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
There are significant and complex
research needs in the area of watershed management. One useful research approach would be to demonstrate that
effective use of stock-flow modeling and GIS can improve policymaking. The steps would be:
(1)
Develop a
comprehensive dynamic watershed system model of runoff and water quality using
stock-flow model linked to a raster GIS.
(2)
Apply
this model to multiple watersheds.
(3)
Evaluate
how these tools can be used effectively with stakeholder committees.
Model
Development
Develop a comprehensive dynamic
watershed system model of runoff and water quality for two watersheds (Red
Butte and Emigration) using a stock-flow model—Watershed Stakeholder System
Integration Model (WSSIM). WSSIM will
be a watershed runoff model attached to a water quality model. The stock-flow and GIS tools proposed are
STELLA (HPS, 1997) and ArcInfo (ERSI, 1999).
Precipitation, flow and water quality
data is available to calibrate and validate the model. This model could help explain important
processes on these two watersheds. Some
GIS analysis of these watersheds will be done to develop the relationships
necessary to prepare the stock-flow model.
The starting
point in the modeling effort is to looking at reference behavior and model
structure, etc. The approach of this research will be
to use simple “sub-system” models of each process. This watershed scale model will show the relationships and
linkages between runoff (precipitation, evapotranspiration, etc) and the
processes that produce the water quality constituents.
Policy
Testing Study
Use this dynamic system model to
evaluate the effect of current watershed policies. The process of system
analysis in environmental stewardship uses tools to guide understanding and aid
in policy making. The hypothesis of the system analysis process is that
effective use of the available tools can develop a "shared vision"
for all "stakeholders" of a watershed. A watershed view of water issues and the effects of development
can be very complex. System analysis with STELLA can be used to evaluate these
complex processes. With tools like
STELLA and GIS, we can more easily visualize and focus our system
understanding.
Use of WSSIM
with Stakeholders
This research will evaluate the
watersheds listed in Table 1. These
watersheds are the water supply sources for Salt Lake City, Utah.
Parallel with this research Salt Lake
City Public Utilities is assembling a "blue-ribbon" panel of national
water quality experts to evaluate watershed policies and their effect on
long-term water quality. The panel’s
goal is to identify good water quality indicators for these watersheds—i.e. coliform,
nutrients or some other indicator.
WSSIM could be used to help this panel and other stakeholders gain a
better understanding of water quality outcomes based on policy feedback loops,
i.e. each policy decision will have feedback loops into the final resultant
water quality outcome. This process
will help identify the best indicators of or surrogates for water-quality
degradation.
For increased “buy-in”, stakeholders
should be directly involved in developing the model. An effective stakeholder process might be —
(1)
Team
building — Do some
team building activities to help everyone break down their barrier and feel
comfortable with each other, build trust and a willingness to be “engaged” in
the process.
(2)
Starting
model — Develop a
simple model of the system in question.
STELLA is a good tool for developing the system model. The simple model should demonstrate the
expected system behavior.
(3)
Training
and demonstration — To
start the buy-in process provide all stakeholders with basic training about the
model and modeling concepts.
(4)
Brainstorming
session to identify issues and positions of the stakeholders — Focus on processes, feedback
connections and expected behavior.
(5)
Engage
all stakeholders in the modeling process — This is ongoing until the policy has been
developed. The stock-flow model gives
the stakeholders an opportunity to "test drive" their policy.
Once a reasonable stock-flow model is
developed, it can be applied to other watersheds with appropriate
modifications. The model can be used to
evaluate policy decisions and their effect on water quality — i.e. watershed
"no-dog" policy, effects of distributed recreation, effects of
sewered vs non-sewered watersheds, etc.
A significant issue of this research
will be to consider how stakeholder oversight committees with diverse interests
can use tools like GIS and stock-flow models to increase their common shared
"understanding" of the issues and thus improve the policy making
process. A hypothetical stakeholders
committee could consist of —
