Sustainable Watershed Management and Policy Making

Charles H. Call, Jr.[1]

ABSTRACT

A system approach integrating a geographic information system (GIS) with a dynamic watershed system model can be used as a watershed-based decision support system that assists stakeholders in policy-making by improving their understanding of a watershed's response to policy decisions.

INTRODUCTION

One of the current areas of emphasis for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to evaluate water quality based on the capacity each watershed. EPA has also introduced the concept of total maximum daily load (TMDL) to differentiate between watershed needs and enable solving watershed water quality problems on the basis of each individual basin.

Salt Lake City Public Utilities has responsibility for several watersheds located east of the Salt Lake Valley, Utah (Table 1). As a research effort two adjoining watersheds, Red Butte and Emigration Canyons, are being modeled to evaluate the effects of manmade changes. This is a unique opportunity to evaluate the effects of development because one basin is pristine and the other is heavily developed. The concepts learned through this model and comparison of the two study watersheds could be transferred to other watersheds. One research goal is to evaluate the relationships that describe the water quality and health of a watershed. This effort will include stock-flow system modeling and the use of GIS tools. The purpose of these tools will be to improve the sustainability of these systems and help explain the long-term effects of policy decisions. An extension of this research will be to evaluate the process of policymaking based on the "system" understanding developed using the model and GIS representations.

From a water quality standpoint, identifying the proper indicators or surrogates coupled with an understanding of the long-term effects of policy decisions is very important. To protect watersheds, strategies must address watershed management and nonpoint source pollution prevention. The stock-flow model could be a very valuable tool in that effort.

WATERSHED MANAGEMENT

The national trend in watershed planning and resource management, particularly with the federal agencies, is to develop sustainable area-wide management plans based on the total ecosystem. In nature, physical and biological processes purify water. Problems occur from man-induced changes to those processes from development. Pollution of the water resources can come from atmospheric deposition and surface runoff from polluted development areas. One goal of sustainable development must be to reduce the loading of the watershed "system" to a state that is less than the system assimilation capacity.

Table 1 — Comparison of Study Watersheds

Watershed	Drainage Area (Square Miles)	Mean Watershed Elevation (Feet)	Condition	Comments
City Creek	19.20	7200	Restricted	Nature Preserve
Red Butte *	7.25	6700	Completely Restricted	Research Natural Area (RNA)
Emigration *	18.00	6290	Unrestricted	Developed along stream
Parley's	50.10	6700	Semi-restricted	Limited development
Mill Creek	21.70	7700	Semi-restricted	Fee Area
Big Cottonwood	48.50	8750	Semi-restricted	Developed canyon with sewered system, no-dog policy
Little Cottonwood	27.40	9200	Semi-restricted	Developed canyon with sewered system, no-dog policy
* Model development watersheds

Establishing barriers to protect the quality of watershed water supplies is an important legacy for future generations. These barriers can be physical processes, such as water treatment plants, but they can also be watershed policies and practices such as installing sewers in the watershed, implementing a “no-dog” policy, etc.

Indicators and Sources of Pollution

Common practice is to use indicators or surrogates to monitor the watershed health or impacts of development. Because of the complexity of water resources systems, it is important to analyze an array of water quality constituents and not become too focused on any single indicator. Some of the possible water quality indicators are discussed below.

Organic wastes — Organic wastes (fecal coliform, nutrients, etc.) are subject to decay. Organic pollutants affect the odor and color of the water. When organic wastes are placed in a stream, they decompose and can consume large quantities of oxygen from the water. Oxygen-replenishing and oxygen‑holding capacity of the water is higher when the water is cool — which is the case with streams considered in this research.

Dissolved solids and minerals — Dissolved solids and minerals can be a system problem. Runoff from mine tailings may be a problem for the research watersheds.

Inert materials — Inert wastes are those that enter the water as solids but are not involved in chemical reactions. Pollution from inert wastes is a serious problem in areas located near mining operations.

Toxic materials — Toxic wastes are those that do not easily settle out and are not easily broken down by biological means. They tend to be poisonous when consumed or contacted by plants and animals. Pesticides and herbicides that wash off the land into the streams are examples.

