization! spon)

sors teacher education programs that demonstrate how

teachers can blend watershed resource education activi)

ties into their existing curricula, The organization also

hosts workshops on weed management and alternative

ranch income (e,g,! ecotourism and guest ranching) for

private landowners in the watershed, Wildlife manage)

ment experts hold meetings about threatened and

endangered species in the watershed such as grizzly

bears! wolves! bull trout! and west slope cutthroat trout,

These education programs have helped to change land

use habits in the watershed! improving watershed health,
These efforts notwithstanding, watershed roundtable discussions consistently note that watershed education programs are still needed for citizens, watershed groups, corporations, local governments, and government officials. In

a 1998 poll sponsored by the Roper Center for Public

Opinion Research, nearly half of the people surveyed

thought that factories were still the leading cause of water

pollution and did not know how to do more to protect the

environment. Only 22 percent of Americans knew that

nonpoint source pollution is now the nationís leading

water quality challenge and that changes in their everyday

actions could have a positive effect. While watershed education programs have had many successes in recent years,

this poll suggests that Americans still do not know the

causes of watershed health impairments and therefore

watershed education programs need still greater emphasis.

Partnerships and Coordination

Watershed practitioners consistently say that effective

partnerships provide the foundation for watershed protection or restoration activities. Local partnerships drive

most watershed activities. In addition, since governments

own land, regulate activity, and provide assistance, coordination within and among government agencies also

benefits watershed health. Coordinating the actions of

local watershed groups with government agencies

increases efficiency.

Local Watershed Partnerships

Watershed partnerships can include any person or group

interested in watershed health. Typical partnerships

include many watershed stakeholders:

ï Landowners 

ï Elected officials

ï Representatives of federal, tribal, state, and local

government agencies 

ï Agricultural organizations

ï Business organizations

ï Environmental organizations

ï Student groups and senior citizen organizations

By including many interest groups, local watershed partnerships tap the varied skills of different partners,

increase credibility, reduce duplication of effort, and maximize results from limited funds. 

How is the Watershed Approach Working? -"

EDUCATING MUNICIPAL OFFICIALS ABOUT NONPOINT

SOURCE POLLUTION

THREATS: NUTRIENTS! SEDIMENTS! CHEMICAL POLLUTANTS

Project NEMO (Nonpoint Education for Municipal

Officials) educates local government decision)makers in

Connecticut about land uses that cause nonpoint source

pollution, The program makes technical presentations to

town engineers! planners! and commissioners and recom)

mends a three)tiered planning strategy based on natural

resources! site design! and stormwater best management

practices, The University of Connecticut Cooperative

Extension System developed the NEMO project in part)

nership with two other units of the university: the

Department of Natural Resources Management and

Engineering and the Connecticut Sea Grant Program,

The University of Connecticut Cooperative Extension

System manages the NEMO program with the assistance

of the Environmental Protection Agency! the Connecticut

Department of Environmental Protection! the

Connecticut chapter of the Nature Conservancy! and

EnviroGraphics! Inc,

BANKING GRASSLANDS TO ENHANCE RANCHING IN

NEW MEXICO

THREAT: HABITAT MODIFICATION

The Valle Grande Grass Bank is a partnership of ranch)

ers! environmentalists! and Forest Service personnel

that rehabilitates hard)used rangelands in northern

New Mexico, Ranchers that overuse rangelands can

increase erosion and displace native species, The grass

bank provides alternative grazing lands so that ranch)

ers can rest and restore their home pastures, The

Conservation Fund! a nonprofit organization! manages

the grass bank, Ranchers deliver their cows to the

grass bank and plant their overused lands with desired

vegetation, Ranchers usually participate in the grass

bank for several growing seasons to allow the new veg)

etation to become established and resilient,
In recent years, local watershed partnerships have grown

in number. The Environmental Protection Agencyís

Adopt Your Watershed program (www.epa.gov/adopt)

and River Network (www.rivernetwork.org), a national

nonprofit organization, both recognize over 3,000 local

watershed groups. Citizens increasingly participate in

these efforts because they are increasingly aware of watershed health, and state and federal governments increasingly support watershed groups. States such as

Washington, Oregon, and New Jersey encourage watershed planning by supporting the establishment of local

watershed councils. All states provide varied funding

and technical assistance for watershed planning efforts.

Various federal agencies also encourage local watershed

efforts with financial and technical support. Local watershed efforts often receive federal funding indirectly from

state and tribal grant programs, but they also receive

direct support from federal grant programs. For example,

the Environmental Protection Agency supports local partnerships with Watershed Assistance Grants. These small

grants provide seed money for fledgling watershed groups.

The city of Alpine, TX received $25,000 from the Watershed

Assistance Grant program to form a community partnership for the restoration of Alpine Creek. The restored

creek will serve as an urban wildlife refuge and an important flood control channel. Other federal agencies support

similar programs, such as the Clean Streams Initiative

sponsored by the Office of Surface Mining. Without such

support, local watershed residents may not have enough

capacity to sustain long-term restoration efforts.

Partnerships in Government

State and federal governments own land, regulate activities, and provide assistance, and therefore governmental

coordination on these issues benefits watershed health.

Historically, responsibilities for watershed management

have been very fragmented. In recent years, state and

federal programs have reorganized governmental water

programs to adopt a more unified approach. The following paragraphs identify many recent improvements to

partnerships in government. However, multiple forums

have observed that governmental coordination needs further improvement.

The federal government issued the Unified Federal Policy

for Ensuring a Watershed Approach to Federal Land and

Resource Management in October 2000. The policy guides

management across federal lands and water resources. It

calls for federal agencies to use a watershed approach; to

assess watersheds on federal lands with a common, science-based method; to focus federal funding and resources

in jointly selected watersheds; and to enhance collaboration with tribes, states, and interested stakeholders.

-% Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

PROTECTING LAKE KEOWEE IN SOUTH CAROLINA

THREATS: NUTRIENTS! CHEMICAL POLLUTION!

SEDIMENTS! PATHOGENS

The Friends of Lake Keowee Society (FOLKS) is a "!+++)

member organization dedicated to protecting regional

lakes in South Carolina, The all)volunteer group has a

diverse membership that includes retirees! scientists!

farmers! realtors! and boat dealers, Every realtor and

boat dealer in the region provides new homeowners and

boat owners with free memberships to FOLKS, The

organization believes that homeowners and boat owners

that use the lake have a vested interest in a healthy lake,

Since the early (*'+ís! population growth rates in this

region of South Carolina have increased four)fold,

Increased urban runoff and septic system failure have

accompanied this rapid growth, These changes threaten

the lakeís ability to provide drinking water for local

municipalities and attract tourism and recreation,

FOLKS volunteers have worked with state agencies!

Clemson University! and the Appalachian Council of

Governments to secure aerial surveys and maps of lakes!

coordinate sediment and siltation monitoring! and assist

with volunteer water monitoring, This broad coalition is

working vigorously to maintain watershed health in the

Lake Keowee region,
To further coordinate federal resources, regional offices of

federal government agencies established Federal

Coordination Teams, also known as Regional Watershed

Coordination Teams, in twelve large river basins. On

these teams, regional directors of federal agencies work

with federal staff, state and tribal representatives, as well

as nonprofit organizations to improve interagency coordination and leverage resources. For example, the MidAtlantic Federal Coordination Team signed an agreement

to coordinate government programs to address sprawl

(highlighted in this section).

The Five Star Restoration Grant Program is another example of federal coordination. The Environmental Protection

Agency and National Marine Fisheries Service, along with

the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, National

Association of Counties, National Association of Service

and Conservation Corps, and the Wildlife Habitat Council

have jointly developed this program that supports streambank and wetland restoration. The program provides

challenge grants and technical support to communitybased restoration projects. Each project involves five or

more partnersñ ìfive starsîñin the restoration effort.

Project partners include local government agencies, elected

officials, community groups, businesses, schools, and environmental organizations. Each partner contributes funding, land, technical assistance, workforce support or other

services to match the federal assistance. 

Coordinating Government Assistance

with Local Watershed Actions

State and federal governments coordinate with local

watershed efforts in many ways. The following paragraphs highlight a few examples.

The Tennessee Valley Authorityís Watershed Teams are an

excellent example of federal government coordination

with local watershed efforts. The twelve teams help local

watershed coalitions build capacity, identify priorities,

and implement restoration and protection activities. Each

team serves a specific watershed, learning about local

How is the Watershed Approach Working? -$

MID)ATLANTIC FEDERAL COORDINATION TEAM SIGNS

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT TO ADDRESS SPRAWL

Seven federal agencies committed to protect vital

resources by coordinating federal programs and help)

ing state and local governments implement -$ pilot

projects in the mid)Atlantic region to manage growth,

The pilot projects will use innovative approaches to

achieve the following objectives:

ï Provide positive incentives for environmentally sen)

sitive development and the conservation and man)

agement of natural lands,

ï Furnish technical assistance to state and local gov)

ernments in understanding and addressing the

impacts of development practices on the environ)

ment! natural resources! and working resource lands,

ï Encourage appropriate revitalization of urban resi)

dential communities and redevelopment of aban)

doned commercial! industrial! and brownfields sites,

ï Eliminate programmatic incentives to harmful

sprawl development,

ï Reinforce state and local leadership and objectives in

managing growth! creating livable communities! and

protecting natural resources, 

The Environmental Protection Agency! Department of

Agriculture! Department of Transportation!

Department of the Army! Department of Commerce!

Department of the Interior! and Department of

Housing and Urban Development signed this agreement,

The mid-Atlantic

region has lost

significant forested

and wetland areas

to environmentally

insensitive suburban development.
resource issues and building community trust. The

Watershed Teams facilitate coalitions among government

agencies, businesses, and community organizations, and

they supply environmental assessments and monitoring

data that help local coalitions establish priorities for

watershed restoration and protection actions. The twelve

teams have helped more than 100 stakeholder groups in

the Tennessee Valley, including many groups founded

with Watershed Team assistance. The Watershed Teams

measure their performance by considering improvements

to watershed health and local success in obtaining public

and private contributions. 

