Local Watershed Management Planning in Virginia

A COMMUNITY WATER QUALITYAPPROACH

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section OneWatershed Management Planning – An Overview

Local Watershed Planning .....................................................................................1Intended Audiences ...............................................................................................1Watershed Management Planning Benefits ..........................................................2 Community Benefits of Watershed Planning .........................................................................................................2

Watershed Plan Functions and Uses .....................................................................3Define Watershed Boundaries As the Geography of Management .........................................................................3

Leverage Existing Resources and Mobilize New Resources ..................................................................................3

Guide Land Use Decisions ...................................................................................................................................3

Provide Consistency for Other Watershed Plans ...................................................................................................3

Partnering for Successful Plans .............................................................................3Key Components of an Effective Plan....................................................................4Virginia Watershed Management Planning Checklist ...........................................5Collecting and Reviewing Existing Planning Documents......................................5Watershed Plan Scope and Scale ........................................................................5

Section TwoFramework of Institutional and Regulatory Responsibility

Identifying Responsible Organizations .................................................................7Integrating Virginia Planning Initiatives ..................................................................7Local Comprehensive Plans ..................................................................................................................................9

Stormwater Management and the MS4 Permits ....................................................................................................9

Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) ...................................................................................................................10

Virginia Tributary Strategy Program .......................................................................................................................10

Watershed Roundtables ........................................................................................................................................11

Scenic Rivers Program .........................................................................................................................................11

Other Related Initiatives..........................................................................................12Local Agency Plans .............................................................................................................................................12

Transportation Plans ............................................................................................................................................12

Section ThreeA Community-Based Watershed Vision

A Vision for the Future ............................................................................................13Watershed Plan Constituencies: Who Should Be Involved?.................................13Key Constituencies in the Planning Process .........................................................14A Clear Participation Process .................................................................................15Plan Adoption .........................................................................................................15

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section FourEnvironmental Inventory

Understanding and Evaluating Current Watershed Conditions ............................17 Riparian System......................................................................................................17Water Quality Data ................................................................................................................................................17Natural Habitats ....................................................................................................................................................18Rare and Endangered Species...............................................................................................................................18Physical Attributes ..................................................................................................18Drainage Areas ....................................................................................................................................................18Floodplains ...........................................................................................................................................................18Wetlands ..............................................................................................................................................................19Erosion Potential ...................................................................................................................................................19 Karst Peatures ......................................................................................................................................................19Riparian Conditions...............................................................................................................................................19Springs ................................................................................................................................................................19Water Budget........................................................................................................................................................19 Existing and Future Land Use/Cover .....................................................................19Land Uses ...........................................................................................................................................................19Major Forested Areas ...........................................................................................................................................19Disturbed Areas ....................................................................................................................................................19Flood Mitigation Areas .........................................................................................................................................19Runoff Potential ....................................................................................................................................................19Potential Pollution Sources ...................................................................................................................................19Protected Areas ...................................................................................................................................................20Recreational Uses.................................................................................................................................................20Significant Sites ....................................................................................................................................................20 Data Collection ......................................................................................................20

Section FiveData Evaluation and Goal Setting

Evaluating Watershed Challenges and Opportunities...........................................21Current Conditions ...............................................................................................................................................21Future Conditions and Trends ...............................................................................................................................21Identify Critical Watershed Issues and Needs .......................................................................................................22

Setting Goals ..........................................................................................................22

Section SixObjectives and Implementation Strategies

Setting Objectives...................................................................................................23Sample Watershed Protection Objectives .............................................................................................................23Developing Actions to Achieve Objectives ............................................................23Integrating Land Management Tools ...................................................................24Stormwater Management .....................................................................................................................................24Riparian and Sinkhole Protection ..........................................................................................................................24In-Stream Mitigation .............................................................................................................................................24Legal and Land Planning Tools..............................................................................................................................24

Section SevenResource Needs

Effectively Leverage Existing Resources and Mobilize New Resources ..............25Planning for Ongoing Funding and Management ................................................25

Section EightProgress Benchmarks

Tracking and Evaluating Implementation ..............................................................27Review and Evaluation ..........................................................................................27 Intermediate Indicators and Milestones ................................................................................................................28

A Mechanism for Ongoing Watershed Assessment ..............................................28Build a Case for Action Based on Impacts ............................................................................................................28

Section NineConclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

APPENDICESA. Watershed Management Planning Checklist ................................................................31-34B. Technical, Regulatory and Financial Assistance Programs..........................................35-38C. Virginia Planning Initiatives ...........................................................................................39-40D. Data and Planning Resources ......................................................................................41-44E. Visioning Process .........................................................................................................45-47F. Resource Bibliography .................................................................................................48-49

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1

SECTION ONE

Local Watershed PlanningEnvironmental planning conducted bylocal governments, agencies and commu-nities requires prioritizing goals andaddressing needs that incorporate a widerange of social, economic and environ-mental factors. Considerations about waterquality, stream management, habitatrestoration, and the relationship betweenland use planning and healthy watershedshave become key components of planningat community and regional levels.

Over the past decade, the benefits ofusing watersheds as realistic delineatorsfor natural resource planning efforts havebeen gaining attention. More localities areusing watershed management planningeither within their existing comprehensiveplanning or to promote regional coopera-tion. On the state level, the development oftributary strategies to reduce nutrient andsediment pollution in the Commonwealth’swaters exemplifies watershed-based planning. At the community level, manylocal groups are initiating their own water-shed planning processes.

The Virginia Watershed AdvisoryCommittee (VWAC), a consortium ofVirginia agencies, regional organizationsand local government representativesinvolved in watershed management andrestoration, developed this guide to givecommunities tools to develop local, effec-tive, community-based watershed man-agement plans. These plans are a frame-work to improve management of Virginia’s494 watersheds through strategies encom-passing local solutions.

Effective watershed management planscan help Virginia’s local governments meet

new regulatory requirements, includingTotal Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) andstormwater provisions of the federal CleanWater Act. Plans developed locally also will help the state meet commitments inthe Chesapeake 2000 Agreement. Mostimportantly, watershed plans enable com-munities to make appropriate decisions ata level that allows them to meet local resi-dents’ needs, such as improved water qual-ity or enhanced recreational opportunities.

VWAC recommends a watershed management plan with eight basic compo-nents to effectively capture local needs,while assisting with meeting state commit-ments previously mentioned. This guideprovides background narratives for thoseeight components, as well as a relatedchecklist. It also explores the relationshipbetween local watershed managementplanning and larger state and federal water quality programs such as TMDLsand other Clean Water Act programs.

Intended Audiences Local government agencies and depart-ments, including engineering, public works and planning, interested in devisinga coordinated plan to manage and protecttheir local natural resources will derive themost use from this guide. Entities involvedin regional planning, such as soil andwater conservation districts and planningdistrict commissions, can use it to estab-lish a framework for their watershed planning processes. Additional users mayinclude elected bodies, such as city coun-cils and boards of supervisors, as well asappointed officials, such as planning commissioners or water planning boards.

Section One

Watershed Management Planning – An Overview

A watershed management approach can help coordinate ongoing or proposed natural resource-based planning efforts.

Watershed: The areafrom which waters flows to agiven river, spring, lake,ocean or other body of water.Elevated land forms dividewatersheds. In Virginia 494local watersheds encompassapproximately 50,000 milesof rivers and streams.

Watershed management: An effortto coordinate and integratenatural resource based pro-grams, tools, resources andneeds of multiple stakeholdergroups within a watershed toconserve, maintain, protectand restore habitat and waterquality.

Watershed management plan: Adetailed vision and strategy,usually at the small water-shed level, to achieve water-shed management. Manytimes initiated by local gov-ernments in conjunction withother local planning efforts,watershed management plan-ning identifies specificactions to restore habitat andwater quality, lands for con-servation and development,and ways to reduce nonpointsources of pollution. Pollution reduction actionsare prioritized in the plan.

2

SECTION ONE

Community watershed and environmentalgroups, civic groups and neighborhoodassociations can use the guide to planprojects or suggest watershed protectionstrategies to elected officials and govern-ment agencies.

Watershed ManagementPlanning Benefits Protecting local watersheds leads to vari-ous benefits for Virginia’s naturalresources and environment. A watershedprotection strategy can mean improvedquality and quantity of water for the sur-vival of fish, wildlife and people. Stablefloodplains and vegetated stream buffersare important to any watershed becausethey reduce the likelihood of flood events,provide recreational opportunities such asgreenway trails, and offer aesthetic naturalscenery.

Every community in Virginia has a pri-mary planning tool in place: the local com-prehensive plan. Many communities haveincluded water protection as a componentof their comprehensive plans. However,localities’ plans may not adequatelyaddress specific strategies for implementa-tion of water protection goals. A watershedplan provides an opportunity to developwater protection strategies by applying anecological and physical framework to plan-ning. The water quality of streams is adirect measure of impacts from land usesin the watershed. Healthy streams withdiverse aquatic life, stable stream banks,vibrant native vegetation, and healthyfloodplain and buffer areas signify a well-protected watershed.

However, rivers and streams canbecome degraded quickly. Inadequatestormwater management and resultanthigh flows, toxic waste spills, contaminat-ed rainfall, removal of streamside vegeta-tion, stream channelization and otherhuman impacts may take a heavy toll.Impacts from natural events such as hurri-canes and extreme floods also may harmrivers and streams. An active watershedplanning process can ensure that tools arein place to address unexpected changesand flooding events.

Effective local watershed managementplanning provides a new set of tools forcommunities to address policy challengesand new planning opportunities thatextend beyond simply meeting minimumregulatory requirements. Effective water-shed management can help ensure thatsurface and ground water supplies do notbecome degraded over time, drinkingwater supplies are sustained, soil andstream bank erosion are reduced, andwildlife habitat is restored.

In addition to protecting the environ-ment, a watershed-based approach to landmanagement also provides important ben-efits for the economy and for Virginia’scommunities. Watershed improvementscan lead to ancillary benefits such asenhanced real estate values for homes andbusinesses near river greenway trails orother new recreational offerings. Effectivewatershed management can provide a newcontext within which to evaluate communi-ty goals, and assess current and projectedfuture land use patterns.

Community Benefits of Watershed PlanningWith myriad natural resource planningresponsibilities facing local governmentsand communities, why consider taking onwatershed management planning?Because a watershed managementapproach can often help you coordinateongoing or proposed planning efforts.Watershed management planning is not apanacea but can provide a framework inwhich to coordinate existing planning,whether done as a component of a locali-ty’s comprehensive plan, or to coordinatemulti-jurisdictional planning efforts. Manylocalities already possess the pieces thatcan form the basis for a watershed man-agement plan; the plan itself can tietogether local efforts.

Following are just a few benefits ofwatershed management planning:

•Helps address community concerns aboutthe quality of local waterways

•Provides a framework to identify resourceissues and constraints that impact devel-opment and land use decisions

Lessons from localities involved in watershed man-agement planning

Local government plannersusing watershed managementplanning say the plans:

serve as a framework formeeting NPDES regulationsand other stormwater planning

address cumulative environmental impacts ofdevelopment

offer a rational way to integrate objectives such asprotecting sensitiveresources, providing greeninfrastructure to accommo-date balanced development,and generating greater nterest in and support forenvironmental programs

When asked to list major selling points of mostcommon responses werethat it:

helps meet regulatoryrequirements

enhances environmentalplanning

improves relations withcitizen groups

enhances support forenvironmental programs

saves money by bettercoordinating planning activities

3

SECTION ONE

•Helps localities prioritize resources suchas money, time and staff

•Uses natural rather than jurisdictionalboundaries to foster regional cooperation

•Targets geographic areas for land conser-vation and development

•Approaches interdependent issues underone framework, leading to greater efficien-cy in the use of resources

•Helps plan for community sustainability,balancing environmental protection, eco-nomic development and quality of life

•Provides a forum for proactive communityinvolvement and self-determination ratherthan crisis response

Watershed Plan Functions and UsesAmong its functions, an effective watershed plan should:

Define watershed boundaries as the geography of managementEstablish a watershed’s geographic loca-tion as the framework for the plan’s organi-zation and management. Identify the water-shed’s physical and jurisdictional bound-aries, including the various governmententities located within the watershed andtheir management responsibilities. West ofthe Blue Ridge, this process is complicat-ed by karst topography, which can result instream flow that bypasses topographicdivides. Identifying watershed size and rel-evant government entities quickly estab-lishes the scale and timeframe of thewatershed planning process.

Leverage existing resources and mobilize new resourcesWithin the plan, existing resources areidentified that can provide technical andfinancial assistance and work in tandemwith existing programs. Watershed plan-ning can mobilize new communityresources to support local watershed man-agement. For example, Nelson County’swatershed plan for the Rockfish River ledto the formation of a new citizens’ advoca-cy group that has begun water monitoringand re-establishing riparian buffer areas.

