Download - IRAPP@MSU - Institute for Regional Analysis and ...

tubacitychiropractorManagement

Nov 8, 2013 (3 years and 10 months ago)

80 views

Community
-
Based Watershed
Management in Ohio


Watershed Workshop

Morehead State University

May 11, 2006








Robert McCall



Dana Oleskiewicz




Center at Lima



Center at Wooster






Educators, Watershed Management




Ohio State University Extension



Objectives:


Define Community
-
Based Watershed
Management (CBWM)



Explore Two Ohio Case Studies



Tools of the Trade

Water resource protection

through watershed management efforts

for the goal of high water quality

requires planning

by communities (
stakeholders
)

within the watershed.

a.k.a.

Community
-
Based Watershed Management!!


A Model for Success

Facilitating Agency









Community
-
Based Watershed Management






with Stakeholder Involvement









Community Organization

Steelman, Toddi. 1999.



Set priorities



Set timeframes



Assign tasks



Obtain funding

Implementing the W
-
shed Approach

Implement & Evaluate

Create an Action Plan

Build Public Support

Create an Inventory

Define the Problems

Set Goals &

Develop Solutions



Establish the core watershed group



Create a mission statement



Promote activities in the watershed



Recruit new stakeholders



Define the watershed



Assess the quality of the water resource



Examine the human and ecological
features that affect the quality of the water
resource



Measure progress



Revisit the action plan and make
adjustments where needed



Evaluate potential solutions for the
identified problems



Set goals and measurable indicators



Select solutions that achieve goals



Identify the pollutants causing the
problems



Identify the sources of the pollutants



Identify high quality areas to protect



Formulate a problem statement

Ohio EPA. “A Guide to
Developing Local Watershed
Action Plans in Ohio”. 1997.

The CBWM Approach

Implement &
Evaluate

Create an
Action Plan

Build Public
Support

Create an
Inventory

Define the
Problems

Set Goals &

Develop Solutions

Ohio EPA. “A Guide to
Developing Local Watershed
Action Plans in Ohio”. 1997.


Why Community
-
Based?


Problems are complex


Solutions exceed capabilities of one entity


Collaborative decisions necessary


Communities have vested interest


Local people are crucial


Define workable options


Enforce management choices


Monitor the effectiveness

Steelman, T.A. 1999.


Social Goals


Educate and inform the general public


Incorporate public values into decisions


Improve the quality of decisions


Resolve conflict among competing interests


Build trust in institutions


Beierle, T.C. & J. Cayford. 2002.

Environmental Behavior Model


Entry
-
level
-

(awareness)



Ownership
-

(knowledge)



Empowerment
-

(attitude / skills)



Citizenship (
Steward
) Behavior
-

(motivation)

Hungerford & Volk. 1990.

Environmental

Societal

Economic

Quality of
Life!

CBWM and Sustainability

Biophysical /
Ecological

Socio
-
Economic

Policy and Institutional

Watershed Management
Core Components


Science
-
Based


Decisions based on data



Community
-
Led


Stakeholders decide



Sustainable


Long
-
term coordination

http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/nps/NPSMP/index.html

Science
-
Based

Community
-
Led

Sustainabl
e

Effective
Stakeholder
Participation

CBWM Core Components

Biophysical /
Ecological
Considerations

Socio
-
Economic
Considerations

Policy and Institutional Considerations

Implementation Continuum

5. Sustained implementation of endorsed WAP

4. WAP receives state endorsement

3. Group develops Watershed Action Plan

2. Coordinated, issue
-
based local group forms

1. Local water resource advocate / steward

http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/nps/NPSMP/index.html

Water Quality Attainment
Drinking Water Protection

Developing Capacity


Resources Needed



People
-

Staff


Technical
-

Knowledge


Financial
-

Money


Networking
-

Partnerships


Organizational
-

Efficiency


Legitimacy
-

Good Representation

Stakeholders!