In addition to coordinating federal government activities

(discussed under the heading ìPartnerships in

Governmentî), Federal Coordination Teams have also

helped local watershed efforts. For example, the Southeast

Federal Coordination Team provided technical expertise in

environmental assessment, monitoring, and restoration to

the Hiawassee River Watershed Coalition for a project in

Brasstown Creek in western North Carolina. As a result of

the Federal Coordination Team support, the Hiawassee

River Watershed Coalition successfully applied for nearly

two million dollars in funding for this project from the

North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund. The

Federal Coordination Teams have also convened the previously mentioned regional roundtables to facilitate coordination among watershed stakeholders from public, private, and nonprofit sectors. Roundtable participants have

shared information about successful projects and explored

new ideas. More than twenty regional roundtables have

been conducted, and the National Watershed Forum in

June 2001 will bring together regional participants and

perspectives. 

Local watershed groups recognize the efforts of governments to assist them, but many practitioners suggest that

governments can still better organize their support for

local actions. For example, watershed data, technical

assistance, and financial assistance remain disorganized

within state and federal departments, and organization

across departments is rare. In addition, many government programs lack an effective point of contact for

watershed groups.

Assessing Partnership Success

While watershed practitioners suggest that partnerships are

the most important element of any watershed effort, their

progress in forming and successfully utilizing partnerships

may be gradual. Stakeholders often hold different views,

interests, and responsibilities, so trust and mutual understanding may be slow to develop. Even after watershed

stakeholders form functioning, sustainable partnerships,

the partnerships may not produce immediate, tangible

environmental results. Because the process of improving

watershed health is usually a gradual one, it is difficult to

assess the success of watershed partnerships. Nonetheless,

most evaluations of watershed partnerships suggest that

their efforts can improve coordination, use resources more

efficiently, and make decisions more effectively.

Monitoring and Research

Watershed monitoring and research provide information

about watershed health, watershed function, and the

-& Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

RESTORING ESTUARINE WETLANDS WITH A

FIVE)STAR PARTNERSHIP

THREAT: HABITAT LOSS

People for Puget Sound! a nonprofit organization in

Seattle! Washington! organized a diverse partnership to

restore estuarine habitat for wild Chinook salmon, This

partnership includes volunteer organizations! businesses!

urban youth corps! the Student Conservation

Association! the Environmental Protection Agency! the

Army Corps of Engineers! and the International Marine

Association for Protection of Aquatic Life, The Five Star

Restoration Grant Program awarded a grant to the part)

nership to restore previously altered parkland to tidal

influence, The restored wetlands will provide mudflat

and salt marsh habitat for wild Chinook salmon and

other estuary)dependent species,
impacts of human actions. Watershed monitoring evaluates the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics

of watersheds. Water chemistry monitoring is the most

traditional and common monitoring program.

Monitoring of physical watershed characteristics such as

sediment loading or channel stability is more rare.

Biological monitoring is most rare. Biological monitoring

evaluates the diversity of living organisms and is considered by many experts to be the most complete measure of

watershed health. All three methods of monitoring help

to identify specific impairments and threats to watershed

health. Watershed groups use this information to understand threats to watersheds and prioritize their efforts.

Watershed research explains how watershed ecosystems

work and how they can vary. Research also assesses the

results of watershed protection and restoration activities.

Ideally, this research informs future watershed actions.

Monitoring programs organized by local watershed

groups, states, tribes, and federal agencies contribute

valuable information to watershed management efforts.

For example, the Environmental Protection Agency collects water quality data from states and synthesizes the

data for the biannual National Water Quality Inventory

and the List of Impaired Waters. The U.S. Geological

Surveyís National Water

Quality Assessment program makes selected

measurements of water

quality in sixty river

basins and aquifer systems. The breadth and

consistency of this monitoring program allow for

nationally consistent

assessments. The

National Water Quality

Assessment program

recently released a

report assessing pesticide and nutrient levels

in these sixty watersheds

and will soon release

further assessments.

The Fish and Wildlife

Service has developed

National Wetland

Inventory maps for more

than 90 percent of the contiguous United States. The maps

are available for wetland trend analysis and watershed

planning. The Natural Resources Conservation Service

inventories resources on private lands. The Forest Service

monitors the size, health, and location of the nationís

forests and woodlands.

The U.S. Geological Survey also works with states, local

governments, and tribes to collect watershed data and

develop research projects. Projects have delineated drinking water source areas; assessed water quality in lakes,

rivers, and estuaries; monitored best-management practices; and identified sources of microbial contamination.

In a separate program, the U.S. Geological Survey has

established research partnerships with 51 universities. 

Improved water quality models provide an interesting

intersection of watershed monitoring and research. The

U.S. Geological Surveyís National Water Quality

How is the Watershed Approach Working? -'

Water chemistry monitoring is

the most traditional and common

type of monitoring performed.

Volunteer monitoring programs contribute valuable

information to watershed management efforts.
the U.S. Geological Survey, the Department of

Agriculture, and the Environmental Protection Agency,

notes that coastal waters lack consistent, comprehensive

monitoring data. Many watersheds lack data about habitat quality. Few monitoring programs consider biological

indicators of watershed health.

Also, many national and state monitoring programs provide data for watersheds that encompass hundreds of

square miles, whereas local actions require data related to

an individual town or a specific stream reach. The existing watershed data are often uncoordinated and inconsistent. Local monitoring data, state monitoring data, and

federal monitoring data may be incompatible. As a result,

watershed groups may be unable to analyze trends in

watershed health.

Watershed research, too, has significant gaps. For example, research is just beginning to explore linkages among

watershed componentsñrivers, wetlands, floodplains,

upland areas, groundwater, and the atmosphere. Because

watershed management requires an interdisciplinary

approach, more research is needed to explore integrating

biology, chemistry, and physics with the social sciences. 

Also needed is greater understanding of the public health

and environmental impacts of chemical mixtures, chemical degradation products, and emerging contaminants

such as endocrine disrupters and pharmaceuticals.

Watershed models with greater accuracy and reliability

would be very useful for this purpose and many others.

Models can serve to reduce the overall costs of performing monitoring.

Practitioners ultimately need research that assesses individual projects. Such research could help practitioners

understand the long-term effects of restoration and protection projects and the factors that most influence project

success or failure. 

Planning and Prioritization

Watershed planning and prioritization activities guide

public and private actions in a watershed. They ensure

-# Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

MONITORING SOURCE WATER FOR HERBICIDE

CONTAMINATION IN PENNSYLVANIA

THREAT: HERBICIDES

The Philadelphia Suburban Water Company intakes

water in the lower Neshaminy Creek watershed in east)

ern Pennsylvania, The watershed is largely suburban!

but approximately ($ percent of the watershed remains

agricultural, The water company works with the Bucks

County Conservation District and the Penn State

Cooperative Extension Service to reduce levels of herbi)

cides occurring in peak spring runoff,

This partnership is trying to quantify the problem with a

concentrated monitoring program, Philadelphia

Suburban tests samples hourly at the treatment plant

after significant rainfall events between May ($ and June

"+, The water company also collects grab samples from

key sites in the watershed, The Bucks County

Conservation District and the Penn State Cooperative

Extension Service organize forums at which the water

company shares this information with local farmers,

The information encourages farmers to follow herbicide

application instructions and adopt relevant best manage)

ment practices,

Assessment program is developing promising models of

nationwide surface water quality. The Environmental

Protection Agency is testing models that predict pesticide

occurrence in streams and reservoirs.

Despite the many national monitoring programs, more

and better data are needed. Watershed practitioners find

that data are often incomplete because of limitations and

differences in various local, state, tribal, and federal monitoring programs. For example, the Environmental

Protection Agencyís 1998 National Water Quality Inventory

reflected state, tribal, and territory monitoring of only 23

percent of the nationís rivers and streams, 42 percent of

the nationís lakes, ponds, and reservoirs, and five percent

of the nationís ocean shoreline miles. The new ìCoastal

Research and Monitoring Strategyî a cooperative product

of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
that restoration actions are focused, coordinated, and efficient. State, federal, and tribal governments often establish broad plans and priorities. Local land use and watershed planning efforts address smaller-scale issues.

In 1998 and 1999, states, tribes, and territories developed

Unified Watershed Assessments that identified watersheds most in need of restoration. The Unified Watershed

Assessments were developed quickly with available information. Since these state, tribal, and territorial assessments required collaboration and agreement across government programs, their compilation is the nationís most

comprehensive statement of watershed priorities. In

developing Unified Watershed Assessments, participants

used resources such as state lists of impaired and threatened waters, federal and state lists of endangered species,

and data from nonprofit organizations. States, territories,

and tribes determined that 60 percent of the nationís

watersheds do not meet clean water and other natural

resource goals requiring restoration action. They also

determined that 15 percent of the watersheds need preventive action to sustain water quality and aquatic

resources. Participants are developing watershed restoration action strategies for many of their highest priority

watersheds. These comprehensive watershed plans allow

governments to target funding and technical assistance to

watersheds with the greatest needs. 

The National Estuary Programís Comprehensive

Conservation and Management Plan process provides a

model of regional watershed planning and priority setting. Representatives of government, industry, and public

interest groups work together to develop comprehensive

plans for estuary activities. These plans reflect the priorities of estuary stakeholders. They strive to conserve and

enhance the natural, cultural, recreational, social, and economic resources of each watershed.