Guide land use decisions A watershed plan provides a basis for localland use planning decisions. These deci-sions could include designating potentialeconomic growth areas, zoning in coordi-nation with community land developmentor protection goals, designating locationsfor community access to surface andground water supplies (e.g., drinking,recreation, aesthetics), as well as waterresources that need to be preserved asenvironmental resources (e.g., fish andwildlife habitat).

The plan should be integrated with thelocal comprehensive plan and zoning reg-ulations: The comprehensive plan shouldidentify the watershed plan as a means ofimplementing comprehensive plan goals,and existing zoning should be evaluated todetermine if and how regulations could beupdated to meet watershed plan goals.Similarly, additional community planningefforts for parks, recreation facilities, trans-portation needs and other land useprocesses should be integrated with thewatershed plan.

Provide consistency for other watershed plansAt a certain level, a watershed plan can bea model for similar local and regionalplans. For example, Fairfax County isdeveloping watershed plans for each of thecounty’s 10 watersheds. The county isusing a standardized process to guideplan development so the plans work wellwith each other. Additionally, the plans arebeing developed in a staggered sequenceso that each can build on lessons learnedduring prior watershed planning processes.

Partnering for Successful PlansLocally developed watershed managementplans are critically important to protectingVirginia’s natural resources as well as pub-lic health and safety. To be most effective,localities, government agencies and com-munities must work in regional partner-ships to address issues facing the state’sriver basins, the Chesapeake Bay, and

4

SECTION ONE

waters downstream beyond Virginia’s bor-ders. Regional partnerships are importantbecause, while state and federal legislationdirectly addresses environmental qualityand public health, no single piece of legis-lation can resolve competing jurisdictionalneeds such as competition for surfacewater supplies among upstream anddownstream users.

Management objectives for a sharedwatershed can vary from one jurisdiction toanother. Without regional coordination,these objectives sometimes conflict. Forexample, one county may target a streamfor future drinking water supplies, while acounty upstream plans to use the streamfor discharges from a proposed waste-water treatment plant. Similarly, severaljurisdictions may share a large watershed,such as the Potomac River watershed, thatis drained by the District of Columbia,Maryland, Virginia, and portions ofPennsylvania and West Virginia. Unlessthese jurisdictions coordinate their water-shed management goals, the potential forcompeting needs and conflicting goals ishigh. As these examples illustrate, thefuture health of the Chesapeake Baydepends on all jurisdictions within itsdrainage area committing to effectiveregional coordination and coordinatedwatershed management strategies.

While federal legislation such as theClean Water Act plays an important role inprotecting water quality and habitat, locali-ties’ voluntary participation in watershedmanagement is vital to make sure surfaceand ground waters are protected. Federaland state programs have requirements forstream protection, but these alone cannotadequately protect Virginia’s watersheds.For example, it is impossible to assess andverify every pollution violation. Also, someproperty owners and local governmentsdon’t understand the importance of water-shed management or how to develop awatershed plan. As a result, land areas thatserve as key groundwater recharge areasmay be paved over because of inadequateassessment of the local ground wateraquifer. Similarly, local developers may notbe aware of “low-impact development”

approaches or clustered housing designsthat limit detrimental watershed impacts.For these reasons, an effective watershedmanagement plan covers ways to increase public and government aware-ness of watershed management tech-niques to ensure well-informed participa-tion.

Key Components of an Effective PlanWhen developing an actual watershedplan, it is important to include key compo-nents that will confirm that Virginia’s envi-ronmental protection goals are met. Allwatershed plans should identify the water-shed as the area to be managed. Fromthere, an effective watershed planningprocess should:

1. Identify key stakeholders, stakeholderroles and responsibilities, and a clear participation process; involve stakehold-ers so they become invested in the plan

2. Establish a vision for the watershed andset goals that improve or protect waterquality and habitat

3. Assess and evaluate the status of thewatershed and identify critical concerns

4. Develop a framework of institutional andregulatory responsibility

5. Set goals based on results of data evaluation

6. Identify clear and achievable strategiesbased on the plan’s goals, an actionplan, and responsible parties and time-frames

7. Identify all resource needs including funding and technical support, as well as financial limitations

8. Provide progress benchmarks as part ofa process for using and applying thewatershed plan, and adapting it as needed over time

Including these eight key components inthe watershed planning process will helpthe plan’s outcomes result in a compre-hensive approach to watershed manage-ment that meets community needs. Ofcourse, a plan can incorporate additionalcommunity goals and related outcomes.These may include protecting recreational

5

SECTION ONE

opportunities, providing appropriate riveror lake access, protecting drinking watersupplies, enhancing fish and wildlife habitat, protecting cultural and historicresources, protecting threatened or endangered species, and others.

Virginia WatershedManagement PlanningChecklistThe broad range of data, participation andeffort needed to accomplish the eight keycomponents of a watershed managementplan can make it difficult for those involvedin the planning process to recognize whenminimal planning criteria are met. TheVirginia Watershed Management PlanningChecklist in Appendix A gives planners astraightforward evaluation tool. Use thischecklist to determine the degree to whicha watershed management plan meets thecomponents and functions envisioned bythe Virginia Watershed AdvisoryCommittee. Use of this checklist can revealplan elements that require additional effortto ensure effectiveness.

Collecting and ReviewingExisting Planning DocumentsThe review and categorization of local nat-ural resource-based planning already in-hand are often overlooked when a water-shed plan is begun. Many components ofa watershed management plan may havealready been completed thanks to previ-ous local or regional initiatives. Not all ofthese initiatives will be watershed-based;many will be jurisdictionally based. Despitethis, many localities are closer to an actualwatershed plan than expected. Takingstock of previous efforts can be a valuable,timesaving first step.

Watershed Plan Scope and Scale After taking stock of existing efforts, plan-ners can determine the appropriate scaleand scope for a local watershed plan. Thisis a must for a watershed plan to achievethe functions described previously. Ideally,

the plan should seek to address an entirewatershed, irrespective of jurisdictionalboundaries. A whole-watershed approachalso needs to cover the full scope of water-shed conditions and impacts including thewatershed’s drainage area, land uses, landcover, geology and hydrology. For exam-ple, if a community decides to restore fishhabitat but fails to account for stormwaterrunoff from a large shopping mallupstream, the project will likely not suc-ceed. Similarly, a stream buffer enhance-ment program may not achieve water qual-ity goals if stormwater outfalls are not abat-ed.

Watershed management at the whole-watershed level can be a complex under-taking. Watersheds vary in scale from sev-eral acres to thousands of acres. The com-plexity of watershed management is notjust tied to watershed size. Watershedsalso vary greatly in ecology, geology,topography, land use, jurisdictional bound-aries and climate. A large watershed mayhave relatively stable land uses (e.g., statepark land) and low population densities,whereas a small watershed may containdiverse land uses, a rapidly growing popu-lation and increasing competition foraccess to natural areas. Differentapproaches may be needed within awatershed. For example, the lower flowand reduced assimilation capacity of astream’s headwaters may require morestrict protection strategies than otherstretches of the stream.

Within the whole-watershed framework,localities can also consider if and how toprioritize the management of multiplewatersheds. Here are a few questions tohelp determine appropriate scale:

•Will the watershed management plan seek to protect the water quality of allwatersheds within a particular jurisdiction?

•Will the plan be limited to watersheds thatcontain ecologically sensitive or uniquecultural areas?

•Will the plan address targeted watershedsfor protection?

If a smaller scale pilot approach is takenfor the planning process, it may be

6

SECTION ONE

worthwhile to conduct an assessment ofwatersheds within the county or region todetermine which watersheds would benefitmost from a targeted approach. However,it is important to consider that targeting themost endangered or polluted watershedsmay not yield the greatest return, nor nec-essarily be a practicable model.

After looking at the size of a watershedand the intensity of uses and land use pat-terns within its drainage area, it can bedetermined whether or not effective man-agement of the watershed will requiredividing it into sub-watersheds. For effec-tive management, large watersheds mayneed to be split up. The James River, forexample, drains more than 10,000 squaremiles and has been divided into three sec-tions – upper, middle and lower Jameswatersheds, to develop manageable waterquality goals. As the river flows from theuplands of western Virginia to theChesapeake Bay, local ecologies, popula-tion densities and land uses vary greatly,so different management strategies areneeded.

Localities that share large watershedscan establish multi-jurisdictional partner-ships to share management responsibili-ties and maximize available resources. Forexample, if a large watershed includesparts of three counties, each one can takeownership of a particular part of the water-shed and work cooperatively to identifyand achieve goals. Shared plan goals for alarge watershed may still require differentimplementation tools in different areas.Consider a case where a local river suffersfrom excessive nutrient enrichment leadingto algal blooms and low oxygen condi-tions. The upstream source of nutrientscould be agricultural, the middle streamsource could be failing septic systems,and sewer overflows could be affecting thestream’s lower portion. In this example,achieving a shared goal to reduce nutrientlevels would require a different solution foreach part of the watershed.

As a locality assesses the potentialscope and scale of its watershed manage-ment plan, a smaller-scale watershed planning process could be piloted toanswer initial questions and refine

methodology and approach.Demonstration projects also can be usedas replicable models or field-tests beforeimplementation throughout the watershed.

7

SECTION TWO

Identifying ResponsibleOrganizationsThe variety of conditions affecting waterquality and habitat within a watershed isdiverse, just as is the particular mix of anygiven locality’s public agencies and com-munity groups that restore and protect itsunique natural resources. The responsibili-ties these organizations have may belegally mandated or may result from nego-tiation and mutual agreement. Agencyresponsibilities may include promoting vol-untary efforts through education or incen-tive programs or may be focused on regu-latory or permitted activities. Many govern-ment programs include both regulatoryand incentive-based approaches. Privatelyrun groups generally assume advocacyroles and run volunteerism efforts.

Tables 1 and 2 list data sources in Virginia.Listed agencies and organizations general-ly collect or manage specific data as partof their mission or a program mandate.Aside from providing data, these agenciesand organizations can contribute to awatershed management planning effortthrough commitment of resources andtechnical aid. It’s important to identifyresources available to watershed planningand implementation through an inventoryof agencies’ specific responsibilities andtypes of technical assistance.

Appendix B is a list of Virginia’s mandatedand specific assistance programs. Theappendix is organized by land use.

Integrating Virginia Planning InitiativesThere are several planning initiatives inVirginia that either utilize or affect localplanning efforts. The Virginia PollutantDischarge Elimination System (VPDES)and Section 303(d) impaired waters andassociated TMDL planning processes areexamples of programs that can directlyaffect local watershed planning activities.Such planning can bring together, or makesense of, these various programs at thatlevel while integrating local input within theplanning processes. Seen in this light,local watershed management planning isnot just another planning initiative thrust onlocal governments. It is, in fact, a tool thatcan help localities meet state and regionalprogram goals and statutory requirementswhile providing a more comprehensivelocal perspective to the state and regionalefforts. Local watershed management plan-ning thus enhances regional and stateefforts.

Programs and plans described belowcomprise a partial list of processes thoseinvolved in local watershed planningshould bear in mind. At best, planningefforts should be coordinated with otherprocesses to develop shared solutions thatmeet the needs of numerous constituen-cies, as well as restore and protecting nat-ural resources. At a minimum, conflictswith other management plans should beavoided. Two charts in Appendix B providean overview of programs and their relation-ships. Appendix E describes each pro-gram in detail and has contact information.

Section Two

Framework of Institutionaland Regulatory ResponsibilityThe plan should outline agencies and organizations that have mandated or agreed upon responsibilities within the watershed, and identify known planning resources and opportunities for coordinating efforts.

8

SECTION TWO

conservation easements Xdrainage and utility easements Xland ownership Xexisting and historical land uses X X X X Xzoning and subdivision regulations Xpermitted point source discharges X X Xidentified NPS pollutant sources X X X X X Xfuture land use X Xhighway right-of-ways Xrecreational and historical sites X X Xforest cover X X

Data Sources Commonwealth of VirginiaType of Data DCR DEQ DGIF DMME DOF DOH VDACS VDOT VMRCRiparian Systemwater chemistry X X X X Xbiological monitoring X X X Xhabitat X X X Xrare, endangered or threatened species X X Xwater flow XPhysical Attributeswetlands Xchannel and navigation data X Xsoils Xfloodplain mapping Xriparian buffers X Xtopography X Xshoreline erosion rates Xstream morphology data X X X X

Existing Use and Land Cover

conservation easements X X X X

drainage and utility easements X Xland ownership X Xexisting and historical land uses X X X X Xzoning and subdivision regulations Xpermitted point source discharges X X Xidentified NPS pollutant sources X X X X X X X Xfuture land use X Xhighway right-of ways X Xrecreational and historical sites X X X Xforest cover X X X X

Data Sources Federal Agencies Regional and Local Organizations

Type of Data EPA USDA-NRCS

USDA-FSA USFWS USGS PDCs SWCDs CWOs LOCAL

GOV'TColleges &Universities

Riparian Systemwater chemistry X X X X X Xbiological monitoring X X X X X Xhabitat X X Xrare, endangered or threatened species X X Xwater flow X XPhysical Attributeswetlands X X X X X Xchannel and navigation datasoils X X X X Xfloodplain mapping X Xriparian buffers X X X X X Xtopography X X X Xshoreline erosion rates X X Xstream morphology data X X X X X X X

9

SECTION TWO

Local comprehensive plans

Every locality in Virginia is required todevelop a comprehensive plan to guidecoordinated and harmonious land develop-ment. Comprehensive plans generallyinclude the guiding principals a local gov-ernment employs to accomplish develop-ment as well as specific regulations, suchas zoning maps and subdivision ordi-nances, that govern development. A locali-ty may use its capital improvement pro-gram as the mechanism to fund specificmeasures deemed important.

