pragmatic watershed assessment and decision support for...

Pragmatic Watershed Assessment and Decision Support for Comprehensive Pollution Planning and Management

Paul E. StaceyFootprintsInTheWater@outlook.com

13 September 2017

Come gather ‘round peopleWherever you roamAnd admit that the watersAround you have grownAnd accept it that soonYou’ll be drenched to the boneIf your time to you is worth savin’Then you better start swimmin’ or you’ll sink like a stoneFor the times they are a-changin’

- Bob Dylan

The Times They Are A-Changin’

The Road Ahead…

Priorities for Ecosystem-Based Management

• “Well-being” Outcomes• Integrate Social-Economic-Environmental Processes• Analyze Multiple Drivers and Stressors Collectively• Select Introspective Environmental Indicators and Measures• Assess State in Context• Seek Sustainable and Balanced Solutions• Integrated Landscape Management Framework

Use a pragmatic approach towards measuring sustainability: The issue is indeed complex, more complex than the already complicated issue of measuring current well-being or performance.

Well-being is multi-dimensional: …includes social, economic and environmental dimensions.

Joseph Eugene Stiglitz is an American economist and a professor at Columbia University. He is a recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences

Key Findings for Environmental Management

From production to well-being: …shift emphasis from measuring economic production to measuring people’s well-being.

Stiglitz, J., A. Sen and J.-P. Fitoussi. 2009.

Physical indicators for environmental pressures: …there is a need for a clear indicator of our proximity to dangerous levels of environmental damage (such as associated with climate change or the depletion of fishing stocks).

Taking stock: …not an easy task[!]. [Include] …indices that essentially focus on…how far we currently “overconsume” our resources.

Use Ecological Footprints (EF): …measures how much of the regenerative capacity of the biosphere is used up by human activities (consumption).

Ewing, B., et al. 2010. Global Footprint Network.

Well-being:

Plantier Santos, 2010

Well-being:

Figure 3. Systems taxonomy for resource flow indicators (Fiksel, Eason and Fredricksen, 2012).

Well-being is multi-dimensional:

Hagen, 2015

Measuring sustainability:

Indicators for environmental pressures:

ECOSYSTEMS AND THE BIODIVERSITY THEY EMBODY

CONSTITUTE “ENVIRONMENTAL CAPITAL” ON WHICH

HUMAN WELL-BEING HEAVILY DEPENDS.

Indicators for environmental pressures:

Indicators for environmental pressures:

Use a pragmatic approach:

Ecosystem Services Toolkit

Use a pragmatic approach:

Indicators for environmental pressures:

- Climate Change- Development- Food & Fiber- Resource Extraction- Ecosystem Instability

- Vegetative Cover- Forest Integrity- Core Forest- Fragmented Forest

Indicators for environmental pressures:

- Climate Change- Development- Food & Fiber- Resource Extraction- Ecosystem Instability

- Vegetative Cover- Forest Integrity- Core Forest- Fragmented Forest

Vegetative Cover

Action –Ecosystem-Based

Indicators for environmental pressures:

Taking stock:

Taking stock:

Taking stock:

Taking stock:

Taking stock:

Semi-Honest Paul Imaginative Paul

Human Nature – Another Complicating FactorTaking stock:

Scoping The Forest Integrity Indicator

Pre-Colonial – 95%

Civil War – 25-30%

1950 – 64% 1998-2006 – 59%

Eastford, CT. Ouimet, W. and K. JohnsonUCONN Center for Integrative Geosciences

Ecosystem Management HQ

NERRS Science Collaborative Buffers ProjectGreat Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve

Analysis Background & Objectives

• DEVELOP A GENERALIZED ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY THAT:• IS CONCEPTUALLY SIMPLE BUT CREDIBLE