Local planning increasingly considers an array of environmental issues. Local ordinances have always

addressed traditional issues such as building density and

land use, but in the past they have not reflected environmental concerns. Zoning decisions impact watersheds by

How is the Watershed Approach Working? -*

RESEARCHING THE MANAGEMENT OF FRESHWATER

INPUTS TO ROOKERY BAY

THREAT: PHYSICAL BARRIERS

The -$ reserves in the National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administrationís National Estuarine

Research Reserve System monitor estuarine trends in

-( states and territories, The Rookery Bay Reserve

(Florida) is studying how freshwater inflows affect fish

species and how these inflows can be mitigated,

Research by the Florida Department of Environmental

Protection indicates that Hurricane Andrew and other

major storm events altered the estuaryís freshwater

inflows! damaging habitats within the reserve, These

alterations had immediate and long)term impacts on

the food chain by harming species eaten by commer)

cially and recreationally important fish, 

Human impacts! such as dam or weir construction!

alter the flow of freshwater and nutrients into estuar)

ies, When storms threaten upstream flooding! fresh)

water is released downstream, The National Oceanic

and Atmospheric Administrationís National Marine

Fisheries Service awarded funding to the Rookery Bay

Reserve to restore natural freshwater inflow patterns

during storm events, The reserve proposes to comput)

erize a weir on Henderson Creek to allow for more nat)

ural flow of freshwater into the estuary, The reserve

hopes that this project will enable other water man)

agement districts to manage water flow similarly,

FOUR ADVANTAGES OF THE UNIFIED WATERSHED

ASSESSMENT APPROACH

PROVIDED BY THE MARYLAND DEPARTMENT

OF THE ENVIRONMENT

(, Allowed the state to build on an existing analytical

framework that it had been developing,

-, Gave the state an opportunity to go beyond tradi)

tional water quality issues and perform a truly inte)

grated assessment of its watersheds! including habi)

tat! landscape! and human)related factors,

", Encouraged the state to bring together a truly

diverse group of agencies and individuals that histor)

ically had not collaborated on management efforts,

%, Focused restoration in an integrated! watershed)

based manner,
influencing the location of commercial, residential, and

industrial buildings in communities. For example, construction in a floodplain often reduces wetland acreage,

and environmentally oriented zoning plans attempt to

prevent or mitigate these impacts. Local land trusts and

national land conservation organizations preserve open

space in watersheds benefiting species, water quality, and

the community. In these examples and many more, local

planning has important consequences for the health of

local watersheds and economies. The Environmental

Protection Agency has posted model ordinances on the

webpage ìModel Ordinances to Protect Local Resourcesî

(www.epa.gov/owow/nps/ordinance).

Despite many successful planning and prioritization

efforts nationwide, watershed activities remain difficult to

organize and integrate. Various government agencies and

stakeholder groups address different issues at different

scales.

For example, it is not clear that the Unified Watershed

Assessment process has improved coordination within

state and federal governments. Although these assessments are state-wide, multi-program statements of watershed priorities, many government funding and technical

assistance programs have not used them to target their

resources. Federal agencies do not consistently integrate

voluntary programs (e.g., the Environmental Protection

Agencyís nonpoint source management program, the

Department of Agricultureís Environmental Quality

Incentives Program) or regulations (e.g., regulations for

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations) in the identified priority watersheds. In addition, stakeholders in

high priority watersheds have not consistently implemented restoration action strategies. These priority

watersheds need greater attention from watershed practitioners and these practitioners may require more financial

and technical assistance to successfully implement the

restoration action strategies. The process of developing

statewide water quality and habitat assessments has,

however, fostered greater collaboration between state

agencies and amongst all decision-makers. The process

may therefore serve as the starting point for the development of comprehensive natural resource assessments in

the future.

Many local planning efforts and land use ordinances still

need revision. For example, at a roundtable meeting for

southeastern states, seven of nine state delegations identified land use planning and zoning as their highest priorities. They found that existing planning efforts and zoning

ordinances often fail to protect watersheds and sometimes

encourage watershed degradation. Many zoning laws

unintentionally encourage urban sprawl and discourage

investment in inner cities. For watershed management to

be effective, these local issues must be addressed.

"+ Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

MANAGING THE SAN MIGUEL WATERSHED THROUGH

COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT

THREATS: FLOW MODIFICATION! SPECIES LOSS!

NUTRIENTS! SEDIMENTS

Stakeholders in the San Miguel Watershed in southwest

Colorado began a comprehensive watershed manage)

ment approach in (**+, Numerous studies! including

rare plant and animal surveys! instream flow studies! a

fish survey! a land health assessment! a hazardous waste

inventory! water quality studies! and river restoration

studies assessed the condition of the watershed, A broad

coalition of partners used information from the studies

and public meetings to draft a watershed management

plan, This plan will conserve and enhance the natural!

cultural! recreational! social! and economic resources of

the watershed,

The management plan strives to reduce impacts to the

watershed from large)scale development, Large)scale

development can cause excessive nutrient inputs! heavy

sedimentation! and erosion, As a result of accompanying

population increases! communities often over)appropriate

water and reduce instream flows, To address this problem!

the San Miguel Board of County Commissioners has placed

new stipulations on construction! sewage disposal! fertiliz)

er use! blasting! and new roads in the watershed, These

stipulations helped San Miguel County earn an

Environmental Protection Agency Outstanding

Achievement Award and a National Association of Counties

Award for community)based ecosystem protection,
Funding and Technical Assistance

Funding and technical assistance provide local watershed

groups with the means to protect and restore watersheds.

Watershed management requires that work be done and

materials and services be purchased. Watershed actions

require both human and financial resources. Governmental,

nonprofit, or private sources provide this support.

The federal government has many funding programs that

support watershed actions. The Environmental Protection

Agencyís recent revision of the Catalog of Federal Funding

Sources for Watershed Protection (www.epa.gov/win/

resources/html) identifies 69 federal grant or loan programs from twelve federal departments and agencies. The

catalog indexes the programs by name, agency, and keyword. These funding opportunities are critical, but many

are limited to specific purposes, recipients, or geographic

areas, and some offer minimal funding.

The array of funding resources for watershed management can overwhelm watershed groups. However, environmental finance centers at nine universities provide

publications, analyses of financing alternatives, training,

and technical assistance. The environmental finance centers at the University of Maryland and Boise State

University develop workshops for local governments that

discuss watershed financing alternatives. The

Environmental Protection Agencyís National Estuary

Program is also conducting workshops that discuss

financing alternatives for estuary plan implementation

activities. These programs help watershed practitioners

identify and exploit creative financing opportunities. 

The federal government recently enhanced some financial

assistance programs for watershed protection and restoration activities. The Department of Agricultureís

Conservation Reserve Program now provides greater

financial incentives to farmers that retire environmentally

sensitive cropland. These incentives include rental payments, cost-share payments for best management practices, and technical assistance. The recent Transportation

Equity Act for the 21st Century provides billions of dollars for transportation improvements, including environHow is the Watershed Approach Working? "(

PLANNING FOR IMPROVED WATER QUALITY WITH

NEW GRADING ORDINANCES IN MAUI! HAWAII

THREATS: SEDIMENTS! NUTRIENTS

Maui County includes the islands of Maui! Molokai! and

Lanai, Hawaiiís Department of Health considers the

waters of West Maui! Kahului Harbor! and the South

Molokai Shoreline to be impaired because they often

exceed nutrient and turbidity standards, The county

has identified construction and grading projects as a

primary source of water quality problems,

In August (**#! the Maui County Council revised its

grading ordinances, The county now requires that all

grading work use erosion control and sediment best

management practices, The county informed the pub)

lic! the construction industry! general contractors! gov)

ernment officials and inspectors! and Soil and Water

Conservation District officials about the new ordinance!

effective erosion control plans! and new technologies,

This program has inspired other counties in the state to

consider similar ordinances,

The Natural Resources Conservation Service provides direct

technical assistance to farmers across the nation.
In the same period, the Department of the Interiorís Office

of Surface Mining has more than doubled its funding for

the Appalachian Clean Streams Initiative. This program

addresses acid mine drainage, nonpoint source pollution

from abandoned coal mines. The program has provided

$20 million as seed money for 99 projects in 11 states. In

the last few years, the Environmental Protection Agencyís

nonpoint source grants program has doubled its assistance to states and tribes to nearly $240 million. The

Agencyís Clean Water State Revolving Fund provides

loans for many types of watershed protection and restoration projects, including wastewater, stormwater, nonpoint

source, and estuary protection projects. The program

manages more than $34 billion in assets.

While the federal government has enhanced and expanded

existing funding programs, it has also developed entirely

new programs. For example, the federal government

developed both the Five-Star Restoration Grant program

and the Watershed Assistance Grants program in 1998.

The Environmental Protection Agencyís Watershed

Assistance Grants program supports local watershed partnerships during their development and contributes to

watershed protection and restoration actions. In 1999 and

2000, the program awarded more than one million dollars

to 60 projects. The demand for these grants far exceeds

available resources: in 2000 alone, 400 proposals from local

groups in 46 states requested nearly nine million dollars.

One source of technical information for watershed efforts

is the Stream Corridor Restoration Handbook

(www.usda.gov/stream_restoration). The document presents current knowledge of stream corridors and stream

corridor restoration. Fifteen federal agencies and other

watershed groups developed this document to address

many stream corridor restoration scenarios.

Other technical assistance programs support private

landowners. The Natural Resources Conservation Service

provides direct technical assistance programs to farmers

across the nation. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serviceís

Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program works with

"- Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

RESTORING WETLANDS WITH TRANSPORTATION

FUNDS IN MISSISSIPPI

THREAT: WETLAND LOSS

In (**+! the Mississippi Department of Transportation

purchased State Line Bog and Dead Dog Bog! two wet)

lands on "&+ acres in southeast Mississippi, The

Department of Transportation used Transportation

Equity Act grant funds to work with the Mississippi

Chapter of The Nature Conservancy and the Mississippi

Department of Wildlife! Fisheries! and Parks to restore

the bogs, The restoration project is designed to offset

unavoidable wetland impacts that will occur during the

construction of Mississippi highways, Paper companies

had owned these properties and degraded the habitat by

draining the bogs and harvesting their trees,

Project partners backfilled drainage ditches to restore

wetland hydrology and used periodic prescribed burns to

gradually remove logging debris and create an appropri)

ate vegetative structure, These changes are restoring

the insectivorous pitch)

er plant communities

that once dominated

the bogs,

The Mississippi

Department of

Transportation used

Transportation Equity

Act grant funds to restore

wetlands with rare insectivorous pitcher plant

communities.

mental protection and restoration projects. This act and

an earlier act, the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act, have created and protected many acres of

wetlands with mitigation projects. In the last four years,

states have restored or created 2.4 acres of wetlands for

each acre that has been unavoidably impacted by transportation projects. 
landowners to restore watersheds by planting native

species, removing invasive species, improving wetland

hydrology, and reconstructing in-stream aquatic habitat.

Landowner interest in the Partners for Fish and Wildlife

program exceeds the programís resources. 

The financial assistance programs highlighted in these

paragraphs will help to protect and restore watershed

health, but further assistance is still needed. Recent studies by the Environmental Protection Agency suggest that

communities will need billions of dollars over the next

twenty years to upgrade and maintain their wastewater

treatment infrastructure. 