When developing and updating thecomprehensive plan and its components,local governments generally evaluate landmanagement concerns such as flood-plains, wetlands, soil types, karst featuresand springs, ground water supplies, andcritical or sensitive habitats. As the tool thatdrives the type and intensity of uses per-mitted in different locations, zoning ordi-nances should also be reviewed from awatershed-based perspective to make sureregulations adequately address watershedprotection goals, in accordance with thecomprehensive plan. It is crucial that bothcomprehensive plans and zoning propos-als are reviewed in the watershed contextsince, though these local plans often serveas the basis for zoning decisions, this rela-tionship is not codified in state law. Inother words, because a concept is in acomprehensive plan does not guarantee itwill be reflected in local zoning decisions.

Local governments in TidewaterVirginia must address additional require-ments to restore and protect water qualityin the Chesapeake Bay through theChesapeake Bay Preservation Act. Theselocalities must consider specific measuresaimed at protecting state waters becauseland use impacts water quality and habitat.

Integration with local watershed man-agement planning: The detailed environ-mental inventory included in a watershedmanagement plan can lend an increasedlevel of data and context to guidance pro-vided by the comprehensive plan. A thor-ough watershed-based inventory of theconstraints to development and an evalua-tion of critical natural resources add rigor

to the comprehensive planning process,improve decision-making, and help estab-lish policies that will drive needed zoningamendments. Including watershed man-agement planning in the comprehensiveplan – and in subsequent zoning decisions– will better connect and integrate naturalresource goals with other plan goals.These include high quality of life, safedrinking water, efficient and safe roadways,and abundant recreation opportunities.This approach avoids potentially costlymistakes and secondary impacts of landuse decisions on water and habitat quality.Finally, using watershed managementplanning as a basis for the comprehensiveplan helps localities recognize that theyshare watersheds and natural resourceconcerns with neighboring jurisdictions.

MS4 and Virginia’s new stormwater management program

About 50 Virginia communities are affectedby Clean Water Act Municipal SeparateStorm Sewer System (MS4) Program regu-lations. MS4 communities must develop,implement and enforce a local stormwaterprogram that addresses six minimum con-trol measures including public educationand outreach, public participation andinvolvement, illicit discharge detection andelimination, construction site runoff con-trol, post-construction runoff control, and pollution prevention/good housekeeping.

Legislation passed by the 2004 VirginiaGeneral Assembly has created a statewide,comprehensive stormwater managementprogram related to construction and post-construction activities effective in 2005.The Virginia Department of Conservationand Recreation is developing consistentstatewide stormwater managementrequirements for projects with land distur-bances of one acre or more. This new pro-gram requires eastern Virginia communi-ties and MS4s to adopt and implementstormwater management programs in con-junction with existing erosion and sedimentcontrol programs. Similarly, other localgovernments are authorized by this newprogram to also adopt and implement local

stormwater management programs. Thenew program will develop a statewide uni-form permit fee system and will encouragelow-impact development approaches andbetter site designs to minimize stormwaterrunoff and long-term maintenance.

Integration with local watershed man-agement planning: The MS4 and new statestormwater management programs aremeant to protect water quality by reducingstormwater pollutant discharge. For somecommunities, development of a local pro-gram will require mapping and evaluatingthe storm sewer system, including con-tributing watersheds and sub-watersheds.Local watershed management planningcan provide the wider context for evaluat-ing the storm sewer system and address-ing the six minimum control measures. Awatershed management planningapproach enables a local government tobetter use community resources to engagestakeholders and address issues affectingthe stormwater program.

Total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) The TMDL for a water body represents themaximum amount of pollutant(s) the waterbody can receive and still meet water quality standards. Once monitoring datashow a water quality problem (chemicaland/or biological) in a body of water thatcauses it to not meet standards, the waterway is added to a list of impairedwaters. Virginia must establish TMDLs forall pollutants causing impairment (asrequired by The 1972 Clean Water Act and Virginia’s 1997 Water QualityMonitoring, Information and RestorationAct). This includes a watershed-wideassessment of pollutant sources and adetermination of pollutant reductions nec-essary to support the water body’s benefi-cial uses, such as swimming, fishing oraquatic life. A thorough public engagementeffort reaching all stakeholders in theprocess is also required. Once the TMDL isdetermined, a TMDL implementation plan(TMDLIP) is written that defines specificactions and a timetable needed to accomplish the TMDL.

Virginia’s TMDL program is also gov-

erned by a federal court order ConsentDecree that lays out a schedule for TMDLdevelopment through 2010. DEQ is thelead agency for the program.

Integration with local watershed man-agement planning: By definition, TMDLsand TMDLIPs address only the pollutant(s)identified as causing the water qualityimpairment(s). While TMDLs and TMDLIPsfocus on the entire drainage area, or water-shed, contributing to the impaired seg-ment, the plans will not address watershedactivities not unrelated to the TMDL waterquality problem. For example, habitatdestruction may not be addressed as partof a TMDL. Similarly, a stream may meetstate water quality standards at themoment even though monitoring datareveals that it is trending downward. Waterbodies may be vulnerable to decline as aresult of rapid land use changes occurringin the associated watershed. Anecdotaldata from residents within the communitymay support this conclusion. Still, theTMDL development process is a good startbroader local watershed managementplanning efforts. By starting with an inven-tory of impaired streams or an existingTMDL, local government can build onexisting stakeholder involvement and takea broader approach to water quality andhabitat in a watershed that has become, byvirtue of the TMDL process, an importantlocal issue.

Virginia tributary strategiesVirginia Tributary Strategies are multi-agency efforts to coordinate and imple-ment large-scale water quality manage-ment plans that restore living resources inthe Chesapeake Bay by reducing andeliminating specific pollutants. The strategies set nutrient and sediment reduction goals and develop methods forimplementing related activities at majorriver basin levels (e.g. Shenandoah,Potomac, James, etc.). Virginia’s tributarystrategies result directly from theCommonwealth’s commitment as aChesapeake Bay Program partner.

Just as TMDLs address impaired spe-cific stream segments and defined pollu-

10

SECTION TWO

tants, tributary strategies address specificpollutant loads (nitrogen, phosphorus andsediment) for the entire Chesapeake Bay.Tributary strategies have been describedas proactive TMDLs for addressing nutri-ents and sediment in the bay, since pollu-tant loads are assessed from all land usesand then reductions are allocated for eachpollutant and for each major tributary. Inthe late 1990s, Virginia set nutrient reduc-tion strategies for each of the bay’s majorrivers and smaller creeks based on pollu-tant load allocations derived by theChesapeake Bay Program. As a result ofthe revised Chesapeake Bay Agreement,Chesapeake 2000, new nutrient and sedi-ment goals and strategies must be devel-oped in 2003 and 2004 for theShenandoah, Potomac, Rappahannock,York, James and Eastern Shore water-sheds.

Integration with local watershed man-agement planning: Because implementa-tion of each tributary strategy is deter-mined locally, local watershed manage-ment plans are logical building blocks forthe larger tributary strategy. Local planscan address water quality impairments ofall types, including those caused by nutri-ents and sediment, thus they can provevaluable in developing TMDL and tributarystrategy implementation plans. Local plan-ning that incorporates these effortsinvolves land use decisions, stormwatermanagement, erosion and sediment con-trol, and other issues localities otherwiseaddress. Tributary strategies are now beingrevised, and those writing local plansshould take those initiatives into account.

Watershed roundtables Active in each of the state’s 14 major riverbasins, watershed roundtables are forumsthat enable stakeholders to define criticalbasin-level needs, target significant waterquality problems, provide input on man-agement options and develop strategicwatershed action plans. Roundtables per-form critical roles in watersheds, providingeducation, outreach and solutions torestore and protect water quality.Roundtables in Virginia’s “Southern Rivers”watersheds – i.e., those outside the

Chesapeake Bay basin – are working onstrategic plans similar to Chesapeake BayTributary Strategies in that they addresswater quality and habitat needs. Basin-level planning can set basin-wide goals,but local information must be integrated toreflect local conditions and needs.Roundtable strategic planning must alsosupport local implementation goals.

Virginia’s southern rivers connectVirginia to the Albemarle-Pamlico Sound,through the Roanoke and Chowan rivers,to the Gulf of Mexico through theTennessee, Big Sandy and New rivers, andto the Atlantic Ocean through the YadkinRiver. Basin-level coordination and plan-ning are underway in each of these water-sheds, offering opportunities for localwatershed planning efforts.

Integration with local watershed man-agement planning: Because implementa-tion of each roundtable strategy is deter-mined locally, local watershed manage-ment plans are logical building blocks forthe larger basin-level strategy. Local plansdeal with water quality and habitat issuesand are useful in writing TMDL and round-table strategic implementation plans. Localplanning that incorporates these efforts willinvolve land use decisions, stormwatermanagement, erosion and sediment con-trol, and other issues that localities otherwise address.

Scenic rivers programThe Virginia Scenic Rivers Act was passedin 1970 to protect and preserve certainrivers or sections thereof possessing natu-ral or pastoral beauty. Many river sectionshave been found worthy of this status. Thefirst designation was in 1975; 19 rivers orriver segments have been designatedsince, including one identified as a StateHistoric River. Ten more have been evalu-ated and found to qualify for designation.The Virginia General Assembly and thegovernor must approve each addition. Ariver’s inclusion in the scenic rivers systemprovides a framework whereby preserva-tion of that river is encouraged. Thisincludes the review of all projects for whichthere are plans for using or developingwater and related land resources. The river

11

SECTION TWO

12

SECTION TWO

is evaluated as a scenic resource whenreviewing alternative plans for use anddevelopment. Furthermore, once a river isdesignated scenic, no dam or other struc-ture that impedes natural flow can be built,operated or maintained unless specificallyauthorized by an act of the GeneralAssembly.

Integration with local watershed man-agement planning: River resources protec-tion and management rests with local gov-ernments. Current water laws add to theprotection of the state’s river resources.Through comprehensive planning, zoningand special-use tax incentives, localitiesare able to maintain the quality of their sce-nic river resources while allowing contin-ued development and other importantlandowner activities. Although the scenicriver program cannot protect a riverabsolutely, it does call attention to theresource’s importance.

Other Related InitiativesLocal agency plans Local watershed planning also needs toinclude a review of relevant local andregional planning efforts focusing onregional parks, river trails, heritage tourism,recreation and other opportunities thatcould be linked with watershed planningefforts. Taking these into account improvesthe effectiveness of all planning efforts andmitigates potential conflicts. Planningefforts undertaken by local, state and fed-eral parks, planning district commissions,agricultural programs, extension servicesand nonprofit land trusts should be consid-ered for review. Without coordinationbetween local and regional planningefforts, different processes can reach verydifferent conclusions, as illustrated by thefollowing:

A city had two planning processes under-way. One process focused on redevelop-ment of the city’s waterfront as a tourist des-tination. Those involved concluded thatriparian areas would need to be removedand replaced with a bricked walkway toimprove the view of the waterfront. The sec-ond planning process focused on develop-ment of a network of river greenways. Thisgroup concluded that protection of riparian

zones would be an effective way to preservewildlife habitat along the trail. Thoseinvolved in both processes reached logicalbut diametrically opposed conclusions.

In contrast, effective coordination betweenwatershed planning efforts and other com-munity planning processes means that acomprehensive watershed plan can bedeveloped, linking riparian restoration withenhanced eco-tourism opportunities, tomeet the needs of different communityconstituencies. The review of past studiesand existing planning processes is key toany local watershed planning process.Determine how best to incorporate theiruseful elements and what resources theycan contribute to the plan’s development.For example, the first step in FairfaxCounty’s watershed planning processentails a review and synthesis of pastplans such as drainage basin plans,stream protection strategies, in-fill studies,drainage complaint records, and state,county and volunteer monitoring data.

Transportation plansProposed transportation projects can haveprofound impacts on nearby rivers andstreams, specifically because roadsincrease runoff. Roadways also impactfuture land use and where developmentoccurs. Virginia’s planning district commis-sions or the Virginia Department ofTransportation can provide informationabout plans for new roads and improve-ments to existing roads.