• USES READILY-AVAILABLE OR ATTAINABLE LAND COVER METRICS

• AND IS SUITABLE FOR CUSTOMIZING BUFFER WIDTHS WITH RESPECT TO:• WATERSHED SIZE AND CONDITION

• WATERSHED SIZE AND BUFFER CONDITION

• DEVELOP AN INDICATOR OF ECOSYSTEM INTEGRITY THAT:• SUPPORTS THE ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

• ASSESSES WATERSHED ECOSYSTEM INTEGRITY PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE

• CAN ASSESS NATURAL CAPITAL STATUS

• DEVELOP A DECISION SUPPORT FRAMEWORK (DSF) THAT IS:• USEFUL FOR LOCAL ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING

• SCALABLE TO ANY GEOGRAPHIC UNIT (POLYGON), E.G, WATERSHED, TOWN, AND BUFFER WIDTH

• ACCOMMODATES USER-DEFINED TARGETS FOR WATERSHED CONDITION, NATURAL CAPITAL, AND BUFFER LEVEL OF PROTECTION

• GUIDES ENVIRONMENTAL LAND MANAGEMENT POLICY, INCLUDING BUFFERS

• PREDICTS OUTCOMES IN TERMS OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH AND NATURAL CAPITAL

Watershed and Buffer Metricsfor Generalized Analysis Methodology

• WATERSHED OR TOWN (SUB-UNITS AT SMALLEST SCALE LOCALLY USEFUL)• TOTAL AREA

• LAND COVER CATEGORY AREAS

• CORE AND FRAGMENTED FOREST AREAS

• BUFFERS FOR THREE STANDARD WIDTHS (100’, 200’ AND 300’)• PERENNIAL STREAM LENGTHS

• SHORELINE LENGTHS

• TOTAL AREA

• LAND COVER CATEGORY AREAS

• CORE AND FRAGMENTED FOREST AREAS (OR NATURAL COVER AREAS)

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

50000

1 26 51 76 101 126 151

Wat

ersh

ed S

ize

(acr

es)

Connecticut Coastal Watersheds

Watershed Size Distribution

Mean 8730

Median 7033

Minimum 1437

Maximum 46499

Forest Condition Indicator = Natural Capital• Based on a Forest Condition Normalized Indicator (NOT Valuation in

Dollars), Scaled from 0 to 1• 1.0 = 100% Forest = Natural Capital “Bank” is Full• 0.0 = No Forest = Natural Capital “Bank” is Empty• Applied to both watersheds and buffers

• Targets are Set by Local Authorities and the Public• Based on Local Needs and Interests• Considers Ecosystem Service Benefits to “Well-being”• “Level of Protection” options for watersheds and buffers• Decision Support Framework (DSF) assists with status and future scenarios

• For this Analysis, Target is set at 0.5 = 50% Forest

Calculating Forest Integrity/Natural CapitalThe Effective Forest Cover Indicator (EFCI)

EFC = ((FAF * TFF) + TCF)

Where: EFC = Effective Forest Cover (acres)TFF = Total Fragmented Forest (acres)TCF = Total Core Forest (acres)

And: FAF = Fragmented Forest Adjustment Factor= TFF/(TFF + TCF)

EFCI = EFC/TB

Where: EFCI = Effective Forest Cover Indicator (a fractional proportion)TB = Total Basin area (Acres)

An EFCI can be calculated for any geographic unit (polygon), e.g, watershed, town, and anybuffer width for which input data are available and for any past, present or future condition helpful to local planning.

Core Forest

Fragmented Forest

Non-Forest

If we conserve half the land and sea, 85% ofall species will be protected from extinctionand life on Earth enters the safe zone.

— E.O. Wilson

Standard widths have proven to be the most accepted buffer management approach adopted by states and municipalities that have adopted legal buffer requirements. Science supports widths in the range of 100’ to 300’ with reasonable consistency and derived benefits of:• Low Level: 100’

• Pollutant trapping• Physical attributes such as shading

• Medium Level: 200’• Hydrologic and pollutant benefits• biological/microbial mediation• riparian habitat benefits for wildlife

• High Level: 300’ • hydrologic character, floodplain function, and pollutant removal beenfits• habitat value for terrestrial wildlife• migratory corridors and connectivity for upland, wetland and aquatic species.