Resources Delivered

Steelman, Toddi. 1999.

Management Challenges


Low stakeholder involvement


Lack of local ownership


Planning at too great a scale


One
-
time study, not long
-
term management


Land use issues not addressed


Document too long or complex


Recommendations were too general

Center for Watershed Protection (www.cwp.org)

Successful Watershed Management

Strong Community
-
Based Effort

(Stakeholders)

+

Good Partnership
-
Building

(Buy
-
In)

+

Effective and Collaborative

Environmental Decision
-
Making

(Best Management Practices)


=

Case Study Watersheds

Case Study #1


Blanchard River Watershed
Partnership

County

Commissioners

Engineering

Extension

Farm Bureau

Regional Planning

Parks District

SWCD

Farm Service Agency

Dept. of Health & Human
Services

Township Trustees

Blanchard River Watershed Partnership

Stakeholders to date

City

Reg. Plan. Comm.

Utilities Director

W W Treatment Plant

County Engineering

Civic Groups

Regional

RC&D

OSU Extension

ODNR

Ohio EPA

Non
-
profit orgs.



Industry

Consultants

General Public

Ottawa, Ohio (04/20/04

Water velocity, erosion

and

sedimentation

Flooding

Drinking water quality

Recreation

Septic discharge

Fertilizer use

Maintaining drainage for

agr. production

Blanchard River Watershed Partnership

Issues of Public Concern

Bluffton, Ohio (04/28/04)

Get youth interested and

involved in the basin

Water quality and run
-
off

Local ditching projects,

removal of Riparian area

Erosion and sedimentation

Flooding and results of

flooding

Water and smart growth and

its effects

Non
-
point source pollution

Findlay, Ohio (03/29/04)

HSTS Plans

Sedimentation in waterways

Sustainable development

Flooding and drainage

Agricultural run
-
off

River water quality impacts on
reservoir

Treatment costs for drinking
water

Quantity and quality of water
resources

Flow management and drainage

Blanchard River Watershed Council

Issues of Public Concern

Stream bank erosion

Total maximum daily load
(TMDL = OEPA Assmnt.)

Flooding and water quality

Loss of wetlands

Riparian habitat, wetlands
and water quality

Stakeholder driven solutions
and watershed planning

Recreation (fishing,
canoeing, wildlife habitat)

BRWP: Where are they now?



Working on watershed inventory



Reviewing 501c3 options



Soliciting sponsors for a Watershed
Coordinator Grant



Potential Organizational
Development Model

Watershed Action Plans to work on.


Sub W
-
S
#1

Sub W
-
S
#2

Sub W
-
S
#5

Sub W
-
S
#4

Sub W
-
S
#3

Sub W
-
S
#6

Standing Committees under the Steering
Committee, including the Executive Committee

Staff:

Coordinator

Interns?

Supp. Staff?

Steering Committee

Executive
Committee

Project Sponsor:

Funding &
administrative

support.

Development
& Fundraising

Agriculture

Education

Stream Flow &
Habitat

Membership

Wastewater

Water

Marketing &
Communication

Current

Organizational
Development Model

Currently gathering watershed assessment
information for the entire watershed


Standing Committees under the Steering
Committee, including the Executive Committee

Staff:

Coordinator

Interns?

Supp. Staff?

Steering Committee

Executive
Committee

Project Sponsor:

Funding &
administrative

support.

Development
& Fundraising

Agriculture

Outreach/Ed./Membership

Stream Flow &
Habitat

Water/Wastewater

Marketing &
Communication

Coordinator Sponsor Survey?


Fiscal capabilities


Adm. Support


Technical Support


Housing


Equipment


Overhead


Experience with NP, PS, Pr S.