Watershed practitioners at the Regional Watershed

Roundtables suggest that, compared to watershed needs,

watershed assistance programs are modest. Many of

these practitioners suggest that substantial increases in

funding and technical assistance are necessary, including

additional grant and loan programs. The watershed practitioners noted that technical assistance programs cannot

meet the demand for on-the-ground implementation of

protection and restoration measures. Most federal agencies lack field-level, watershed-based personnel. Private

practitioners increasingly provide technical assistance,

but local stakeholders cannot always secure assistance

when they need it most. Practitioners at the roundtables

asked for expanded federal and state programs that are

less restrictive and provide more financial and technical

support for local watershed efforts.

In addition, watershed practitioners note that specific elements of watershed management are typically overlooked

in assistance programs. Watershed groups struggle to

secure funding for staff salaries, monitoring and research,

and project evaluation and maintenance because many

assistance programs are restricted from supporting these

activities. While federal laws place restrictions on some

programs, many agencies develop other restrictions themselves. Federal, tribal, and state assistance programs do

not effectively coordinate their efforts to target priority

watershed problems. Multiple mandates and conflicting

How is the Watershed Approach Working? ""

RESTORING BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD WETLANDS IN

ARKANSAS WITH THE WETLANDS RESERVE PROGRAM

THREAT: WETLAND LOSS

The Raft Creek Bottoms in northeast Arkansas was

once an extensive tract of bottomland hardwood for)

est, Bottomland hardwood forests are especially valu)

able for wildlife breeding! nesting! and habitat, In the

(*&+s and (*'+s! landowners converted most of the

Raft Creek Bottoms to cropland, In recent years!

landowners have worked to reverse these actions, 

With the help of the Department of Agricultureís

Wetlands Reserve Program! landowners have restored

the "!+++ acres in the Raft Creek Bottoms,

Landowners planted bottomland hardwoods in approx)

imately '+ percent of the area while creating the

largest manmade herbaceous wetland in Arkansas on

the remaining "+ percent of the tract, Waterfowl by

the thousands now visit the bottomlands in the winter,

Shorebirds and water birds that recently were rarely

seen are now common sights on these tracts,

The Department of Agricultureís Wetland Reserve

Program is a voluntary program that offers landowners

financial incentives to protect! restore! and enhance

wetlands on their property, Landowners that partici)

pate in the program may sell a conservation easement

to the Department of Agricultureñthe landowner limits

future use of the land! yet retains private ownership,

Landowners may also receive cost)share funding from

the Department for wetlands restoration activities, In

this case! landowners and the Natural Resources

Conservation Service developed plans for wetland

restoration and protection, Landowners continue to

control access to the land and may lease the land for

hunting! fishing! and other undeveloped recreational

activities, The program has enrolled *($!+++ acres

nationally since (**&,
scientific evidence stymie attempts to focus limited funding and technical outreach. Further coordination of governmental assistance opportunities will help local watershed groups navigate their way through the many programs in many offices of many departments that have different eligibilities, requirements, and application schedules.

Implementation

In this report, implementation describes actions that beneficially impact watershed health. Citizen stakeholders, the

private sector, and government agencies implement these

actions. Implementation includes pollution prevention,

wastewater treatment, wetland restoration, enforcement,

invasive species control, and critical habitat protection.

This report frequently mentions ìwatershed protection

and restoration.î National watershed health depends on

both watershed protection and watershed restoration.

However, watershed practitioners note that watershed

protection (the prevention of degradation) is more costeffective and more likely to succeed than watershed

restoration. Practitioners also note that ìrestoredî watersheds are rarely as ecologically valuable as protected

watersheds. Nonetheless, watershed restoration is necessary because many of the nationís watersheds are already

degraded. 

Federal agencies account for watershed protection and

restoration actions in many ways. For example, the Fish

and Wildlife Service estimates that it has protected or

restored more than 325 million acres of wetlands as part

of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. The

Service estimates that in the last five years it has also

helped to protect more than 160,000 acres of coastal habitat and reopen more than 2,200 miles of streams to

anadromous fish. The Department of Agriculture reports

that in the last four years it has created nearly one million

miles of conservation buffers and restored nearly one million acres of wetlands. Working with state agencies and

other partners, the Bureau of Land Management, the

Forest Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, and

the U.S. Geological Survey are restoring 120 abandoned

mine sites in 12 states as part of the Interdepartmental

Abandoned Mine Land Watershed Cleanup Initiative. 

While new programs often command attention, longstanding programs are more important than ever for

watershed health. For example, the National Pollutant

Discharge Elimination System requires that states and

regional offices of the Environmental Protection Agency

issue permits to effluent dischargers, providing a baseline

of protection for waterbodies everywhere. Even as watershed efforts do more to alleviate nonpoint source pollution, watershed health depends on permits that manage

point sources. However, some Watershed Roundtable

stakeholders suggest that governments do not sufficiently

enforce regulatory programs. The Green Gauge 2000, an

"% Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

STOPPING THE SPREAD OF THE TAMARISK ON THE

MOJAVE RIVER! CALIFORNIA

THREAT: INVASIVE SPECIES

The Mojave River flows above ground year)round in the

Afton Canyon of the southern California Desert, The

above ground flow provides riparian wildlife habitat

amid the desert, However! the salt cedar! or tamarisk!

has invaded this habitat! drastically reducing wildlife

populations near the river, A native of the

Mediterranean region! the salt cedar creates an environ)

ment that is too salty for Californiaís native plants, It

has replaced much of the native vegetation and offers lit)

tle food or shelter to wildlife, The salt cedar also con)

sumes large volumes of water! reducing the amount

available to other plants! fish! and wildlife, 

Working with local conservation districts! the Natural

Resources Conservation Service! the Army Corps of

Engineers! and other partners! the Bureau of Land

Management is removing salt cedar and replacing it with

native vegetation, To date! the Bureau of Land

Management has treated more than "++ acres of

tamarisk and planted over '!+++ native willows and cot)

tonwoods along the Mojave River, Native wildlife is

returning to the banks of the Mojave River after a

decadeís absence,
annual survey tracking the American publicís attitudes on

environmental issues, confirmed stakeholder concerns by

noting that public support for strengthening environmental regulations has been increasing over the past decade.

In 2000, nearly half of the surveyed population agreed

with the statement, ìenvironmental regulations do not go

far enough.î Compliance and enforcement activities are

necessary to prevent watershed degradation and to identify violations of environmental laws. 

Three exemplary projects are highlighted among these

paragraphs about implementation. Many other watershed projects deserve similar recognition. Other documents, such as Watershed Success Stories (www.cleanwater.gov/success) offer more examples of successful implementation projects.

Not all watershed protection and restoration efforts are

successful. Watershed stakeholders often do not fully

implement solutions to watershed problems for many

years, if at all. Partnerships can break down, priorities can

change, and funding can cease, causing implementation to

be stymied. Sometimes watershed efforts are adversely

affected by droughts or storms. Even when successfully

completed, many restoration projects are poorly maintained, negating their previously positive impact. 

How is the Watershed Approach Working? "$

CONTROLLING SALINITY IN THE COLORADO

RIVER BASIN

THREAT: SALINITY

The Colorado River and its tributaries provide munici)

pal and industrial water for more than -" million peo)

ple in seven states and irrigation water for nearly %

million acres of land, The threat of salinity is a major

concern to agricultural! municipal! and industrial users

in both the United States and the Republic of Mexico,

Damages in Mexico are not quantified! but damages in

the United States typically range between $++ million

and '$+ million per year, In the Colorado River Basin

Salinity Control Program! the Bureau of Reclamation!

the Bureau of Land Management! the Natural

Resources Conservation Service! and seven states are

implementing salinity control projects that cost)effec)

tively remove salt from river water, The program con)

structs desalination plants! intercepts groundwater

before it flows through saline formations! implements

water conservation measures! establishes more strin)

gent control measures at oil and gas development

sites! seals flowing saline wells! and provides technical

and financial assistance to land users for salinity reduc)

tion practices, Control measures are preventing

approximately $++!+++ tons of salt from entering the

river system,

RESTORING DEGRADED STREAMBANKS ON CHEROKEE LANDS IN NORTH CAROLINA

THREATS: HABITAT LOSS! EROSION

Increased erosion! sedimentation! and habitat degradation caused by development! recreation! and urbanization have

impaired the Oconaluftee and Ravens Fork Rivers in western North Carolina, The watershed is a popular area for tourists

and is also an important source of revenue for local communities! especially the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians, 

The Cherokee Tribe has worked with the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Agricultureís

Natural Resources Conservation Service to plan! design! and implement best management practices for stream

restoration! and to educate area landowners about watershed protection techniques, The Tennessee Valley

Authority and Western Carolina University have collected and analyzed sedimentation data to identify restoration

sites, Work has begun on restoration projects and on implementing a new Erosion Control Ordinance and an

Integrated Resource Management Plan,

Restoration activities on the Oconaluftee and Ravens Fork Rivers have already yielded results, For example! at one

site restoration actions have slowed stream flow near the riverbanks! and they are rebuilding naturally, The river

has deposited six inches of new sediment along the banks and riparian vegetation is thriving,
Evaluation

Watershed practitioners evaluate implementation actions

to assess their effectiveness. Evaluations can consider the

environmental impact of individual projects, watershedwide efforts, state initiatives, or national programs. 

Proper evaluation ensures that watershed efforts duplicate

effective projects and programs and eliminate or modify

less effective projects and programs. Watershed efforts

that continually evaluate their work tend to achieve more

positive results and can objectively demonstrate those

results. Unfortunately, project-level and watershed-level

evaluations of the environmental impacts of restoration

efforts are not common. Some projects, however, including the two highlighted in this section, provide excellent

exceptions.

At larger scales, some states and regional organizations

produce useful and innovative environmental performance scorecards. For example, Florida recently developed

a water quality and natural resource performance report

(www.dep.state.fl.us/ospp/report) that the Florida

Department of Environmental Protection issues on a quarterly basis. The report tracks environmental trends that

are directly impacted by Floridaís environmental programs. Floridaís Department of Environmental Protection

expects that the report will help it enhance and replicate

successful efforts and change those that are not working

as intended.