13

SECTION THREE

A Vision for the FutureThe process of defining a vision can be aneffective way to involve the community inthe watershed planning process. As well, itcan be a means for implementing and sus-taining the plan over time. A visiondescribes future desired conditions. In thissense, it should encapsulate the communi-ty’s shared desires for futurewatershed condition. An effec-tive vision statement expressesa community’s shared interestswhile defining a rationale forthe development and imple-mentation of the watershedplan.

If a community hasn’tdeveloped an approach towatershed protection and restoration, theprocess of defining a vision proves use-ful. At the outset, participants may havevery different perspectives. For example,an agency’s goal for the watershed mightbe to protect environmental health where-as the business community’sgoal might be withdraw morewater for new housing. The parties work to understandeach other’s perspectives andthe importance of managing the watershed and setting lim-its. A vision for the watershedenables the community anddecision-makers to supportshared goals for the watershed plan.Appendix D describes the visioningprocess in detail.

Watershed PlanConstituencies: Who Should Be Involved?An effective watershed planning processmust involve a wide range of interestedparties. Before a vision can be defined,partners must be identified. Roles of agen-

cies, organizations and con-stituencies in the planningprocess are important to con-sider and define. A plan devel-oped solely by staff in onegovernment agency or one cit-izen group will likely failbecause it would be difficult togain support or aid from rele-vant agencies and organiza-

tions that had been left out.

Core planning team - The first step inwatershed planning is to form a core team. Consisting of representatives fromdifferent agencies and organizations, itcan gather to work on the plan, bringing in

experts and decision-makersas needed. The team may beformed and/or led by the pri-vate sector through a profes-sional organization or citizenriver group. Regardless, a pub-lic-private partnership is themodel most likely to achievebuy-in and success.

Potential roles for othersinvolved in the plan include:

Oversight organizations are needed toshepherd the plan through development.An organization or a team of organizationsmust move the plan forward, evaluate

Restore the Elizabeth Riverto the highest practical level

of environmental qualitythrough governmental,

business, and communitypartnerships.

The Elizabeth RiverProject

With the cooperation of citizens and agencies, ourvision is a clean, healthyand restored Guest Riverecosystem that supports

economic and recreationalprosperity for the region.

The Guest River Group

Section Three

A Community-Based Watershed VisionArticulate a clear vision for the watershed in the plan. Both the vision and the plan will receivegreater support if the community and local governments are active in their development.

14

SECTION THREE

progress and adapt the plan as needed tomake sure it reflects community goals andobjectives. Examples: local departments ofenvironmental protection, planning districtcommissions, and soil and water conser-vation districts.

Decision-makers are those who evaluatethe plan’s development and content, andprovide formal political support for theprocess. Examples: boards of supervisors,planning commissions, city managers andcounty administrators, and state agencieswith watershed management responsibili-ties.

Decision-shapers are community membersand organizations that provide feedbackon the plan’s objectives, development andcontent. Examples: neighborhood associa-tions, fishing, boating and recreationclubs, community civic and religiousgroups, tourism boards, owners of largeland tracts, business community represen-tatives, land developers, local chambers ofcommerce, local residents and, as appro-priate, state and federal agencies.

Plan implementers are those who willimplement activities and tasks in the water-shed management plan. Examples: soiland water conservation districts, local landtrusts, conservation organizations, parkadministrators, local departments of engi-neering, public works, and planning, andlocal organizations, including the farmbureau, the chamber of commerce andindividuals.

Roles described above show how dif-ferent agency and organizations’ sharedresponsibilities can result in a successfulwatershed plan. Parties’ actual roles andresponsibilities will vary by locality.

Key constituencies in the planning processIdentifying the numerous agencies, organi-zations and constituencies required todevelop a successful watershed planrequires extensive research and communi-ty outreach. Pinpointing stakeholdergroups should be far more extensive thansimply distinguishing between governmentand non-government organizations.

Once stakeholders are identified, anadvisory committee comprising key water-shed constituencies can be formed toadvise the core planning team throughoutthe process. Each stakeholder advisorycommittee, made up of key watershedconstituencies, can review plan drafts andprovide detailed feedback to the core plan-ning team. This committee can also helpidentify issues, prioritize concerns andhelp with community outreach efforts.Examples of such constituencies include:

Agricultural community: farmers, agri-business and farm advocacy groups suchas a local farm bureau representative.Business: local small and large businessowners, or a business representative, suchas a member of the local chamber of com-merce.Government: local government planningstaff, soil and water conservation districtstaff, planning district commission staff,local extension service, and state or federalgovernment staff.Universities and schools: faculty from alocal university can provide expertise andresources, including water quality monitor-ing and printing or mapping capabilities.The university may also be a large land-holder in the watershed. Schoolteachersmay offer environmental education, watermonitoring and river restoration classes.Tourism community: local tourist bureaustaff and tourist attraction staff/owners canhelp with watershed planning that address-es recreation and water-related historicalresources such as canal locks and dams.Development community: members ofthe development community are a key con-stituency in rapidly growing areas becausethey affect how land is developed. They arealso a key constituency in developed areasbecause they may be engaged in the rede-velopment of land or retrofitting developedareas in order to abate pollution.Environmental and conservationgroups: local environmental groups, landtrusts and “friends of” groups, especiallythose concerned with waterways. If thereare many groups in the watershed, severalrepresentatives may be needed. Civic organizations: although not histori-cally associated with watershed efforts,

Government rolesThere are varied govern-mental roles in water-shed management.Federal agencies may beinvolved where water-sheds include federallands such as nationalparks, or where there arefederally mandated,state-run programs suchas the Total MaximumDaily Load program.State agencies, such asthe Virginia Departmentof Environmental Quality,are also engaged locallywith TMDL planning. Ifthe watershed falls with-in the jurisdiction of theChesapeake BayPreservation Act, DCR’sDivision of ChesapeakeBay Local Assistanceshould be contacted. A local planning districtcommission will coverall or part of the water-shed and may have arole in planning activitieswithin the watershed.Several counties andcities may fall within thewatershed’s boundaries.Their planning commis-sions, councils andboards of supervisorsshould participate in the plan’s developmentand include it as part oftheir work related to thecomprehensive plan,zoning and other plan-ning programs.

15

SECTION THREE

many civic groups, such as Lions Clubs orthe Ruritans, undertake various communityprojects, especially in rural areas. Gardenclubs and Virginia Native Plant Society chapters are also active in urban and ruralareas. In urban areas, the Urban Leagueand boys and girls clubs may be valuableresources. Other service organizations, suchas Conservation Corps or Americorps, mayhave young adults who can help with water-shed projects and planning. Church groupsmay also be an important resource.Individuals: individuals may have impor-tant perspectives to share as part of thewatershed planning process, particularly ifthey own large tracts of land. They may alsorepresent other individuals through neigh-borhood associations or other civic or pro-fessional affiliations.Community leaders: those with a formalor informal leadership role in the communitycan help with outreach and educationefforts, and build community support forwatershed planning.

A Clear Participation ProcessBefore engaging potential stakeholders, itis important to establish a clear processand objectives for their involvement.Sample objectives include:

•Increase community understandingof watershed management needsand benefits.

•Provide meaningful participationoptions for diverse stakeholders.

•Incorporate community ideas into thescope of the watershed plan.

•Achieve community buy-in and sup-port for the final plan.

To engage different stakeholders, arange of outreach approaches should beconsidered. Watershed planners shouldattend the forums, club meetings and gath-erings of key stakeholder groups to enlisttheir participation. If there are non-Englishspeaking residents in the community,materials and workshops written in the par-ticular language can be provided. All for-mal and informal community gatherings,including barbecues and concerts, as wellas public meetings, can be consideredopportunities for outreach.

Watershed plans should be tailored toaddress needs, interests and conditions ofeach watershed and community. Below areexamples of phases an outreach processmight have. The phases can be adapted tomeet an individual community’s require-ments:

Phase 1: Have a watershed briefing,visioning and scoping forum for key stakeholder groups to learn about thewatershed’s condition and to discuss andprioritize key issues the plan must address.Incorporate these issues into a vision state-ment and into the formulation of a draftwatershed plan.

Phase 2: Hold a community watershedforum for key stakeholder groups to pres-ent draft approaches. Revise plan to reflectstakeholder input, and distribute paper andonline copies of the draft plan for communi-ty review.

Phase 3: Offer a draft plan review work-shop to obtain additional community inputon the proposed plan. Incorporate thesechanges and develop the final plan.Phase 4: Hold a final draft review work-shop to present the plan to the stakeholderadvisory committee and community.Consider final suggestions then submit afinal plan and associated comments to local decision-makers for adoption.

During planning, key watershed informationshould be given to those involved to betterenable informed participation regarding:

•existing baseline stream and riparian conditions

•existing regulations to protect or restorethe watershed’s streams

•existing zoning and current land uses andimpacts

•an analysis depicting future watershedland uses with full implementation of cur-rent zoning and predicted impacts tostream flows or water quality

Plan AdoptionIt will become apparent as the plan is writ-ten which agencies will need to work aspartners to implement the plan. Althoughmany may have participated in the plan’sdevelopment, there may be several agen-cies new to the process. For example, if

Citizen rolesCitizens may be the moti-vating force to engagedecision makers in water-shed planning. This mayoccur through a “friends ofthe creek” group, neigh-borhood association, con-servation group or anglers’group. Involving a localgovernment entity helpsensure that those makinglegal and managementdecisions about the water-shed offer expertise andsupport decisions duringthe process. However, aplan can be developed asa partnership that definesclear roles for both the pri-vate and public sectors forplanning and implementa-tion, with the private sectortaking the lead. TheRockfish River Plan inNelson County followedthis model. In the Rockfishwatershed, although thecounty supported the planand participated on theplanning committee, a nonprofit group coordinat-ed the planning.

16

SECTION THREE

the creation of a new buffer protection pro-gram is a plan objective, relevant agencieswill need to be identified and contacted todevelop and implement the program. Theprogram may necessitate amendments tolocal zoning to provide buffer protectionoverlays, the soil and water conservationdistrict could be asked to help acquireriparian easements, the county parksdepartment may be asked to institute newlandscaping requirements, and the engi-neering department could be asked toreview and police inappropriate land use inprotected buffer zones. Each entity mustbe contacted before plan adoption so ithas have enough time to see if and how itcan fulfill suggested roles. There will alsolikely be roles identified for non-govern-mental entities, and they will need toreview and agree to those.

Once all agencies and organizations with prospective responsibilities have beencontacted, the locality needs to adopt andimplement the watershed plan. If thewatershed includes portions of severaljurisdictions, successful implementationwill require that the plan is officiallyreviewed and endorsed by all involved.This is especially important if the impetusfor the plan came from an entity that doesnot have management authority, such as aplanning district commission or a soil andwater conservation district.

A process for sharing draft plan infor-mation with decision-making bodies (e.g.boards of supervisors, city councils, plan-ning commissions and relevant agencies)should be determined soon after water-shed planning begins. Elected bodies,such as city councils or boards of supervi-sors, may be concerned primarily withpolitical controversies that may arise. Theirconcerns can be addressed by engagingstakeholders early and often during plandevelopment to learn about and handlesuch concerns before the plan is complet-ed. Involving a planning commissioner orplanning agency representative in thewatershed plan development betterschances that the plan is in line with localgovernment goals.

17

SECTION FOUR

Understanding and EvaluatingWatershed Conditions Assessing current watershed conditions isan important stage of watershed plandevelopment. However, this does not nec-essarily require extensive new research.State and local agencies, including plan-ning district commissions, soil and waterconservation districts and the departmentsof Conservation and Recreation,Environmental Quality, Forestry and Gameand Inland Fisheries, may have existingstream, river and watershed data that canbe used for an initial assessment. In addi-tion to evaluating water quality in thewatershed, the assessment should alsocover potential environmental impacts ofcurrent and anticipated land uses.

The need for additional data willbecome apparent during watershed plan-ning. Some can be considered while theplan is being developed or as part of theplan’s review and evaluation strategy. Forexample, if the plan identifies restoringriparian buffers as an objective, then awatershed assessment will be needed todetermine the size of existing buffers andamount of new buffers needed to meetpollution abatement goals. The watershedplan can then specify areas lacking ade-quate buffers and target them for expan-sion or replanting.

A baseline inventory helps in develop-ing sound and effective watershed protec-tion strategies. The extent of the inventorydepends on the resources available to theentity developing the plan. If existing dataand funds for professional inventory arelacking, volunteers can be tapped to help

conduct research and site visits. This is aneffective way to engage citizens, particular-ly members of existing groups, in naturalresources planning. Volunteers have beentrained to conduct inventories of land uses,aquatic insects, stream habitat, sinkholes,springs, buffers and other naturalresources. Contact the departments ofConservation and Recreation andEnvironmental Quality to learn about volun-teer programs in Virginia.