Sugar Creek Watershed
Partnership

Case Study #2

METHOD USED IN UPPER SUGAR
CREEK SUBWATERSHED

DISTRUST OF

EPA DATA

MORAL

DILEMMA ABOUT

GOOD STEWARD

SELF
-
CONCEPT

SOCIAL

RESPONSIBILITY

BASED WQ

TESTING

1 TEST SITE

PER SQ MILE

EVERY 2 WEEKS

HOT

SPOTS


INVITATION

TO HOT SPOT

FARMERS TO

JOIN TEAM

CORRELATION OF HOT
SPOTS WITH PRIMARY
HEADWATERS

PARTICIPATORY TEAMS

PARTICIPATORY

TEAMS IN

SUBWATERSHEDS


UPPER SC

Self selected group
of neighbors

--
Joint buffer by neighbors

--
Hot Spots


NORTH FORK

Task Force of Leading

Citizens

--
Amish/non Amish


tributary joint action

--
Amish marketing coop

--
Kidron Drinking Water

SOUTH FORK

Farmerstown South
Church District / Maple
Grove School

--
temporary livestock

exclusion

--
Amish marketing coop

--
Interest in septic systems


LITTLE SC

No group yet but
likely

--
Kingsway C.S.

--
DOT wetlands/30 BYPASS

--
Troyers

SUGAR CREEK FARMER TEAMS


Summer 2000

-

Low trust in EPA


Fall 2000

-

Desire to be good stewards


Winter 2001

-

Joint reconnaissance mission
by farmer and researchers


2001
-
2002

-

Collect own data and inquiry


Summer 2001

-

Approve EPA grant proposal


Summer 2002

-

Invite EPA on Stream Walk



BUILDING COMMUNITY


Decision to be good land/water stewards


Regardless of EPA data


Realize their inquiries have scientific merit


Request samples for specific questions


Neighbors chosen for purposeful action


“hot spot” approach


Smithville Town Council involved



SOCIAL INDICATORS

According to Farmer Team

Decisions and Actions


Letters to neighbors


Going out to lunch together for first time


Dreaming about a buffer hunting zone


Talking about project at high school games


First farm family to put in a riparian buffer


SOCIAL INDICATORS

According to Farmer Team

Unity, Significance, and Purpose

CASE STUDY

Richard H. Moore, Associate Professor

Human and Community Resource Development.

Ohio State University.

(
moore.11@osu.edu
)

Sugar Creek Method:


Focus on headwaters and benchmark water quality


Treat each stream as unique


Survey community values, concerns, and aspirations


Catalyze local level participatory learning


Collaborate with downstream teams


Build on “healthy environment, healthy people”


Seek to find suitable methods of protection



http://sugarcreekmethod.osu.edu/

Tools for Watershed Action Planning

http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/nps/guide.html


Conduct a thorough search for stakeholders


Build relationships and make it fun


Employ conflict resolution


Remain vigilant and get organized


Remember


calendars and “to do” lists!



Tools for Stakeholder Involvement


Building & Development


Community Services


Economic Development


Health Department


Land Records & Property
Transfers


Libraries


Mapping & Geographic
Information



Parks and Recreation



Planning & Zoning



School Boards



Social Services



Tourism Board



Water & Sewer Services

Tools for Stakeholder Involvement

Community Invitees

MacPherson & Tonning, Tetra Tech, Inc.


Dept. of Transportation


Civic Organizations


Religious Groups


Rec. Organizations


Historical / Cultural
Associations


Business Organizations



Financial Institutions


Home Associations


Realtors


Political Organizations


Parent
-
Teacher
Associations


Major Landowners

Community Invitees

Tools for Stakeholder Involvement


Make the invitation
-

direct ask and early on


Distribute the materials
-

widely cast the net


Know the audience
-

carefully craft the message


Understand their needs
-

address their concerns


Continue to inform
-

don’t give up


Create the forum
-

make it easy!