Federal agencies and departments are also increasingly

evaluating their efforts with objective, environmentally

focused measures. For example, the Tennessee Valley

Authorityís Watershed Teams monitor water quality ratings in the 603 watersheds managed by the Tennessee

Valley Authority. In recent years, water quality ratings

have improved in 210 of the 603 watersheds. 

Despite this progress, many existing measurement tools

and environmental indicators are complex and have only

indirect linkages to on-the-ground changes. Efforts to

improve these tools often have to overcome organizational inertia to replace traditional measurement approaches.

Improved evaluation techniques are needed to objectively

demonstrate the success or failure of watershed protection

and restoration efforts.

"& Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

EVALUATING RIPARIAN RESTORATION IN COYOTE

CREEK! CALIFORNIA

THREAT: HABITAT LOSS

The San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory at the south end

of San Francisco Bay uses mist)netting! point counts!

area searches! and nest)finding to evaluate riparian corri)

dor restoration projects, The program monitors bird use

of these managed riparian corridors by comparing data

from their long)term reference site (Coyote Creek Field

Station) to other restoration sites, The Observatory uses

these bird data in conjunction with vegetation data to

assess the success of the restoration sites! to make man)

agement recommendations! and to study the use of

urban riparian sites, The program plans to monitor the

reference site for at least the

next %+ years, It will document

changes in the avian populations

over time as the site matures,

The San Francisco Bay Bird

Observatory is studying bird populations (e.g. Rufous Hummingbird) as

an indicator of the success of riparian

corridor restoration projects.

EVALUATING DRINKING WATER PROTECTION

MEASURES IN IOWA

THREATS: PATHOGENS! SEDIMENTS! NUTRIENTS

Lake Fisher is the primary source of drinking water for

Bloomfield! Iowa, Excessive inputs of sediments and

nutrients are reducing lake capacity and increasing

drinking water treatment costs, To address this situa)

tion! landowners have treated *++ acres of land in the

watershed with a combination of terraces! water and

sediment control basins! ponds! and constructed wet)

lands, Septic system improvements have also reduced

bacterial inputs to the lake, Preliminary results for this

project have been striking, Agricultural best manage)

ment practices have reduced the sediment load reach)

ing Lake Fisher by &+ percent, Nutrients! pesticides!

and organic materials flowing into the lake have been

reduced by $+ percent, Septic system improvements

have reduced bacteria flowing to the lake by $+ percent,
How is the Watershed Approach Working? "'

INTEGRATING THE THEMES OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT: THE AMD&ART PROJECT

THREATS: CHEMICAL POLLUTANTS! HABITAT LOSS

Acid mine drainage (AMD) is the most widespread and damaging environmental problem for Appalachia! as well as

one of the regionís worst economic and social problems, AMD&ART! a small non)profit organization! develops water)

shed treatment systems that are also recreational sites! art parks! educational centers! and historical exhibits, Their

projects reach people! restore nature! and clean water, The ìARTî in AMD&ART is not an acronym, It represents the

art of blending disciplines in the design process and orchestrating citizens! contributors! and governmental agencies,

This example highlights all seven

components of the watershed

approach discussed in this report,

A pilot project in Vintondale!

Pennsylvania is designing a com)

munity park to fulfill environmen)

tal! recreational! and educational

needs, This project is developing

new partnerships and increasing

coordination, More than (+ per)

cent of the Vintondale population

has gathered for regular meetings

with AMD&ART artists! historians!

and scientists to discuss project

planning and prioritization, The

resulting design proposal incorpo)

rates ideas from everyone that

contributed to the process,

Participation in the process is

increasing public awareness of

economic and environmental

issues, The project has initiated

school education programs and

service projects for students of all ages in surrounding communities, Diverse partners such as the Environmental

Protection Agency! the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation! AmeriCorps! and private foundations have

contributed technical support and more than %++!+++ in funding to the project, Monitoring and research efforts

include volunteer water quality monitoring! AMD&ART staff)conducted biological surveys! and university)conduct)

ed surveys of community attitudes! knowledge! and behavior, Twenty)five percent of the townís population gath)

ered for the projectís groundbreakingñthe symbolic beginning of implementation efforts, Many aspects of project

implementation have already begun! including the development of a "$)acre site that includes a wetlands treat)

ment system for acid mine drainage, Evaluation efforts are measuring environmental change and social and eco)

nomic benefits, These results will allow other communities with similar discharges and environmental conditions

to build upon Vintondaleís successes, The AMD&ART project is a model for a new partnership between the

Department of the Interiorís Office of Surface Mining and the National Endowment for the Arts, This partnership will

remediate acid mine drainage with similar artful! community)driven approaches throughout eastern coal country,

The Vittondale Site Plan: (1) History Wetlands; (2) Community Recreation; 

3) AMD Treatment System and Litmus Garden
T his last section summarizes ideas and actions to

improve watershed management from roundtable

participants, reinvention team members, academic

evaluators, and government-sponsored studies and

reports. The section organizes these recommendations

with the same seven themes used by the previous section.

Implementation of these recommendations will require

the collaboration of diverse stakeholders in the public and

private sectors. A more detailed discussion of potential

actions follows each set of recommendations.

Education and Awareness

Recommendations

Ensure that key groups receive environmental education:

ï Local decision-makers, such as municipal officials,

mayors, and county councilpersons

ï Students

ï Real estate, agricultural, and industrial organizations

Use modern technology and multi-media campaigns to

enhance education and awareness programs

Discussion

As noted in the fourth section of this report, most

Americans do not understand how watershed health is

threatened and degraded. Many others do not under-

"# Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds

What Can be

Done to Improve

Progress?

Quick as my Thought

Rachel Rees

Age #

Submitted Independently

Susanville! California
stand how they can improve watershed health. As a

result, the collective actions of individuals significantly

impair our nationís water resources.

Education and awareness efforts should build on previous

successes. Many programs attempt to reach a broad audience, but education and awareness programs should give

special attention to a few key groups. Education and

awareness programs should target local decision-makers

because they can change local land use policies.

Watershed groups should develop peer education programs for agricultural stakeholders, real estate developers,

and industrial organizations because these programs have

proven to be effective.

Student education programs are a long-term investment in

an environmentally aware citizenry. State and federal

agencies should expand efforts to encourage use of environmental curricula; many excellent and proven curricula

are rarely used. Teachers need training, and schools should

consider flexible, interdisciplinary learning approaches.

Studies suggest that thematic, action-oriented environmental education can improve academic achievement in many

subjects, reduce discipline problems, and motivate students. 

Education programs should continue to use modern technology. The Watershed Information Network organizes

information about watershed resources in one location on

the internet. Its sponsors are expanding the network and

improving the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the

information presented. Watershed education campaigns

should increase their use of computer imaging technology. For example, television weather reports can use

watershed maps to depict floods and droughts, and related features can demonstrate how common activities such

as fertilizing a lawn impact watershed health (highlighted

in this section). These types of projects can expand public

awareness of how watersheds function.

Partnerships and Coordination

Recommendations 

Continue to develop broad partnerships for watershed

protection and restoration:

ï Enhance university-based service-learning networks to

connect students and educators with local watershed

groups

Foster greater coordination of government agencies for

watershed protection and restoration:

ï Implement the Unified Federal Policy

ï Continue to facilitate government assistance to state,

tribal, and local watershed practitioners with Federal

Coordination Teams

Improve the delivery of information and support to local

watershed efforts:

ï Establish points of contact for federal, tribal, and

state agencies

ï Expand and enhance the Watershed Information Network

ï Convene a federal-level workgroup to discuss further

opportunities for improvement

What Can be Done to Improve Progress? "*

USING MODERN TECHNOLOGY DURING

WEATHER REPORTS

The National Environmental Education and Training

Foundation hopes to advance public awareness of

watershed issues through television weather reports,

It is anticipated that in -++( the weather report on

WRC)TV NBC% in Washington! DC will depict events

such as oil spills! plumes of polluted runoff! floods! and

droughts with three)dimensional maps of the

Chesapeake Bay and Potomac River watersheds, An

accompanying website will link viewers to real)time

water quality monitoring data! volunteer monitoring

data! and tips on reducing water pollution, If the pro)

gram is successful! the National Environmental

Education and Training Foundation will reproduce it in

major cities around the country,
Discussion

The nation has supported many watershed partnerships

in recent years. And yet, because governments have traditionally divided watershed management responsibilities, partnership and coordination efforts may still provide the greatest opportunities for improvements to

watershed management.

Many stakeholders participate in local watershed efforts,

and state and federal governments should continue to

encourage and support these partnerships. Universities

can play a larger role in watershed management efforts.

Academic institutions should assist watershed efforts with

relevant research, monitoring, assessment, planning, priority-setting, implementation, and education programs.

Federal agencies should support service-learning networks that link skilled students and faculty with watershed groups.

Government coordination efforts should build on recent

successes. Federal Coordination Teams should continue

to integrate government funding and technical assistance

programs and to support the implementation of these programs by local watershed practitioners. The Unified

Federal Policy on Watershed Management should promote a consistent, cost-effective watershed approach for

federal land and resource management. Agencies should

continue model programs such as the Five-Star

Restoration Program. 

Many watershed practitioners note that government agencies can improve the delivery of informational, technical,

and financial support to watershed efforts. Individual

government agencies should designate reliable, responsive, and knowledgeable points of contact to answer questions and support watershed management. Government

agencies should coordinate information about water quality data, technical assistance, and financial assistance in

one location. The Watershed Information Network supports this goal; its sponsors are updating this network to

address all of these issues. Federal agency representatives

suggest that a federal-level workgroup could consider further coordinating federal support for watershed efforts.

Senior career personnel that manage watershed issues

would participate in the workgroup. The workgroup

would develop strategies to promote mutual understanding of programs and policies, to identify and resolve interagency inconsistencies or misunderstandings, and to

implement actions (such as memoranda of understanding)

that foster and support coordination at regional, state,

tribal, and local levels. 