Once created, an inventory of availabledata and data needs can help determinewatershed plan priorities. The inventorycan be used to identify areas that urgentlyrequire restoration or protection. It can alsobe a tool for evaluating costs and potentialbenefits of different watershed protectionstrategies. The following componentsshould be included as part of a compre-hensive resource inventory.

Riparian SystemEffective watershed management requiresmonitoring of condition of the river’s ripari-an zone. The riparian zone includes thewaterway itself, banks and surroundingfloodplain and associated vegetation.Water quality dataA complete picture of the health of theriparian system requires collection andanalysis of chemical, physical and biologi-cal data. Typical chemical and physicalmonitoring programs include basic param-eters, such as measures of dissolved oxygen, pH and temperature. Monitoring toreveal the presence of a suspected pollu-tant, such as metals or a specific pesticide,requires more sophisticated analysis and

Section Four

Environmental Inventory Base a comprehensive watershed management plan on an inventory of existing conditions, resources and impairments, as well as the relative conditions of each.

18

SECTION FOUR

can be costly. Virginia has a variety ofwater monitoring programs that character-ize physical and chemical qualities andvolume of Virginia’s waterways. DEQstores much of this data. Water qualitymonitoring data is also available from fed-eral agencies, universities and colleges,local governments and volunteer- or citi-zen-based monitoring organizations. Datafrom these sources are usually collectedas part of special study and can providedetailed information on specific geopraph-ic areas.

Macroinvertebrates lack backbones yetare visible by the naked eye. They includeaquatic insects and their larvae andnymph forms, crustaceans, aquatic wormsand leeches. Macroinvertebrates are par-ticularly useful as water quality indicators.For example, stoneflies are highly sensitiveto pollutants, hence the flies’ presence orabsence can indicate the health of astream. The diversity and relative abun-dance of macroinvertebrates can indicateriver health. Biological monitoring of aquat-ic organisms can reveal water quality con-cerns that chemical monitoring approach-es may not. DEQ runs a biological moni-toring program, as do numerous volunteergroups.

The status of a river’s aquatic lifeserves as an important measure of ariver’s health and the effectiveness ofongoing watershed management efforts.The amount, type and distribution of fish indifferent parts of the river can reveal areasof localized and general water quality con-cerns. Fish tissue analysis can also showwhether or not there are pollution sourcesin the river.

The Virginia Water Monitoring Councilmaintains an online inventory of monitor-ing activities throughout the state. SeeAppendix E, Data and PlanningResources, for details.

Natural habitatsA river may meet water quality standardsbut lack the requisite in-stream habitatneeded to support native species. Forexample, trout require deep pools, runs,riffles, overhanging roots and vegetationfor cover. These conditions can be

assessed and mapped to show habitatneeding protection or restoration.

Within the river’s floodplain, surround-ing riparian wetlands may help filterstormwater runoff and provide critical nurs-ery grounds for amphibian species, suchas salamanders and newts. Riverside veg-etation contributes leaf litter to the riverwhere it serves as food for aquatic insects,which, in turn, are food for fish. Waterwaysthat lack adequate native vegetation can-not support a diverse range of insects andanimal species.

Rare and endangered speciesThe watershed’s animal species, includingrare, threatened or endangered species,should be noted and mapped.

Physical AttributesAn understanding of the key physicalattributes in a watershed is critical to effec-tive planning. Elements to review include:

Drainage areasA watershed is the land that drains directlyor via tributaries into a particular river orbody of water. Determining drainage areascan be complex in karst areas of westernVirginia because the topography can haveunderground and surface stream flow thatbypasses topographic divides. In theseareas, watershed delineation can beaccomplished only by tracer dye investiga-tions.

FloodplainsFlooding is natural. The river’s floodplainstores floodwaters as the river rises duringstorms. Soils deposited by floodwatersenrich the floodplain’s soils. Building infloodplains has resulted in property dam-age as well as lives lost and can reducethe tax base long-term because flooddamaged areas are not rebuilt. Properlyprotected, floodplains are resources thatprovide natural flood and erosion control,protect water quality by filtering runoff andpromote groundwater recharge. Excessiveflooding - higher frequency and volumes -often occurs because of changes in thewatershed’s drainage area, such as anincrease in impervious, paved areas.

19

SECTION FOUR

Floodplains should be mapped and protected.

WetlandsUpland wetlands often slow down and fil-ter stormwater, Locations and types of wet-lands should be mapped. Areas experienc-ing flooding may suffer from past loss ofwetlands. Wetland protection and restora-tion are essential to watershed steward-ship.

Erosion potentialLocations and percentages of steepslopes, especially areas with highly erodi-ble soils that may contribute to excessivesiltation, help determine erosion potential.Sensitive soils can be mapped to helpdetermine potential erosion rates,stormwater issues and more. Data fromthe statewide soil survey are available formany counties, and soil survey informationcan be obtained from the local soil andwater conservation district.

Karst features Karst landscapes allow surface waters toreach groundwater, often very quickly.Areas with sinkholes, caves and karstsprings are particularly sensitive andrequire special treatment for most types ofland use. Note areas where surface watersenter bedrock or sinkholes. Developedand agricultural areas west of the BlueRidge are concentrated on karst.

Riparian conditions Consider the degree of stream sinuosityand channel type, stream buffer widths,vegetation types and tree canopy cover-age.

SpringsGroundwater emerges naturally at springsto become surface water. Much of thebase flow of Virginia’s streams is support-ed by spring water. Spring flows of severalmillion gallons per day are common, espe-cially in the karst areas of western Virginia.Water emerging at these springs common-ly includes surface waters pirated fromother surface watersheds. Accurate delin-eation of watersheds in karst areas can bedone only by tracer dye studies that delin-eate spring basins.

Water budgetCharacterizing water flows and storagethroughout the hydrologic cycle entailsassessing the amount of water in variousplaces, such as in aquifers and surfaceflow, and the amount of water needed torecharge aquifers to relate communitywater needs to actual water supply.

Existing and future land use/coverComplementing a review of physical attrib-utes is an assessment of current land uses,future land uses, and existing laws andordinances impacting them. Specific areasto review include:

Land usesList watershed land uses and zoning,including current and projected future landuses and their potential environmentalimpacts. Expectations for current andfuture uses can be found in local compre-hensive plans.

Major forested areasEssential to land use data, major forestareas should be assessed. Forests trapand filter land runoff, helping waterrecharge groundwater aquifers.

Disturbed areasLand that needs remediation, such asabandoned mine lands, brownfields, etc.,may harm natural resources.

Flood mitigation areasCompare the percentage of undevelopedland within the river’s 100-year floodplainavailable to mitigate flooding impacts withthe percentage of developed land at riskduring flood events.

Runoff potentialThe percentage of impervious cover, meas-ured by paved area and compacted soilsin high-use areas, affects runoff rates andvolumes, hence water quality.

Potential pollution sourcesA review of land uses and soil data canshed light on the watershed’s nonpointsource pollution potential. An inventory ofpoint sources (wastewater treatmentplants, industrial facilities, etc.) should alsobe done.

20

SECTION FOUR

Protected areas Localities and their residents are con-cerned about land conservation and openspace. The percentage of land under per-manent protection, such as conservationeasements or parklands, should be notedand mapped.

Recreational usesFishing, hiking and boating, as well asexisting and projected access points forthe activities, should be noted andmapped.

Significant sitesHistorically or culturally significant sites,such as canal locks, dams and NativeAmerican encampments, should be notedand mapped.

Data CollectionCollecting environmental and land usedata needed for a comprehensive water-shed management plan may seem daunt-ing, but existing local resources can pro-vide a wide range of relevant data andexpertise, and augment state datasources. Local government staff, for example, has years of experience withenvironmental and land use planningissues.

Staff in the public works departmentcan provide data about flooding frequency,undersized road culverts or areas sufferingfrom extreme erosion. Staff from engineer-ing and/or water treatment plants hasinformation about streams and reservoirssuffering from high rates of nutrient over-enrichment. The local parks departmentmay be able to produce water quality data,while the regional forestry department mayhave data about streams that requireforested riparian buffer areas. These pro-fessionals may have knowledge not cap-tured by a central database.

Similarly, there are many groups andindividuals that can contribute data andtechnical expertise, including staff fromlocal nature centers, fishing and canoeclubs, volunteer water monitoring groupsand school environmental clubs. The corewatershed planning team also shouldserve as a valuable information source.Appendix E lists data and planning

resources that can help localities and com-munities collect and evaluate data. Tables1 and 2 briefly list several state, federaland local information sources.

21

SECTION FIVE

Evaluating Watershed Challenges and OpportunitiesWith an inventory of the watershed’s physi-cal characteristics in hand, along with anunderstanding of local, state and federalprogram responsibilities, data can be eval-uated to identify resource needs and setspecific goals to accomplish the statedwatershed vision. Much like the data col-lection process, the evaluation processshould make use of a range of availablestaff and volunteer resources to identify natural resource conditions in the water-shed. Evaluating data can best be accom-plished through data-driven, geographicalinformation system (GIS) mapping. Thisapproach yields a “picture” of the water-shed’s health and highlights whichresources to protect, restore and better use.

Current conditionsThe first step is to understand the currentstate of natural resources in the watershed.Answers to the following questions begin to define existing conditions within thewatershed:

•Where are large areas of forest? Are theyconnected with forested corridors? Whatare the dominant species? How are theforested lands utilized? Timber manage-ment? Off-road recreational vehicles?Livestock grazing?

•Where is the farmland? Are there suffi-cient acres to support a viable agriculturalcommunity? What are the typical farmoperations? Grain? Livestock? Fruit? Vegetables?

•Where are the other land uses in thewatershed? Urban? Residential?Industrial?

•What is the extent and quality of riparianbuffers in the watershed? Are they at least35 feet wide? Are they made up of mixedand native species?

•What do water quality monitoring datareveal about the water resource? Whereare permitted discharges, known pollution sources (such as abandonedmined land), potential pollution sources(such as land application of biosolids)?Impairments?

•Where eroding stream channels?Where are flood-prone areas? 100-yearflood plain? Known rates of shorelineerosion?

•What concerns stakeholders most aboutthe conditions within the watershed?

Future conditions and trendsThe next step is to evaluate how currentzoning, population and trends in employ-ment will shape the watershed’s future.Answers to the following questions will aidin this evaluation.

•Based on current zoning, what is theexpected “build-out” of the watershed in15 years?

•Where will most growth or loss occur?What kind of growth or loss is predicted?New residential? Loss of industrial base?Increases in impervious cover? Retailexpansion?

•What new demands on water resourcesare expected in the next 15 years? Arenew highways planned for the watershed?

•What new environmental or other regula-tions are anticipated in the next 5 to 10years?

Section Five

Data Evaluation and Goal SettingSet realistic natural resource goals based on reliable data evaluation.

22

SECTION FIVE

Identify critical watershed issues and needsOnce current and future conditions havebeen assessed, the collected informationcan be used to determine these concerns:

•Which streams or springs show themost stress?

•Which streams or springs show theleast stress?

•What are the watershed’s risk factors,and which bodies of water are most atrisk?

•Which bodies of water have uniqueresources or habitats that should beprotected?

•Which bodies of water are most likelyto benefit from better management?

•Are wetlands threatened by currentdevelopment patterns?

•Which streams have adequate riparianbuffers?

This is not an exhaustive list of possibleconcerns. Other concerns may becomeapparent as available data are evaluated.

Setting GoalsAn effective watershed plan states cleargoals and measurable objectives neededto achieve them. In turn, objectives can bebroken down further into very specificactions, such as a project to replant astretch of riverbank or to collect additionaldata concerning a suspected source ofpollution.

Goals for an effective watershed planshould address desired outcomes. Forexample, if the community identifies drink-ing water protection as a primary need,streams that could serve as future watersupplies could be targeted for protection.

Other examples of specific goals thatwatershed plans could address include:

•meeting regulatory standards•protecting historic or ecological

resources•addressing flood risks and property

damage•promoting tourism and recreation and•ntegrating local ordinances to ensure

comprehensiveness of watershedplanning

The detail and complexity of the water-shed plan will depend on several factors.These factors include the extent and characteristics of watershed problems,resources available to address problems,the scale of inter-jurisdictional coordina-tion, and the size and number of sub-watersheds addressed by the plan.

Evaluating land usepatterns and trendsIn addition to assessing awatershed’s environmentalhealth, future land use pat-terns that may affect thewatershed should be con-sidered in watershed plan-ning. Land use changes orplanned developments thatmay significantly modifyland use, stormwater man-agement, or the stream/corridor system should beevaluated and mapped.When evaluating future landuse impacts for a water-shed, the assessmentshould address:

• The percentage of thewatershed’s area zonedfor future developmentand the type of develop-ment (e.g., parks orshopping malls) allowedunder that zoning

• The potential increase inimpervious surfaces cre-ated by future develop-ment, including roads,parking lots and rooftops

• Future demands on watersupply, such as newpower plants, planneddrinking water impound-ments or new wells

• Estimated increases ordecreases in populationand employment levels,which may have animpact on storm waterflows and impervioussurface area

Sample Plan Goals

• Protect and restore ecologicalhealth of the watershed.