Tools for Stakeholder Involvement

Tools for Stakeholder Input

Goal


Inform the community, garner trust, and collect opinions


Challenge


To gather a crowd and be efficient



Communicate clearly and often


Call meetings only when necessary


Use collaborative processes and good facilitation


Provide advanced notice and prior written information


Develop a strong agenda and employ time management



The Meeting

Tools for Stakeholder Input

Goal


Better understand the community and build relations


Challenge


Is time
-
intensive



Reach the un
-
reached audiences


Be strategic in selecting interviewees


Begin with good questions


Avoid responsive body language or comments


End with “Do you have anything else to say?”


Record and transcribe interviews with paraphrasing



The Interview

Tools for Stakeholder Input

Goal


Gather the wants and needs of the community


Challenge


Make it effective and informative



“Brainstorm” on problems and possible solutions


Use “Vision to Action” to move group agenda forward


Employ “Group Discussion” to record audience thoughts


Create and send a “Survey” for quantitative information


Present a “Dot Matrix” to prioritize issues


Appreciative Inquiry Process to avoid negative focus


The Exercises


Make it exciting and worthwhile


Plan for results


Manage the process effectively


Involve stakeholders as soon as possible


Be honest and listen carefully


Recognize differences early on


Don’t leave out difficult stakeholders


Tools for Success

MacPherson & Tonning, Tetra Tech, Inc.


Set realistic goals


Focus on their issues


Establish mini
-
milestones to celebrate


Give feedback and praise


Commit the needed resources to succeed




Tools for Success


Effective organizational by
-
laws


Efficient working structure


Good accounting and tax reporting practices


Annual strategic planning


Regular Board trainings


Continually cultivate a new workforce


Celebrate successes and hold social activities!

Tools for the Organization

Tools on the Internet


Ohio State University Extension


Ohio Watershed Network

(
http://ohiowatersheds.osu.edu/
)


Ohio Watershed Academy

(
http://ohiowatersheds.osu.edu/owa/
)


16 On
-
Line Modules to choose from


Ohioline Factsheets

(
http://ohioline.osu.edu/
)


Ohio EPA


Ohio NPS Plan

(
http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/nps/NPSMP/index.html
)


Ohio Department of Natural Resources


Coastal NPS

(
http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/soilandwater/Coastalnonpointprogram.htm
)

Tools on the Internet


US EPA


National TMDL Program

(
http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/overviewfs.html
)


National Watershed Program

(
http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/
)



References

Beierle, T.C. and J. Cayford, 2002. “ Democracy in Practice: Public
Participation in Environmental Decisions.” Resources for the Future:
Washington, D.C.

Hungerford, H.R. and Volk, T.L. 1990. “Changing learner behavior through
environmental education.” The Journal of Environmental Education. 21(3),
8
-
22.

Kenney, D.S. and W.B. Lord. 1999. “Analysis of Institutional Innovation in the
Natural Resources and Environmental Realm: The Emergence of
Alternative Problem Solving Strategies in the American West.” Research
Report (RR
-
21). Natural Resources Law Center, University of Colorado
School of Law: Boulder, CO.

MacPherson, C. and B. Tonning. “Getting in Step: Engaging and Involving
Stakeholders in Your Watershed.” Tetra Tech, Inc.

http://www.ttwater.com/downloads/StakeholdrGuide
-
All.pdf
.


Steelman, T.A.. 1999. “Community
-
Based Environmental Management:
Agency
-

and Community
-
Driven Efforts.” Presented at the 21
st

Annual
Research Conference of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and
Management. Graduate School of Public Affairs, University of Colorado:
Boulder, CO.

Dana Oleskiewicz

Watershed Management Educator

Ohio State University Extension

Center at Wooster

1680 Madison Avenue

OARDC Administration Building

Wooster, OH 44691

330
-
263
-
3799

oleskiewicz.1@osu.edu


Robert McCall

Watershed Management Educator

Ohio State University Extension

Center at Lima

1219 West Main Cross

Suite 202

Findlay, OH 45840

419
-
422
-
6106

Mccall.57@osu.edu