Monitoring and Research

Recommendations

Increase coordination of watershed monitoring programs:

ï Develop a national watershed monitoring network to

consider trends in watershed health

ï Increase coordination among federal, tribal, state, and

local governments and volunteer monitoring groups to

ensure that volunteer data are accurate, complete, and

compatible with government monitoring efforts

ï Implement the Coastal Research and Monitoring

Strategy recommendations

Incorporate new indicators into watershed monitoring

programs:

ï Monitor physical and biological characteristics

ï Monitor emerging chemical contaminants such as pharmaceuticals and endocrine disrupters

Provide meaningful and timely watershed information to

decision-makers and the public:

ï Provide data at scales useful for decision-making

ï Use the internet to display and distribute visual, understandable data

Expand research in watershed management:

ï Explore linkages among watershed componentsñrivers,

wetlands, floodplains, upland areas, groundwater, and

the atmosphere

ï Explore the integration of the natural and social sciences

ï Improve and verify models that can predict watershed

properties

%+ Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds
Increase research efforts that evaluate environmental outcomes, such as research that evaluates best management

practices

Discussion

Monitoring and research direct watershed protection and

restoration activities. Many watershed monitoring and

research programs operate at local, state, tribal, and federal

levels. Increasingly, volunteers and nonprofit organizations

are also collecting and analyzing watershed indicators.

Watershed monitoring programs lack consistency and

comprehensiveness. The federal government should

develop a national watershed monitoring program with

standard protocols. This program should be coordinated

with monitoring programs run by tribal, state, and local

governments, as well as with volunteer groups. A consistent national program would reveal trends in watershed

health. These coordinated sources of watershed monitoring data should provide information that the federal government can use at larger scales to make national policy

decisions, and local watershed decision-makers can use

for smaller-scale assessments. 

Watershed monitoring programs should incorporate

resource indicators that have not been traditionally measured. Monitoring programs should consider physical

characteristics, such as wetland structure and streambank

stability, and emerging chemical contaminants, such as

pharmaceuticals. The federal government should continue to develop and disseminate wetlands tracking and

assessment tools. Monitoring programs should incorporate biological indicators of watershed health, such as

species diversity and population levels. These programs

should also monitor previously neglected areas. For

example, federal agencies with coastal responsibilities

should lead the implementation of the ìCoastal Research

and Monitoring Strategyî to address deficiencies in

coastal zone monitoring. Watershed management efforts

need nationally consistent monitoring programs that

cover a variety of watershed resources.

Watershed monitoring programs should provide timely

data to the public. The data should be easily accessible

and understandable. Monitoring programs should use

the internet to display and transfer large volumes of data.

Research programs should study linkages in watershed

function. Researchers should investigate the linkages

between watershed componentsñrivers, wetlands, floodplains, upland areas, groundwater, and the atmosphere.

Researchers should also investigate linkages of natural

sciences, such as biology, chemistry, and physics, with

social sciences, such as economics, sociology, and psychology. For example, watershed actions that protect lands,

reduce pollution, or manage species can profoundly affect

individual and community attitudes and economics.

Researchers should also develop models that are more

accurate and more reliable. For example, watershed models are needed to predict pollutant inputs or pollutant

movement in watersheds. These models would reduce

monitoring costs and suggest watershed protection and

restoration actions. 

Perhaps most importantly, research efforts should investigate the long-term successes and failures of protection

and restoration activities. Researchers should investigate

why similar actions cause different results in different

watershed situations. This research would be invaluable

in guiding future watershed projects. 

Planning and Prioritization

Recommendations

Encourage consideration of watershed health in local

planning:

ï Provide incentives for ecologically sensitive planning

activities

Refine and coordinate national watershed assessments:

ï Provide incentives to prioritize actions within watersheds at a smaller scale

ï Coordinate federal assistance (financial and technical)

across programs to maximize improvement opportunities

ï Integrate new and enhanced monitoring and assessment

data into planning and prioritization activities

What Can be Done to Improve Progress? %(
Discussion

Watershed stakeholders should organize and integrate

watershed activities to ensure that they use resources efficiently. For example, local planning and zoning requirements for residential, commercial, and industrial development should reflect broader regional watershed conditions and management priorities. Many local governments already consider water quality issues in planning,

but they should increase and broaden these efforts. State

and federal governments should encourage local efforts

with education campaigns and financial incentives.

States and tribes should continue to update and refine

their comprehensive watershed assessments. Revised

assessments could consider watersheds at smaller scales

that would be more useful for local watershed efforts.

State and federal governments should use these improved

assessments to coordinate funding and technical assistance. Coordination of protection and restoration activities will maximize their efficiency.

Funding and Technical Assistance

Recommendations

Increase financial and technical assistance from all sources

to watershed protection and restoration efforts

Increase program flexibility to address high priority

needs:

ï Re-evaluate funding needs and funding programs to

ensure that programs sustainably support areas of

greatest need

ï Expand funding eligibilities

ï Relax grant-matching requirements for selected assistance recipients

Expand citizen knowledge and understanding of watershed funding and technical assistance tools:

ï Develop an internet-based clearinghouse of watershed

assistance tools

ï Develop education campaigns that inform watershed

groups about financial and technical assistance tools

Discussion

Participants at the Regional Watershed Roundtables suggested that existing watershed management assistance

programs are insufficient. In particular, participants suggested that federal and state governments should increase

their financial and technical assistance to watershed management efforts. Assistance programs should also add

field staff to work with private landowners and managers

to make on-the-ground improvements.

Watershed practitioners suggest that government funding

and technical assistance programs should support high

priority activities. Governments should expand program

eligibilities or develop new programs to support chronically under-funded needs such as watershed monitoring

and research, staffing, and project evaluation and maintenance. Since watershed implementation projects often

require long-term efforts, they require sustainable sources

of funding. Grant programs should ease match requirements for smaller projects or for nonprofit organizations

with limited capital.

Watershed practitioners recommend that technical assistance programs expand their use of on-the-ground partnerships that teach landowners about best management

practices and water efficiency techniques and assist

landowners with their implementation. Because watersheds cannot be restored without the participation of private landowners, technical assistance programs will critically impact the success of governmental watershed efforts.

The federal government should furnish an internet-based

clearinghouse to help watershed groups navigate an overwhelming number of public and private services and funding sources. A clearinghouse of this sort would also aid

inter-agency coordination. Finally, the federal government

should inform citizens and organizations about available

watershed resources through educational campaigns.

%- Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds
Implementation

Recommendations

Pursue both watershed protection and restoration activities

Display patience and perseverance with implementation

efforts:

ï Recognize that successful implementation of watershed

protection and restoration actions takes place over

decades

ï Ensure that watershed plans lead to action

ï Follow up projects with appropriate monitoring, maintenance, and evaluation activities

Provide adequate enforcement of watershed laws

and regulations

Incorporate the latest technologies to restore, protect, and

monitor watershed health

Discussion

Watershed practitioners should implement actions that

both protect and restore watersheds. Many local stakeholders recognize that protecting remaining undeveloped

watershed areas is preferable to restoring degraded areas.

Federal agencies with competing authorities and legislative mandates will need to cooperate with each other to

balance protection and restoration efforts.

Project implementers should exercise both patience and

perseverance. Watershed protection and restoration programs often gain momentum slowly. However, watershed plans must eventually lead to action. Watershed

practitioners should also maintain restoration projects

appropriately to retain environmental gains. 

Governments should provide adequate resources to their

programs for effective implementation. Watershed management programs should be able to provide reasonable

deterrents against activities that adversely impact watershed health, decisive actions against violators, and efficient on-the-ground actions.

Evaluation

Recommendations

Establish science-based indicators for watershed programs and projects:

ï Improve indicators for chemical, physical, and biological properties of watersheds

ï Incorporate outcome-oriented measures into assistance

programsñand provide funds for evaluating these

measures

ï Fund research to evaluate varying treatment and

restoration techniques

ï Develop common federal indicators for assessing watershed health and common measures for tracking and

reporting performance

Measure results against established goals

Make results widely available to watershed practitioners:

ï Track results at local, regional, and national watershed

scales 

ï Post results on the internet

Discussion

The complexity of watershed approaches has limited

objective and empirical evaluations of success or failure.

Watershed protection and restoration efforts often involve

many scientific and social issues that practitioners can

only assess in a subjective and piecemeal fashion. At the

same time, many functional watersheds need immediate

protection and many degraded watersheds need immediate restoration. Therefore, watershed practitioners should

learn as much they can from their actions, and these lessons should inform future actions.

Watershed projects and programs should develop and use

indicators that reflect resource-level changesñquantifiable

chemical, physical, or biological results. Federal agencies

should establish common watershed health indicators and

track and report performance of both projects and programs. For an effort like this to be successful, individual

projects must track results against established goals and

What Can be Done to Improve Progress? %"
government programs must keep better inventories of

these watershed restoration projects. Federal agencies

should require that applicants for federal assistance establish quantifiable resource-level goals. Governments

should also provide financial support for the monitoring

and measurement of project results.

Governments should track results with databases that

cross agency and political borders. These databases

should consider watershed progress at many scales and

should be accessible via the internet.

%% Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds
T his report provides information about local,

regional, and national efforts to protect and

restore the health of the nationís water resources.

It reflects three major concepts used in managing the

nationís watersheds:

ï The watershed approach offers the best hope for protecting and restoring the nationís watersheds.

ï Local citizens should provide both leadership and

active support for watershed management efforts.

ï State and federal governments provide significant support to local watershed efforts, but they should coordinate and enhance this support to make it more effective.

The Watershed Approach

Healthy watersheds are some of the nationís most precious resources, but Americans contribute to water quality

and habitat degradation with their actions in small ways

every day. Our industries, our farms, our neighborhoods,

Conclusion %$

All Paths Lead to Light

Natalie Hamill

Age ('

Stuart Country Day School Conclusion

Princeton! New Jersey
and our carsñmany elements intrinsic to our livesñaffect

our water resources. Because the sources of impairment

are so diffuse, a watershed approach to water resource

protection and restoration is most appropriate.

Local Leadership and Engagement

Citizens are leading the drive to reverse impacts to watershed health. Community groups are recognizing watershed

problems and taking the responsibility to address them.

These local efforts are educating the greater public, building

new and unique partnerships, and improving knowledge of

how watersheds are threatened and impaired. They are

establishing plans and priorities, securing financial and

human resources, taking action to restore and protect watershed health, and evaluating their successes.