• Enhance economic value.

• Provide recreational opportunities.

• Protect current or future watersupplies.

• Protect sinkhole buffer areasand spring heads.

23

SECTION SIX

Setting ObjectivesOnce a watershed plan’s goals are set,objectives to achieve them must be writ-ten. For example, how will water qualitygoals be attained – through restoration,enforcement and/or new zoning approach-es? To be effective, objectives shouldreflect and support the intent of the relatedgoals.

Elements of a Watershed Plan

Sample watershed protection objectives

Critical habitats: Define and identify sensitiveecological zones needed to maintain theecological integrity of the watershed, e.g.,sensitive wetlands, headwaters, significantcaves, wildlife corridors, communities ofnative plants and trees, stream buffers andslopes subject to erosion.In-stream habitat: Protect and restore in-stream habitats, including streambanks, in-stream substrate, aquatic plants, riparianvegetation and stream cover. Stream form and function: Preserve orrestore the natural stream morphology con-sistent with local conditions to ensure that

stable streambanks and habitat are pre-served.Riparian habitats: Protect and restorestream buffers. Water quality: Set standards for alloweduses or discharges that will maintain orimprove existing water quality.Stream flows: Ensure adequate stream flowfor animals, fish and recreation. Preventextreme stormwater flows by keeping impervious cover to less than 15-25 percentof land surface area and providing addition-al infiltration areas.Access: Identify, protect and improve exist-ing access points and provide new appro-priate access points for people or animals.Floodplain: Restrict or prevent developmentwithin the 100-year floodplain and protectfloodplain habitats.Wetlands: Protect and restore riparian andnon-tidal wetlands to ensure preservation ofwater filtering and storage, and habitat.Sinkhole buffers: Protect and restore sink-hole buffers.

Developing Strategies toAchieve ObjectivesThe watershed management plan mustidentify specific strategies – the “how” ofthe plan – to achieve objectives. Thestrategies should be realistic and rely onavailable resources. Identify realistic time-frames and parties responsible for achiev-ing each strategy. An objective mayrequire several strategies. Monitor each toensure that it is implemented. For exam-ple, if there is an objective to restorestream buffers to improve water quality,specific strategies should identify where,when and how stream buffers will berestored.

Strategy

Strategy

Strategy

Strategy

Strategy

Strategy

Strategy

Strategy

Strategy

Strategy

Objective A Objective B Objective C Objective D

Goal 1 Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4

Vision

Strategy

Strategy

Section Six

Objectives and Implementation StrategiesTo meet the plan’s goals, establish clearly defined objectives andactions that detail responsibility and timeframes.

24

SECTION SIX

Integrating Land Management Tools Development of a watershed plan offerslocalities the opportunity to incorporatenew management tools and techniques,such as incentives to encourage low-impact development approaches thatreduce impervious cover and maintainwater quality. Management technology hasevolved to address the quality and quantityof runoff, including such techniques asbiofilters or rain gardens that trap runoffand filter pollutants.

Below is a list of watershed manage-ment techniques.

Stormwater managementBiofilters (rain gardens): reduce or eliminatestormwater impacts by trapping and filteringpollutantsGreen rooftops: trap and filter rooftop rain-fall; reduce runoff through transpirationRain barrels: capture rooftop runoff andreduce peak stream flows and erosion ratesGrassed swales: retard and filter runoff

Riparian and sinkhole protectionFloodplain and riparian zone restoration:restores native tree and plant species andremoves or mitigates harmful land uses Removal of invasive and exotic species:allows restoration of native species anddependent fish and wildlifeLivestock exclusion: prevents streambankerosion by fencing off cattleReduction of fecal waste impacts: byinspecting and repairing failing septic sys-tems, requiring pet waste removal in parksnear streamsRemediation of sinkhole dumps: by remov-ing material and disposing of it at licensedsolid waste facility, and re-establishing vege-tation with appropriate native species

In-stream mitigationBioengineering: prevents streambank ero-sion and revives habitat using natural mate-rials to restore stream structure and stabilityFish habitat restoration: rebuilds fish habitatssuch as riffles, runs, pools and dropsStream channel restoration: restores streamchannel’s natural sinuosity to reduce ero-sion and revive habitatsLowhead dam removal: restores fish passage

Legal and land planning toolsRiparian easements: protect streamsidebuffersLand purchase (fee simple or developmentrights): prevents incompatible developmentand can be used to acquire sensitive habi-tat landsRe-zoning: changes zoning to permit usescompatible with protecting sensitive water-shed areasOverlay zoning: places additional restric-tions on land uses in sensitive zones likeriparian areas or wetlandsWater quality protection ordinances: canaddress specific watershed managementneeds, including open space protection,erosion and sediment control, clustereddevelopments and stormwater manage-mentEnhanced enforcement: may result inincreased inspections, higher penalties forviolations, public education about regula-tionsIncentives: awards for improved land andwater condition, flexible avenues for reduc-ing pollution, and showcasing innovativetechnologies and practices

In Reston, Va., efforts are underway to manage theheadwaters of Difficult Run, Sugarland Run andHorsepen Run, all of which drain into the PotomacRiver, a tributary of the Chesapeake Bay. WhileReston was being developed in the 1960s andthroughout the 70s, stormwater management wasuncommon. Now 25 percent of Reston’s land areais impervious. Reston is attempting to learn frompast mistakes to improve watershed conditionsthrough a comprehensive watershed planning effort. Similarly, Fairfax County is beginning todevelop watershed plans for the county’s 10 majorwatersheds. The process will include the evaluationand implementation of innovative storm water man-agement techniques, particularly for areas that havealready been fully developed.

Examples of innovative watershed managementtools are being practiced across Virginia. Fairfax and Albemarle counties have approved lists of bestmanagement practices for use in preventing or mitigating stormwater impact from new develop-ments. Albemarle County also encourages develop-ers to use bioengineering techniques, and the county has installed several projects.

25

SECTION SEVEN

Effectively Leverage Existing Resources and Mobilize New ResourcesAn effective watershed plan should identifyexisting resources for technical and finan-cial assistance and work in tandem withexisting programs. For example, instead ofincluding a stand-alone roadway plan, thewatershed plan would detail guidelines forexisting road planning processes to helpengineers and government officials under-stand how road design can mitigate poten-tial watershed impacts. Similarly, if thewatershed plan calls for protecting riparianareas, the plan can incorporate partner-ships with existing local and state conser-vation easement programs rather than pro-posing creation of a new program.

The goals and objectives of a water-shed’s plan can mobilize new communityresources to support local watershed man-agement. For example, the draft watershedplan for Yarmouth Creek in James CityCounty calls for creating a citizens advoca-cy group to mobilize volunteer and othercommunity efforts on behalf of the water-shed.

Planning for Ongoing Funding and Management Plans frequently fail because of inadequatefunding. To avoid this, each plan objectiveshould identify a funding mechanism. Stafftime also will be required to oversee,review and adapt. Monitoring and evaluat-ing the plan may require additionalresources from local engineering depart-ments or necessitate hiring consultants.

Staff and resources required to monitorand evaluate the plan often are unavail-able. This problem can be addressed sev-eral ways. For example, a volunteer waterquality monitoring program can be imple-mented to collect data on stream healthand habitat, morphology and buffer condi-tions. A university’s planning and mappingclass can develop a geographic informa-tion system map for the watershed. A localcontractor can help with grading and treeplanting. A local high school could developand circulate newsletters and brochuresabout the health of the watershed. Theseare examples of real volunteer assistancethat has been provided to Virginia locali-ties. Enlisting partners’ assistance withmonitoring and implementation also buildspolitical support.

In addition to enlisting volunteer help,budget and staff shortfalls can beaddressed by tiered levels of funding tocarry out plan objectives. For example, astream buffer re-vegetation plan couldinclude three levels of implementationbased on available funds. Level I mightinclude voluntary community planting inbuffer areas, pursuing tree donations fromlocal nurseries or obtaining leftoverseedlings from federal nurseries. Level IImight involve giving free trees and techni-cal assistance to landowners. Level IIImight expand to enabling county parksstaff to supply trees, and organizing andconducting the entire planting and moni-toring effort. Create partnerships whereverpossible. They save financial and staffresources and expand community owner-ship of the watershed among multiplestakeholder groups.

Section Seven

Resource NeedsClearly outline funding and technical support needs throughout the plan. Identify resource limitations that might prevent successful completion of the plan’s implementation strategies.

Finally, a locality could integrate theworkload for implementing the watershedplan as part of the appropriate localdepartments’ regular scope of work andbudget. This may include pursuing fundingfor complementary projects in the locality’scapital improvements program. Anotheroption is to seek outside grants. Over-reliance on grant funds for watershed plan-ning efforts can be problematic, however,as funding may vary from year to year.Outside grant funds may be a more appro-priate resource for one-time costs.Examples include an initial watershedassessment, a stream bioengineeringdemonstration project or a watershedforum event.

26

SECTION SEVEN

Goal 1: Improve the water quality of Muddy Creek to allowrestoration of a healthy shad fishery.Objective 1: Restore riparian and in-stream habitats.Implementation strategies: Restore 120 linear yards of hardwood riparian buffer, 35'wide along the east side of Muddy Creek downstreamfrom its confluence with Clear Run.

Responsible party: Soil and water conserva-tion district (SWCD) with Earth Conservation Corps volunteersFunding: DCR watershed grant and in-kind serv-ices of consulting engineerTime: Fall 2004

Obtain agreement under the Conservation ReserveEnhancement Program (CREP) for 25 acres of agricultur-al land for reforestation, hardened cattle access andfencing at the McDonald Farm along Muddy Creek.

Responsible Party: USDA Natural ResourcesConservation Service with SWCD Funding: CREP/federal matchTime: Summer 2004

Conduct an inventory on main stem of Muddy Creek.Recruit volunteers from Blue Ridge Voyageurs to canoeentire length of main stem, noting on tax maps exactlocations where erosion occurs along Muddy Creek. Linklandowners with CREP and Virginia Agricultural BestManagement Practices cost-share programs.

Responsible Party: SWCD with volunteers Funding: SWCDTime: Winter-spring 2004

Inventory and prioritize outfalls and impacts along upper tributaries of Muddy Creek for BMP retrofit andremediation.

Responsible Party: County public worksdepartmentFunding: Stormwater feesTime: Spring 2005

Meet with all 17 landowners in the Muddy Creek headwaters tributaries of Briny Branch and Upper South Fork to form a "neighborhood river watch.”

Responsible Party: Watershed associationFunding: Volunteer time, with local general fundsupportTime: Fall 2004

27

SECTION EIGHT

Tracking and Evaluating ImplementationCommunity involvement, watershed assess-ment, and plan development and imple-mentation are critical steps. Still, a complet-ed watershed plan must be evaluated andupdated over time to remain effective.Watersheds are dynamic living systemsaffected by changes in climate, land uses,management practices, and daily actionstaken by people living there. The goals,objectives and strategies within the water-shed plan must accommodate thesechanges.

Benchmarks, or standards, are neces-sary for evaluating the plan’s overall imple-mentation and for adapting the plan tomake sure goals are achieved. A watershedplan should establish a timetable for imple-menting objectives, so activities can bemonitored regularly. A core team can beestablished to track and manage the plan’simplementation over time. The implementa-tion schedule should allow anyone, includ-ing the core team, to review and quickly tellif goals have been met. It can be as simpleas an annual checklist. The plan’s bench-marks should provide a clear mechanismfor evaluating whether or not it has beenachieved.

Enlist new and diverse stakeholdergroups when implementing the watershedplan. As new organizations emerge, suchas a new non-profit “friends of the creekgroup” or a new land development associa-tion, tell them about the plan and invitethem to participate in its implementation.Similarly, if the comprehensive plan is beingupdated or new zoning regulations arebeing considered, the watershed planshould be incorporated in those processes.

Review and Evaluation Once a watershed plan is developed andimplemented, localities need to ensure thatit is adequately reviewed and evaluatedover time in order to assess ongoing chal-lenges, opportunities and successes. There are two steps of review and evalua-tion. First, study and evaluate individualgoals and objectives and, second, reviewand assess the plan’s overall implementa-tion over time.

To monitor and evaluate a plan’s individ-ual goals and objectives, include guidelinesfor these processes in the plan itself. Forexample, if one plan goal is to protect fishhabitat, evaluate existing fish habitat andfish species before developing specifichabitat restoration objectives. Objectivesand action plans should contain measura-ble targets for achieving habitat protectionor improvement. Contingency plans canaddress objectives that are not achieved.