Buffers as A Management Tool

Calculating Effective Buffer Widths at Three Levels of Protection

ADJUSTING BUFFER WIDTH TO LOCAL CONDITIONS:

FACTOR 1: ADJUST TO WATERSHED SIZE

FACTOR 2: ADJUST TO WATERSHED CONDITION (I.E., EFCI FOR THE WATERSHED)

FACTOR 3: ADJUST TO BUFFER CONDITION (I.E., EFCI FOR THE BUFFER)

Adjusting Buffer Width for Watershed Size and Condition

Decision Support Framework for the Effective Forest Cover Indicator (EFCI)

An EFCI can be calculated for any geographic unit (polygon), e.g, watershed, town, or buffer and tested for user-defined past, present or future scenarios or targets helpful to local planning.

Output Input Parameters

Watershed Natural Capital Assessment, Scale 0-1.0 Fragmented Forest and Core Forest AreasTotal Basin Area

Buffer Natural Capital Assessment, Scale 0-1.0 Fragmented Forest and Core Forest AreasTotal Buffer Area

Buffer Widths Scaled to Watershed Size Watershed AreaStream Length

Buffer Widths Scaled to Watershed Size and Condition Watershed Fragmented and Core Forest AreasWatershed AreaStream Length

Buffer Widths Scaled to Watershed Size and Buffer Condition

Watershed AreaStream LengthBuffer Fragmented and Core Forest Areas

Buffer Widths Scaled to Watershed Size and Condition and Buffer Condition

Watershed AreaStream LengthWatershed Fragmented and Core Forest AreasBuffer Fragmented and Core Forest Areas

Decision Support Framework for the Effective Forest Cover Indicator (EFCI)

An EFCI can be calculated for any geographic unit (polygon), e.g, watershed, town, or buffer and tested for user-defined past, present or future scenarios or targets helpful to local planning.

Output Input Parameters

Watershed Natural Capital Assessment, Scale 0-1.0 Fragmented Forest and Core Forest AreasTotal Basin Area

Buffer Natural Capital Assessment, Scale 0-1.0 Fragmented Forest and Core Forest AreasTotal Buffer Area

Buffer Widths Scaled to Watershed Size Watershed AreaStream Length

Buffer Widths Scaled to Watershed Size and Condition Watershed Fragmented and Core Forest AreasWatershed AreaStream Length

Buffer Widths Scaled to Watershed Size and Buffer Condition

Watershed AreaStream LengthBuffer Fragmented and Core Forest Areas

Buffer Widths Scaled to Watershed Size and Condition and Buffer Condition

Watershed AreaStream LengthWatershed Fragmented and Core Forest AreasBuffer Fragmented and Core Forest Areas

THE DSF PROVIDES USER OPTIONS TO:

• MANAGE WATERSHEDS OR BUFFERS OR ANY COMBINATION

• SET LOCALLY-DEFINED TARGETS FOR WATERSHED AND BUFFER

MANAGEMENT

The Road Ahead…

Priorities for Landscape Management• Employ and Integrated, Ecosystem-based approach• Seek local input on Goals and Targets• Preserve what’s good• Repair or Nurture Recovery of what’s close to good• Restore, but recognize Recovery Potential and Limitations of

Restoration• Engage and motivate public to change behavior and lifestyle

considering the prevailing socio-economic setting• Re-engineer – mitigate to the Maximum Extent Practicable for

the Best Attainable Condition

Pragmatic Watershed Assessment and Decision Support for Comprehensive Pollution Planning and Management

Paul E. StaceyFootprintsInTheWater@outlook.com

13 September 2017