Governmental Collaboration and Support

Local watershed groups are not facing this challenge

alone. State and federal agencies significantly support

watershed efforts. These government agencies are coordinating their activities and improving their support so that

it is more accessible, valuable, and conducive to on-theground and in-the-water results.

*****

These three concepts offer a blueprint for success. Building

on these broad concepts and the specific recommendations for action in the last chapter, the nationís watershed

protection and restoration efforts can gain momentum

and make significant progress. The United States established a goal in 1972 to restore and maintain the chemical,

physical, and biological integrity of all its waters. We

have yet to meet that goal. Through the efforts of watershed groups nationwide, that day will yet come.

%& Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds
Links to watershed-related websites of federal agencies

and other organizations.

Interagency Watershed Information

Watershed Information Network

www.cleanwater.gov/win

Federal Government Watershed Websites

U.S. Department of Agriculture

www.usda.gov

Natural Resources Conservation Service

www.nrcs.usda.gov

Forest Service

www.fs.fed.us

Forest Lands Inventory

fia.fs.fed.us

Army Corps of Engineers

www.usace.army.mil 

Research and Development

www.erdc.usace.army.mil

Institute for Water Resources

www.wrsc.usace.army.mil

Bonneville Power Administration, Fish and Wildlife

www.efw.bpa.gov

United States Department of Commerce

www.doc.gov

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

www.noaa.gov

National Ocean Service

www.nos.noaa.gov

Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management

www.ocrm.nos.noaa.gov

National Marine Fisheries Service

www.nmfs.noaa.gov

United States Environmental Protection Agency

www.epa.gov

Office of Water

www.epa.gov/ow

Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds

www.epa.gov/owow

Watershed Restoration

www.epa.gov/owow/restore

Watershed Academy

www.epa.gov/watershed/wacademy

Funding Sources

www.epa.gov/watershed/wacademy/fund.html

Model Ordinances

www.epa.gov/owow/nps/ordinance

Surf Your Watershed

www.epa.gov/surf

U.S. Department of Interior

www.doi.gov

Bureau of Land Management

www.blm.gov 

Websites and Resources %'

Websites and Resources
Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement

www.osmre.gov

Appalachian Clean Streams Initiative

www.osmre.gov/acsihome.htm

Bureau of Reclamation

www.usbr.gov 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

www.fws.gov

Ecosystems

ecosystems.fws.gov

Wetlands

wetlands.fws.gov

U.S. Geological Survey

www.usgs.gov

National Water Quality Assessment Program

water.usgs.gov/nawqa

Tennessee Valley Authority

www.tva.gov

Water Information

www.tva.gov/environment/water/index.htm 

Department of Transportation

www.dot.gov

Federal Highway Administration

www.fhwa.dot.gov

Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century

www.fhwa.dot.gov/tea21/index.htm

Environmental Issues 

www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/genrlenv.htm

Wildlife Crossings

www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/wildlifecrossings/

main.htm

Non)Government Watershed Websites

Adopt-A-Watershed 

www.adopt-a-watershed.org

AMD&ART

www.amdandart.org

American Rivers

www.americanrivers.org

Center for Watershed Protection

www.cwp.org

Clean Water Network

www.cwn.org

Conservation Technology Information Center (CTIC)

www.ctic.purdue.edu/CTIC/CTIC.html

National Institute for Water Resources

wrri.nmsu.edu/niwr

Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officials (NEMO)

nemo.uconn.edu

River Network

www.rivernetwork.org

River of Words

www.riverofwords.org

Save Our Streams (Izaak Walton League)

www.iwla.org/SOS/index.html

Terrene Institute

www.terrene.org

Water Environment Federation

www.wef.org

Watershed Education for Teachers

www.projectwet.org

Watershed Management Council

watershed.org

%# Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds
Acid Mine Drainage

Acidic water that flows from areas that have been mined

for coal or mineral ores. The acidity is caused by the

exposure of sulfur-bearing minerals to oxidizing conditions. Acid mine drainage is toxic to aquatic organisms.

Air (or Atmospheric) Deposition

Process by which pollutants are released into the air, carried by wind patterns away from their place of origin,

and deposited on the land or in waterbodies. These pollutants come from man-made and natural sources. Any

chemical that is emitted into the air can become an air

deposition problem.

Algae 

Simple rootless plants that grow in sunlit waters in proportion to the amount of available nutrients. They are

food for fish and small aquatic animals. Excessive

amounts of algae can adversely affect water quality by

lowering the dissolved oxygen in the water. 

Algal Blooms 

Sudden spurts of algae growth, which can adversely

affect water quality and indicate potentially hazardous

changes in local water chemistry. 

Anadromous

Ascending rivers from the sea, at certain seasons, for

breeding. For example, salmon and shad are anadromous

fish.

Aquifer 

An underground geological formation or group of formations containing water. Aquifers are sources of groundwater for wells and springs. 

Bacteria 

Microscopic living organisms that can aid in pollution

control by metabolizing organic matter in sewage, oil

spills, or other pollutants. However, certain bacteria in

soil, water, or air can also cause human, animal, and plant

health problems.

Basin

The area of land that drains water, sediment, and dissolved materials to a common outlet such as a stream,

lake, or estuary. Often used as a synonym for watershed

or catchment.

Best Management Practice 

Methods, measures, or practices that prevent or reduce

water pollution. Best management practices may include

treatment requirements, operating procedures, schedules

of activities, prohibition of practices, maintenance procedures, or other management practices which control

runoff, spillage, leaks, sludge or waste disposal, or

drainage from various sites and operations.

Biodiversity 

The variety of organisms found within a specified geographic region.

Catchment

A structure, such as a basin or reservoir, that collects or

drains water. Often used as a synonym for watershed or

basin.

Channelization

Human engineering of river channels to enlarge, straighten, embank, or protect existing channels, create new channels, or protect adjacent structures.

Glossary %*

Glossary
Clean Water Act

National environmental legislation designed to protect

and restore the nationís water resources passed by

Congress in 1972 in response to growing public concern

for serious and widespread water pollution. The Clean

Water Act is the primary federal law that protects our

nationís waters, including lakes, rivers, aquifers, and

coastal areas.

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation

Agricultural enterprise that keeps and raises animals in

confined situations. Concentrated animal feeding operations congregate animals, feed, manure and urine, dead

animals, and production operations on a small land area.

These operations bring food to the animals rather than

allowing the animals to graze or otherwise seek food in

pastures, fields, or on rangeland. There are approximately 361,000 animal feeding operations in the United States,

of which 5-10 percent are considered concentrated animal

feeding operations.

Conservation Easement

Legal agreement that restricts landowners to uses that are

compatible with conservation and environmental values.

Easements are generally governed by state laws; thus

states administer easements in various ways.

Ecosystem

A system defined by the interaction of a community of

organisms with their physical environment. Ecosystems

can be considered at many different scales.

Erosion

The wearing away of land surface by wind or water,

intensified by land-clearing practices related to farming,

residential or industrial development, road building, or

logging. 

Estuary

A wide lower course of a river near the sea where fresh

and salt water mix. 

Eutrophic

Having waters rich in mineral and organic nutrients that

promote a proliferation of plant life, especially algae, that

reduces the dissolved oxygen content and often causes the

death of other organisms.

Evapotranspiration

The combined processes of evaporation and transpiration.

It is the sum of water used by vegetation and water lost

by evaporation. 

Groundwater

Water beneath the earthís surface that supplies wells and

springs. 

Habitat

The living and non-living environment where a population (e.g., human, animal, plant, microorganism) lives.

Habitat includes all things an organism needs to surviveñ

food, water, space, and protection from predators.

Hydrology

The study of the occurrence, distribution, and circulation

of the natural waters of the earth. 

Impervious Surfaces or Impervious Cover 

Hard surfaces within a watershed including rooftops,

parking lots, streets, sidewalks, and driveways that do not

allow rainfall to infiltrate underlying soils.

Infiltration

The flow of a fluid into a substance through pores or

small openings.

Insecticide

A chemical compound specifically used to kill or prevent

the growth of insects. 

Invasive Species

With respect to a particular ecosystem, any animal or

plant that is not native to that ecosystem whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental

harm, or harm to human health.

$+ Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds
Irrigation

The controlled application of water to arable lands to supply water requirements not satisfied by rainfall. 

Mitigation (of wetlands)

Restoration, creation, enhancement, or preservation of

wetlands that expressly compensates for unavoidable

wetland losses due to development actions.

Native Species

An animal or plant that originated in a particular place or

region.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

The Environmental Protection Agencyís permitting system to control and monitor all point sources of pollution.

Primary regulated entities are industrial facilities and

publicly owned water treatment facilities.

Nonpoint Source Pollution

Pollution, unlike pollution from industrial and sewage

treatment plants, that comes from many diffuse sources.

Nonpoint source pollution is usually caused by rainfall or

snowmelt moving over and through the ground. As the

runoff moves, it picks up and carries away natural and

human-made pollutants, finally depositing them into

lakes, rivers, wetlands, coastal waters, and even our

underground sources of drinking water. Atmospheric

deposition, hydromodification, and failing septic systems

are other sources of nonpoint source pollution.

Nutrient

A substance necessary for the growth of living organisms.

Nitrogen and phosphorous, for example, are required

nutrients for algae growth. 

Overland Flow

The flow of rainwater or snowmelt over the land surface

toward a waterbody. After an overland flow enters a

stream, it is called runoff.

Precipitation

The discharge of water, in liquid or solid state, out of the

atmosphere, generally upon a land or water surface.

Precipitation includes rainfall, snow, hail, and sleet.

Pathogens 

Microorganisms that can cause disease in humans, animals, plants, or other organisms. Pathogens include bacteria, viruses, and parasites and can be found in sewage,

runoff from animal farms, and wild animals. Fish and

shellfish contaminated by pathogens, or the pathogens

themselves, can cause serious illnesses. 

Point Source Pollution

Pollution discharged by any discernible, confined, and

discrete conveyance, including any pipe, ditch, channel,

tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fixture, container, rolling

stock, concentrated animal feeding operation, landfill

leachate collection system, vessel, or other floating craft.

Reservoir

A pond, lake, or basin, either natural or artificial, for the

storage, regulation, and control of water.