Specific components for monitoring andevaluating the plan’s goals and objectivesinclude:

•Monitoring methods and targets tomeasure achievement of plan objec-tives such as improved water quality

•A clear methodology, timeframe andparties responsible for conductingmonitoring

•Monitoring before and after planimplementation to track improvements

•A reporting mechanism to indicatewho receives and reviews monitoringresults

•A formal plan assessment for ongoingevaluation and updating goals andobjectives that were not met

Section Seven

Progress BenchmarksUse benchmarks to evaluate and quantify progress at regular intervals. Update the plan to reflect changes identified through benchmarking.

An effective watershed plan needn’t contain a detailed monitoring program, butit should have the components describedabove to ensure that watershed-relatedchallenges, opportunities and successesare adequately addressed. For example, ifa specific management practice, such as ariparian buffer, is installed as part of awatershed protection strategy, then thebuffer’s performance should be monitored.Tree survival rates should be measured atleast annually, preferably biannually. In-stream water quality should be evaluatedto make sure the forested buffer is improv-ing habitat and water quality.

Intermediate indicators and milestonesIntermediate indicators and milestones areimportant to effective monitoring and evalu-ation. These in-process, evaluation points highlight interim achievements (anincrease in fish populations) and indicatethat a goal or objective has reached a cer-tain stage (30 percent increase in spawn-ing population). For example, becausebrook trout are sensitive to pollution, asample objective for improving water quali-ty habitat might identify the presence of thefish as an intermediate indicator of suc-cess. A final milestone might be the triplingtrout numbers by 2010. Remedial actionshould be taken if either the indicator orthe milestone is not met.

State environmental agencies may beable to assist with water quality and biolog-ical monitoring needs. If a locality or coun-ty government lacks funds needed toimplement such monitoring, a state agencymight be able to include the given water-shed in its next monitoring cycle.Alternatively, a partnership with a nearbyuniversity or volunteer monitoring programcan provide people, equipment and labora-tory facilities for stream assessment. Forexample, entomology students at theVirginia Polytechnic Institute and StateUniversity collaborate with Virginia SaveOur Streams to monitor streams.

A Mechanism for OngoingWatershed AssessmentAn effective watershed plan is not a reportto be written and left unchanged over time.Because natural systems and land usechange over time, watershed planningshould be understood as an iterativeprocess that needs to be revisited andupdated on a regular basis.

Build a case for action based on impactsEffective watershed plans allow for alter-ation should goals and objectives not met. For example, if periodic assessmentsshow that water quality goals were notmet, document the situation and take cor-rective action. To prepare, the watershedplan might include a series of detailed sce-narios that establish prospective coursesof action. For example, a plan could desig-nate resources for teaching developersabout voluntarily using low impact devel-opment techniques to reduce stormwaterrunoff and pollution. If monitoring showsthat pollution remains high and stormflows are unabated, the plan could stipu-late other tools, such as an updatedstormwater ordinance or extensivestormwater retrofits.

28

SECTION EIGHT

Happy Trout Creek Watershed PlanGoal 1: Restore water quality in Happy Trout Creek.Objective 1: Re-establish riparian buffers.Strategy 1: “Restore riparian buffers to 20 linearmiles of Happy Trout Creek by fall 2008.”Interim Benchmark:Fifty percent of trees and shrubs planted in buffershould survive at least two years after installation.

Intermediate Indicators and Milestones:Using planting plan, establish sample plots and moni-toring schedule to evaluate buffer condition. Conductmonitoring and record the areas where buffer is notmeeting 50 percent survival rate. Assess reasons forfailure (e.g., mowing of young trees by maintenancedepartment) and address problem or replant.

29

SECTION NINE

Developing and implementing watershedplans makes sense. The protection andrestoration of local watersheds improvesVirginia’s environment. It also results in avariety of benefits for Virginia’s communi-ties, including access to clean, healthywater supplies, abundant recreation andpublic safety. The plans help localities meetnew state and federal water quality require-ments, and provide a framework for citizeninvolvement in local water quality issues.

Effective local watershed managementplanning gives communities a new set oftools to address policy challenges and newplanning opportunities that extend beyondmeeting minimum regulatory requirements.Watershed management helps ensure thatsurface and ground water supplies do notdegrade over time, drinking water suppliesare sustained, soil and stream bank ero-sion are reduced, and wildlife habitat isrestored.

Whether large or small, rural or urban,a locality can play a critical role in shapingthe health of its watershed and communi-ties. In developed urban watersheds, thereare many new tools, like rain gardens orbrownfield redevelopment, to mitigatewatershed challenges. And there are manysimilar opportunities in rural watersheds toidentify critical areas and channel growthso that natural resources and water sup-plies are protected.

Leaders in Virginia’s communitiesunderstand that well planned naturalresource protection is needed for the sakeof future generations and a sustainablelocal economy. Local watershed planningcan make a difference in conserving andprotecting Virginia’s natural resources.

Section Nine

Conclusions

Putting It All Together: Sample Steps for Developing a Watershed Strategy

Happy Trout Creek Watershed

1. Establish a goal for the watershed planImproved water quality in Happy Trout Creek. Project goal is based on assessment of currentwatershed conditions.

2. Establish specific objective(s)Objective A: Restore 35-foot-wide riparian forestbuffers on both sides of the stream with native treesand shrubs along 20 linear stream miles.

3. Establish specific tasks to achieve objective•Implement riparian easement and planting program

with county landowners.•Purchase lands from those unwilling to donate

easements.•Assess and plant buffers as needed, to improve •pollution removal and wildlife habitat.

4. Establish an implementation and monitoring plan

•Monitoring Baseline: Measure and establish a cur-rent baseline of trees and shrubs for each projectarea. Devise a plan to restore trees and shrubs(with review and approval by project sponsors, as required).

•Implementation: Install plants and record location,number and species of trees and shrubs.

•Ongoing monitoring: Revisit site at six-month intervals and record survival rates (this can bedone for the entire area or for predetermined sample plots intended to represent the entire plot).

•Maintenance plan: For losses greater than 60 per-cent, repair and replant as needed, according tomaintenance plan.

•Consider providing funds or contingency plans torepair or reinstall if the project is deemed unsuc-cessful. Establish a project endpoint, as appropri-ate. For example, will five years of successfulbuffer re-vegetation be considered a success, or is the project to be inspected in perpetuity?

30

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Watershed Management Planning Checklist

Appendix B: Technical, Regulatory and Financial Assistance Programs

Appendix C: Virginia Planning Initiatives

Appendix D: Data and Planning Resources

Appendix E: Visioning Process

Appendix F: Resource Bibliography

Appendices

31

APPENDIX A

Taking Stock: Planning Checklist1. List the documents that comprise the watershed management plan(s):

2. Do the planning documents identify specific watersheds or hydrologic units as the geographicmanagement unit?If yes, go question 3 and then to Watershed Management Planning Components below.If no, the planning process and documents must be revisited to focus on identified watersheds or hydorologicunits.

3. List the watersheds or hydrologic units addressed in the watershed management planning doc-uments listed above:

Compare the listed planning documents for each watershed or hydrologic unit with the following watershed man-agement planning components to determine if the planning process meets the watershed management planningcriteria and to identify opportunities for further effort.

Watershed Management Planning Components

1. Community involvement: Community involvement helps ensure that a plan has the necessary support to be implemented. Involvement can be formal (participants had decision-making roles) or informal (participants provided information or ideas).

NOTE: Representatives from each category must be present to meet the criteria for community involvement

Who was involved? Formal Informal

non-government stakeholder groups

local/regional government agencies

state/federal government agencies

general public

economic and business interests

other (describe)

Who is coordinating community involvement actionsas part of the planning process (specific local government unit/office, local SWCD, others)?

Appendix A

Watershed Management Planning Checklist

32

APPENDIX A

Which participants have endorsed the plan? Yes-all Yes-some No Don’t know

local governments in watershed

regional commission or planning district commission

soil and water conservation districtcontributing non-government stakeholder groupseconomic and business interests

other (describe)

NOTE: Acceptance by the appropriate local government(s) is necessary to meet the criteria for community involvement. For more information on community involvement, see Section 3.

Was a vision statement developed for the watershed?Was the vision statement developed by collaborative efforts of the stakeholders?NOTE: A watershed vision statement must represent the shared values of the community and must be a product of a stakeholder process. For more information on vision statements, see Section 3 and Appendix B.

2. Environmental Inventory: An environmental inventory describes or characterizes the various features that comprise the watershed. The inventory may go beyond describing features and may include an assessment of their conditions. Do the listed planning documents contain an environmental inventory?If no, an inventory must be undertaken. See Section 4 for assistance.

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

Do the listed planning documents include inventories with the following information? Yes Includes Assessment WS- Based No

Riparian System*available chemical water quality monitoring data*available biological monitoring dataidentification of major natural habitatsrare, threatened or endangered speciesPhysical Attributes*drainage areas*floodplains*wetlands*erosion potentialkarst featuresriparian buffersstream sinuositybuffer widthsvegetation typetree canopy coveragespringswater budgetExisting land use/cover*land uses*existing land uses*future uses*major forested areasdisturbed areasflood mitigation areas runoff potential*potential pollution sources*permitted point sources*identified nonpoint sourcesprotected areasrecreational uses/areassignificant sitesIdentification of missing or needed dataOther

*NOTE: Items with asterisk are readily available in Virginia and represent the minimum amount of data needed to develop a meaningful environmental inventory. For more information on conducting an environmental inventory, see Section 4.

33

APPENDIX A

Do the planning documents Yes No

identify agencies/organizations with mandated responsibilities?

identify opportunities for coordination among agencies and organizations?

outline existing environmental regulations and ordinances? (ie. CBPA, VPA, erosion and sediment control program, TMDLs, MS4 stormwater permits, comprehensive plan, overlay districts, etc.)

identify areas where complementary efforts can be coordinated?

identify gaps in institutional responsibilities?

identify known financial resources? (capital improvement programs, grants, etc.)

identify potential financial resources?

Do the planning documents Yes No

*contain strategies or identify tools for achieving goals?

*assign implementation responsibilities?

*identify sources of funding for specific goals?

assign projects to the local government(s) capital improvement program(s)?

5. Implementation and Resource Needs: This component establishes resourcelimitations that will affect successful implementation of the plan(s).

NOTE: At a minimum the the identified plan goals should clearly reflect the watershed vision and address waterquality and habitat. For more information on data evaluation and goal setting, see Section 6.

Do the planning documents Yes No

establish a process for tracking accomplishments?

establish a time-line for achieving milestones?

establish a horizon for re-evaluation?

What is the planning horizon?

Do the planning documents Yes Noanalyze data collected in the environmental inventory to develop goals?document clearly articulated goals based on local and watershed factors?Have goals aimed at improving, enhancing and protecting:water qualitywatershed habitatswetlandsstream corridorsriparian buffer areas

NOTE: Identifying mandated and regulatory responsibilities is necessary to meet the minimum criteria for thiscomponent. For more information on related state and federal programs, see Section 5.

3. Institutional and Regulatory Framework: This component outlines mandatedand/or agreed upon roles and responsibilities within the watershed(s) and sets up theframework for implementation efforts.

4. Data Evaluation and Goal Setting: This component establishes a link between theenvironmental inventory and desired goals for the watershed(s).

6. Progress Benchmarks: This component identifies the review and evaluation processcritical to successfully implementing any planning effort.

NOTE: Items with asterisk are critical to assuring overall success of planning. For more information on settingimplementation goals and evaluating resource needs, see Sections 7 and 8.

NOTE: This component is critical to assuring overall success of the planning effort. For more information onestablishing progress benchmarks, see Section 9.

34

APPENDIX A

If the comparison of planning documents to these criteria shows that the documents in question have not met the minimum standard for each component, the next step in watershedmanagement planning is to complete missing or incomplete components.

If the comparison reveals that the planning documents collectively meet the minimum criteria,the planning documents represent a successful watershed managment planning effort and stepsshould be taken locally to formalize the effort. Opportunities to re-evaluate the watershed management planning effort to more fully meet the criteria can be pursued.