Policy-making

Water resources management and watershed policies need to recognize the importance and interconnection of all the physical processes that take place simultaneously and the effects of land use changes. It is important to understanding the long-term effects of policy decisions. Watershed management requires sensitivity to ecology and development practices (Loftin, et al., 2000). The NPDES program requires that watersheds be characterized and plans developed and implemented to protect the receiving streams. This has stimulated interest in developing watershed management plans that incorporate all the pertinent scientific data.

Decision Support Tools

In terms of watershed issues, the national research agenda seems to be to develop new engineering tools. BASINS (EPA, 1998) and GIS (ESRI, 1992) seem to be the most often used tools. BASINS (Better Assessment Science Integrating Point and Non-point Sources) is the primary tool proposed by EPA for watershed modeling of water quality. While EPA is not actively supporting research into other models, they are encouraging alternate model development by the professional and academic communities.

The research watersheds (Table 1) are highly complex. There are several interrelated but diverse issues and processes involved such as scientific understanding, basic policy-making, physical watershed processes, biochemistry, hydrodynamics, etc. This complexity and interrelation of processes will require new tools. Dynamic system models developed using stock-flow methods have been shown to be effective tools for planning and policy making. A good system model can aid in operating complex and often multi-objective and multi-purpose water resources systems (Palmer, et al., 2000a). These models are used to facilitate and support the decision making process. Significant advancements have been made on stock-flow models. Using a stock-flow model coupled with GIS analysis to evaluate watershed response and water-quality generation is a new concept. These tools have been used separately in the water resources field but they have not been used together.

WATER RESOURCES PLANNING

From the environmental standpoint, EPA is emphasizing that watersheds must be evaluated on a holistic basis. They are become more integrated in their approach to the range of watershed issues. There is a shift from addressing point source pollution to nonpoint sources. This is more difficult to handle because of the dispersed nature of the sources. It requires looking at issues on a watershed basis. Each watershed is unique with individual problems and consequently mitigation plans will likewise be unique. EPA emphasizes watershed and water quality based assessment and integrated analysis of point and nonpoint sources (USEPA, 1998). The assessment of nonpoint pollution is a complex, multidisciplinary environmental problem.

The planning process is changing. Planning is becoming more locally driven. EPA has shifted their emphasis and strategy to stress community-based environmental protection. The mission of federal agencies is shifting from being motivated to build projects to one of sustainability and establishing effective operation and maintenance (O&M) of existing projects.

The different roles in the planning process vary. Engineers want to be right. Scientists want to understand the system. Politicians want solutions that can be implemented. Regulators want clear boundaries. It is not as important to have the right answer, as it is to be able to develop the "political will" to implement a plan that will solve the “watershed” problems. The role that engineer plays in the planning process is changing. In the planning role of the engineer, it is becoming less important to be "right" than having collaborative solutions.

Trade-offs and conflicts exist in water resources projects. Public involvement with stakeholders and emerging computer technology present a unique opportunity to achieve better decision-making. In terms of stakeholder interaction, shared vision modeling is getting more attention. Shared vision modeling is a disciplined approach to use a model for conflict resolution of water resources issues (Palmer, et al., 2000b and Werick, 2000).

There are two basic research issues — (1) developing integrated stock-flow model linked to a GIS database and (2) proposing an organizational framework and decision support system that will engage stakeholders in developing shared vision solutions to the watershed issues.

In recent years the water resources planning process has changed from the construction paradigm to the coordinated or integrated planning paradigm (Whipple, 1996, Grigg, 1996a and Grigg, 1996b). Coordinated public-private partnership approach to problem solving is needed to address the complex issues involved in water-resources. Current trend is towards sustainable development. Improved methods are needed to move stakeholders to win-win solutions.

The new approach to the planning process is to seek collaborative solutions. Planning and collaborative methods that identify issues and create conditions that lead to effective dialogue are needed. This facilitates multi-objective planning, policy making and issue analysis. Political will to implement a plan is a natural outgrowth of stakeholders’ involvement, facilitated by the use of the tools, which create common shared understanding of the system. The author has experienced this on several occasions during which he worked with stakeholder committees to implement a plan as part of a UPDES stormwater permit.

RESEARCH APPROACH