Riparian Zone / Riparian Buffer

The land adjacent to streams, rivers, and lakes that actively interfaces with the waterbody through physical and

chemical processes. Healthy riparian zones filter nutrients and sediments, increase streambank stability, and

provide shade that reduces stream temperatures.

Runoff

Precipitation, snow melt, or irrigation water that runs off

the land into surface water. Runoff can carry pollutants

from the air and land into the receiving waters. 

Sediment

Fragmental material that originates from weathering of

rocks and is transported by, suspended in, or deposited

by water or air.

Glossary $(
Stakeholder 

One who has a share or an interest in an issue.

Virus

The smallest form of microorganisms capable of causing

disease. Viruses of fecal origin are infectious to humans

by waterborne transmission. 

Water Quality Standard

A law or regulation that consists of the beneficial use or

uses of a waterbody, the numeric and narrative water

quality criteria that are necessary to protect the use or

uses of that particular waterbody, and an anti-degradation

statement.

Watershed

The land area that drains into a single body of water such

as a stream, river, lake, or wetland. Large watersheds

may be composed of several smaller nested watersheds.

Also known as a catchment or basin.

Watershed Approach

A coordinating framework for environmental management involving diverse stakeholders and utilizing sound

science to focus resources on high priority issues within

hydrologically defined areas.

Watershed Management

The process of using and supporting the watershed

approach to manage land and water resources. The term

often describes the implementation of watershed

approaches by governmental agencies.

Watershed Practitioner 

One who practices an occupation or technique related to the

management of watersheds. Practitioners can include local

citizens, government employees, landowners, business leaders, and representatives of non-profit organizations.

Watershed Restoration

The manipulation of physical, chemical, or biological

characteristics of watersheds with the goal of returning

natural or historic functions. Also, the return of a watershed to a close approximation of its condition prior to disturbance. 

Wetlands

An area that is inundated or saturated by surface water or

groundwater with a frequency and duration sufficient to

support, and under normal circumstances supporting,

vegetation adapted for life under those soil conditions.

Swamps, bogs, fens, and marshes are examples of wetlands.

$- Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds
AMD&ART. Transforming Environmental Liabilities into

Community Assets: An Interdisciplinary Initiative Re-creating

Place. Johnstown, Pennsylvania. November 1999.

Bricker, S.B., C.G. Clement, D.E. Pirhalla, S.P. Orlando,

and D.R.G. Farrow. National Estuarine Eutrophication

Assessment: Effects of Nutrient Enrichment in the Nationís

Estuaries. National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration. Silver Spring, MD. 1999.

Center for Watershed Protection. Rapid Watershed Planning

Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide for Managing Urbanizing

Watersheds. Ellicott City, Maryland. October 1998.

Clinton, W. Executive Order 13112 on Invasive Species. 64

FR 6183. The White House. February 3, 1999. 

Coastal Research and Monitoring Strategy Workgroup of

the Clean Water Action Plan. Coastal Research and

Monitoring Strategy. September 2000.

Cronk, Q., and J. Fuller. Plant Invaders: The Threat to

Natural Ecosystems. Chapman & Hall. New York. 1995.

Ecological Society of America. Committee on Land Use.

ìEcological Principles and Guidelines for Managing the Use

of Land.î Ecological Applications. Vol. 10, No. 3. June 2000.

Environmental Law Institute. Building Capacity to

Participate in Environmental Protection Agency Activities: A

Needs Assessment and Analysis. ISBN 0-911937-96-X. June

1999.

Glenn Lozar, J. Environment-based Education: Creating High

Performance Schools and Students. The National

Environmental Education & Training Foundation

(NEETF). Washington, DC. 2000.

Federal Agencies. Clean Water Action Plan: Restoring and

Protecting Americaís Waters. ISBN 0-16-049536-9. February

1998.

óUnified Federal Policy for a Watershed Approach to Federal

Land and Resource Management. Federal Register. Vol. 65,

No. 202, Pages 62566-72. October 18, 2000.

Florida Department of Environmental Protection.

Secretaryís Quarterly Performance Report. Vol. 2, No. 4.

September 1999.

Kenney, D. Arguing About Consensus: Examining the Case

Against Western Watershed Initiatives and Other Collaborative

Groups Active in Natural Resources Management. Natural

Resources Law Center, University of Colorado School of

Law. 2000.

ó Assessing the Effectiveness of Watershed Initiatives: The

Current State of Knowledge. Natural Resources Law Center,

University of Colorado School of Law. 2000.

Lewicki, C., and T. Younos, eds. ìIntegrating Universitiesí

Knowledge and Student Service-Learning into

Community-Based Watershed Management Programs.î

Water Resources Update. Vol. 119. February 2001.

Lieberman, G. and L. Hoody. Closing the Achievement Gap:

Using the Environment as an Integrating Context for Education.

State Environmental Education Roundtable. 1998.

National Academy of Public Administration.

Environment.Gov: Transforming Environmental Protection for

the 21st Century. ISBN 1-57744-083-8. Washington, D.C.

2000.

National Association of Counties. Watershed Management

Advisory Committee. Leadership in Watershed

Management: The County Role. Washington, D.C. June

1999.

National Conference of State Legislatures. Watershed

Protection: The Legislative Role. Denver, Colorado.

December 1998.

References $"

References
National Research Council. New Strategies for Americaís

Watersheds. National Academy Press. Washington, D.C.

1999.

óRestoration of Aquatic Ecosystems. National Academy

Press. Washington, D.C. 1992.

Pimentel, D. ìEnvironmental and Economic Costs

Associated with Non-indigenous Species in the United

States.î AAAS Conference. Anaheim, California.

January 24, 1999.

Reinvention Workgroup of the Clean Water Action Plan.

Watershed Reinvention Opportunities. June 27, 2000.

Scurlock, M., and J. Curtis. Maximizing the Effectiveness of

Watershed Councils: Policy Recommendations from Pacific

Rivers Council and Trout Unlimited. Pacific Rivers Council.

Eugene, Oregon. 2000.

The Meridian Group. (DRAFT) Summary of the Regional

Watershed Roundtable Reports. January 9, 2001.

The Presidentís Council on Sustainable Development.

Sustainable America: A New Consensus for Prosperity,

Opportunity, and a Healthy Environment for the Future.

ISBN 0-16-018429-0. February 1996.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources

Conservation Service. A Geography of Hope. Program Aide

1548. December 1996.

óNational Engineering Handbook. Vol. 210-VI, Stream

Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes, and Practices.

August 1998. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forest Service. Water &

The Forest Service. FS-660. January 2000.

U.S. Department of the Interior. People, Land & Water.

Vol. 6, No. 2. March/April 1999.

óPeople, Land & Water. Vol. 7, No. 5. July/August 2000.

U.S. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway

Administration. Critter Crossings: Linking Habitats and

Reducing Roadkill. Washington, D.C. February 2000.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of

Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds. Atlas of Americaís

Polluted Waters. EPA840-B-00-002. May 2000.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Four Years of

Progress: Meeting our Commitment for Wetlands Reform. 1997.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water.

National Water Quality Inventory: 1998 Report to Congress.

EPA-841-R-00-001. June 2000.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Estuary

Program. Successful Coastal Management Solutions.

February 2000.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water.

Introduction to Water Quality Standards. EPA-823-B-95-004.

September 1994.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water.

Liquid Assets 2000: Americaís Water Resources at a Turning

Point. EPA-840-B-00-001. May 2000.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of

Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds. Top 10 Watershed

Lessons Learned. EPA-840-F-97-001. October 1997.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water.

Watershed Approach Framework. EPA-840-S-96-001. June

1996.

U.S. Geological Survey. The Quality of Our Nationís Waters

- Nutrients and Pesticides. U.S. Geological Survey Circular

1225. 1999.

Westbrooks, R. Invasive Plants - Changing the Landscape of

America: Fact Book. Federal Interagency Committee for the

Management of Noxious and Exotic Weeds. Washington,

DC. 1998.

$% Protecting and Restoring Americaís Watersheds
Photographs

Page 6, field irrigation, Tim McCabe, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

Page 7 (top), nuclear power plant near waterway, Photostogo

Page 7 (bottom), children fishing, Eyewire

Page 11, streambank stabilization, Gary Wilson, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

Page 15, Cutthroat Trout, Yellowstone River, John H. McShane, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Page 16, Hughes Bore Hole, John Turner, AMD&ART, Inc.

Page 18 (top), animal feeding operation, Bob Nichols, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

Page 18 (bottom), zebra mussels on native clam, U.S. Geological Survey

Page 22, outreach, Bob Nichols, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

Page 25, urban sprawl, Photostogo

Page 27 (top), water in beaker, PictureQuest

Page 27 (bottom), children studying stream, Tim McCabe, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

Page 31, technical assistance, Bob Nichols, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

Page 32, pitcher plant, John Lindquist, University of Wisconsin

Page 36, Rufous Hummingbird, San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory

Figures/Diagrams

Page 10, hydrologic cycle in a watershed, U.S. Forest Service

Page 13, 1998 impaired watersñnational summary, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Page 16, impervious cover and surface runoff, Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group

Page 37, Vintondale site plan, AMD&ART, Inc.

Illustrationsñthe River of Words Project 

Each section of this report presents artwork from the River of Words Project. River of Words is an international poetry

and art program created to promote literacy and environmental stewardship by helping children to develop respect for

and understanding of the natural world. River of Words helps children explore and interpret their watersheds through

a multidisciplinary curriculum that combines science, history, geography, math, language, and the arts. Affiliated with

the Library of Congress Center for the Book and co-founded in 1995 by United States Poet Laureate (1995-1997) Robert

Hass and writer Pamela Michael, River of Words conducts an annual poetry and art contest on the theme of ìwatershedsî designed to help children fall in love with language, the arts, and the earth. Thousands of American and international schoolchildren in kindergarten through 12th grade have participated in River of Words.

Further information about the project can be found at www.riverofwords.org or by calling 510-548-POEM (7636).

Credits
"We need to bring alive the necessity for

clean water so all Americans act as stewards of their water resources,,,,

For safe! clean! abundant waterñin our homes!

rivers! lakes! and streamsñis one of our

planet's greatest treasures,"

Senator John H. Chafee