Understanding the Results of the Planning Checklist

35

APPENDIX B

Programs and Initiatives Addressing Agricultural Land UsesVirginia Agricultural Best Management Practices (BMPs) Cost-Share ProgramThis program encourages farmers to voluntary install practices that protect water quality and con-serve soil. The program provides incentives for the installation of BMPs on a flat per-acre rate, up to75 percent of the estimated cost, or a combination of flat rate and 75 percent of estimated compo-nent costs. The maximum amount an applicant can receive in a program year is $50,000.Visit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/sw/costshar.htmor contact your local soil and water conservation district, or call (804) 371-7330

Virginia Agricultural Best Management Practices Loan ProgramThe program, administered by DEQ, is a source of low interest financing to encourage the use ofspecific BMPs that reduce or eliminate agricultural nonpoint source pollution in Virginia’s waters. The minimum allowable loan is $5,000, and repayment periods range from one to ten years. Visit: http://www.deq.virginia.gov/cap/aghome.html

Virginia Agricultural Best Management Practices (BMPs) Tax Credit ProgramThis program encourages voluntary installation of BMPs that will address Virginia’s nonpoint sourcepollution water quality objectives by allowing individuals engaged in agricultural production for mar-ket to take a tax credit for agricultural BMPs installed to improve water quality. The tax credit is 25%of the first $70,000 expended for the agricultural BMPs by the individual or corporation against theimposed state income tax. The amount of the tax credit shall not exceed $17,500 or the total amount of state income tax obligation for the individual. If the amount of the credit exceeds the tax-payer’s liability for such a taxable year, the excess may be carried over for credit against incometaxes in the next five years or until they have taken the total of the tax credit.Visit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/sw/costshar.htmor contact your local soil and water conservation district, or call (804) 371-7330

Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP)CREP is a unique partnership of state, local and federal agencies, and private conservation groups.It aims to improve water quality and wildlife habitat by offering financial incentives to farminglandowners who voluntarily restore riparian buffers, native warm season grass filter strips and wet-lands. Partners include the state departments of Conservation and Recreation, Forestry (DOF), andGame and Inland Fisheries (DGIF); soil and water conservation districts (SWCDs); VirginiaCooperative Extension; USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and Farm ServiceAgency (FSA); U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Chesapeake Bay Foundation; and Ducks Unlimited.

Funding is available for fencing to keep livestock out of streams and rivers to reduce fecal col-iform and sediment; well-drilling and alternative watering systems to support agricultural produ-ction; wetland restoration; and riparian buffer planting to filter nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment.

Conservation practices installed under CREP receive 50 percent cost-share reimbursement fromFSA and up to 25 percent from DCR through SWCDs. Also, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation andDucks Unlimited contribute to wetland restoration efforts and enhanced buffer plantings. The pro-gram offers yearly rental payments for 10- or 15-year federal contracts. Through DCR, a $500/acreincentive is available for CREP enrolled acres placed under a permanent open space easement.Visit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/sw/crep.htm

Appendix B

Technical, Regulatory and Financial Assistance Program

36

APPENDIX B

Conservation Reserve Program (CRP)Similar to CREP, the CRP provides annual rent payments to landowners with highly erodible land toallow them to remove that land from production and plant it with conservation species for at least10 years. It provides cost-share funds for planting trees and other vegetative cover. To be eligible,the cropland must have been planted with commodity crops two of the five most recent crop years.Visit: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/

Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP)WHIP is a voluntary program through which cost-share and technical assistance are provided to pri-vate landowners to develop and improve fish and wildlife habitat. Participants who own or controlland write and implement a wildlife habitat development plan. The program is managed by theNatural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Duration of the assistance is from five to ten years.Contact: Cooperative Extension Service, local conservation district;Visit: http://www.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/pl566/WHIP.html

Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)EQIP provides technical, educational and financial help to eligible farmers and ranchers to addresssoil, water and related natural resource concerns on their lands in an environmentally beneficial and cost-effective manner. This is done through implementation of a conservation plan that includes structural, vegetative and land management practices. Contracts run from five to ten years, and cost-share provisions are possible. Contact: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service; Visit: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/

Wetland Reserve Program (WRP)WRP is a voluntary program to restore and protect wetlands on private property. It offers threeoptions:

Permanent easements: Landowners receive the agricultural value of the land, up to a maximumcap, plus 100 percent of the cost of restoring the land.30-year easements: Landowners receive 75 percent of the easement value and 75 percent cost-share on the restoration.Restoration cost-share agreements with a minimum 10-year duration: Landowners receive 75percent of the restoration cost.

Visit: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/wrp

Emergency Watershed Protection ProgramThis program, administered by NRCS, provides direct technical aid to restore streams in response tonatural disasters. Debris removal, stream bank reshaping, and the reseeding of damaged areas areexamples of practices the program covers. A local sponsor must submit a request for assistance. Visit: http://attra.ncat.org/guide/a_m/ewp.html

Agricultural Stewardship Program The Agricultural Stewardship Act (ASA) enables farmers to voluntarily correct water quality prob-lems before enforcement action is taken. Water quality problems concerning nutrients, sedimentand toxics from agricultural activities are reported to the Virginia Department of Agriculture andConsumer Services (VDACS). The program aims to educate farmers about environmental steward-ship and identify real water-quality problems. Through the program, farmers are directed to soil and water conservation districts for help in correcting problems in a common sense manner,accommodating both the farmer and the environment. VDACS Office of Policy, Planning and Research - (804) 786-3538.

Programs and InitiativesAddressing Non-Agricultural Land UsesErosion and Sediment Control Law and RegulationsDCR implements the state Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Program according to the VirginiaErosion and Sediment Control Law, Regulations and Certification Regulations. The program’s goal

37

APPENDIX B

is to control soil erosion, sedimentation and nonagricultural runoff from regulated land-disturbingactivities to prevent degradation of property and natural resources. The regulations specify mini-mum standards, which include criteria, techniques and policies, that must be followed on regulatedactivities.

Most private projects involving land disturbance are regulated through local government-operat-ed ESC programs whereas DCR’s ESC staff oversees state and federal activities. While propertyowners are ultimately responsible for ESC plan approval and implementation, responsibility forensuring compliance extends to the developer, contractor, consultant and Virginia’s citizenry. Thesuccess of ESC programs affects various interests, from those who own, rent or develop property to those who reside or recreate on lands or waters adjacent to or downstream from land-disturbingactivities. Visit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/sw/e&s.htm or call local government

Stormwater Management Stormwater Management Legislation passed by the 2004 General Assembly created a statewide,comprehensive stormwater management program related to construction and post-constructionactivities. DCR administers the Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP), including theMunicipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Program, under the federal Clean Water Act. TheMS4 program requires urbanized areas with certain population thresholds to develop stormwatermanagement plans and obtain discharge permits for stormwater outfalls. Any locality withinTidewater Virginia, as defined by the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act, and any locality designatedas an MS4 must adopt a local stormwater management program under the VSMP by July 1, 2006.Other Virginia localities may elect to adopt and administer a local stormwater management programfor land disturbing activities under the VSMR Localities adopting VSMP local programs receive aportion of the state permit fees to defray costs. In situations where localities are not required or havenot elected to adopt a local program, DCR administers the VSMP.Visit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/sw/stormwat.htm or call local government

Programs and Initiatives Addressing General Watershed-Based ImplementationCatalog of Federal Funding Sources for Watershed ProtectionThe Catalog of Federal Funding Sources for Watershed Protection website is a searchable data-base of financial assistance sources (grants, loans, cost-sharing) available to fund a variety ofwatershed protection projects. Users can use either of two searches to select funding programs forparticular requirements. One is based on subject matter, the other on keywords. Criteria searchesinclude the type of organization (e.g., nonprofit groups, private landowner, state, business), type ofassistance sought (grants or loans) and keywords (e.g., agriculture, wildlife habitat). Searches yielda list of programs by name and detailed information on the funding source.Visit: http://www.epa.gov/watershedfunding

Virginia Coastal ProgramThe Virginia Coastal Program was established in 1986 as a network of state agencies and local governments dedicated to preserving, protecting and restoring the natural beauty and ecologicalfunction of our coastal zone while fostering appropriate economic growth and development. TheCoastal Program achieves this balance and spirit of cooperation by supporting projects and pro-grams throughout Tidewater Virginia that address coastal issues. Funding is periodically availablefor implementation of projects and polices that support the program’s 10 goals.Visit: http://www.deq.state.va.us/coastal/

Watershed Roundtables A watershed roundtable consists of people who have a vested interest in their communities and are concerned about local water quality. In Virginia, watershed roundtables are known by a varietyof names, such as the Big Sandy River Basin Coalition, the Rappahannock River Basin Commission and the Pure Water 2000 Forum. A roundtable can be the driving force in the water-shed, providing education, outreach and solutions to restore and protect water quality. Roundtables generally involve a diversity of participants. Their activities address many common

community water quality concerns by hosting forums to present watershed issues on local waterquality and land use, educating citizens about water quality, seeking grants, donations and otherfunding sources, coordinating workshops, collecting and analyzing water quality data, participatingin the TMDL planning, and planning and implementing watershed-wide water quality goals. Eachmajor watershed in Virginia has a roundtable. Contact: 1-877-42WATER or call local DCR Watershed OfficeVisit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/sw/wsheds.htm

Chesapeake Bay Restoration Fund (License Plate Program)In 1992, the Virginia General Assembly established the Chesapeake Bay preservation license plate.The colorful plate reads, “Friend of the Chesapeake.” The assembly’s Virginia Division of LegislativeServices administers revenue from license plate sales. Grants are available to state agencies, localgovernments, schools and nonprofit groups for environmental education and restoration projects. Contact: Division of Legislative Services at (804) 786-3591

Water Quality Improvement FundThe Water Quality Improvement Act of 1997 established cooperative programs for nutrient reductionand other point and nonpoint sources of pollution. The Water Quality Improvement Fund (WQIF) wascreated to provide water quality improvement grants to local governments, soil and water conserva-tion districts and individuals. A primary objective is to fund projects that reduce the flow of excessnitrogen and phosphorus into state waters. DEQ manages point source grants, and DCR handlesnonpoint source grants.Visit: http://www.deq.state.va.us/bay/wqif.html or (804) 698-4466Visit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/sw/wqia.htm or (804) 371-8984

Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Control ProgramStates like Virginia, with approved coastal zone management programs, are required to focus NPSpollution control efforts to restore and protect coastal water quality by applying economically achiev-able BMPs. These are implemented through enforceable state policies and mechanisms.The federal government defines state-enforceable policies and mechanisms as state and local regu-latory controls and/or non-regulatory incentive programs combined with a state enforcement authori-ty. DCR is the lead state agency for the Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. Visit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/sw/czreauth.htm or call (804) 692-0839

Scenic RiversThe Virginia Scenic Rivers Act was passed in 1970 to protect and preserve certain rivers or sectionsthereof possessing natural or pastoral beauty. Nineteen rivers or river segments have been designat-ed, including one State Historic River. Ten more, which have been evaluated and found to quality fordesignation, are identified in the 2002 Virginia Outdoors Plan. Local support is necessary for the des-ignation of scenic river status, and the state legislature and governor must approve each addition toVirginia’s Scenic River system. The scenic rivers system comprises tidal and non-tidal rivers andextends from the coastal Virginia to the mountains. Inclusion in the scenic rivers system provides aframework whereby the river’s preservation is encouraged. DCR works with localities and citizens to study potential scenic rivers and encourages their participa-tion in evaluation. Following evaluation, the locality is notified whether or not the river qualifies. If theriver qualifies, DCR informs citizens and government officials about the program and their roles inresource management.Visit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/lanm_sum.htm

38

APPENDIX B

39

APPENDIX C

PlanningElement

WatershedManagementPlan (WMP)

TMDLImplementationPlan

TributaryStrategies Plan

LocalStormwaterManagementProgram

Local Comprehensive Plan

LeadResponsibility

local government or com-munity watershed organi-zation

state or federal agency,local government, college/university, community organization

state government incooperation withChesapeake Bay Progam

local Eastern Virginia gov-ernment or MS4 owner

local governments adopting program

DCR in all other localities

local government

Purpose local protection, conservation and restoration of streamcorridors, riparian

forest buffers, and wetlands to improve habitat and water quality

implement NPS load allocations to restore thebeneficial use of theresource

achieve and maintain thenutrient and sedimentloading goals assigned toeach tributary in order torestore bay livingresources

to protect the quality andquantity of state watersfrom the potential harm ofunmanaged stormwater

guide and accomplishcoordinated, adjusted andharmonious developmentof land within jurisdictionEastern Virginia – incorporate the protectionof the quality of statewaters

Scale one to several hydrologic units

small watershed up toseveral hydrologic units

entire watershed of eachbay tributary, includingmultiple jurisdictions andhydrologic units

one to several hydrologicunits within jurisdiction

local government jurisdiction – one to several hydrologic units

Detail specific to identifiedwater quality and land use issues

specific to water qualityimpairment

specific to nutrient andsediment reductions forentire watershed

specific to stormwaterdischarges issues

specific to the physicaldevelopment of the jurisdiction. Controls thegeneral or approximatelocation, character andextent of each physicalfeature (roadways, utilities, etc.) EasternVirginia – specific to a) physical constraints

to developmentb) protection of water

supplyc) shoreline erosion

controld) public-private

waterfront accesse) water quality

improvement potentialfrom redevelopment

StakeholderInvolvement

yes, watershed-wide yes, watershed-wide yes, at basin level yes, jurisdiction-wide,may be by watershed

yes, jurisdiction-wide

Appendix C

Virginia Planning Initiatives

40

APPENDIX C

PlanningElement

WatershedManagementPlan (WMP)

TMDLImplementationPlan

TributaryStrategies Plan

LocalStormwaterManagementProgram

Local Comprehensive Plan

WatershedGoals

yes, watershed-wide and addressing all water quality issues

yes, specific to waterquality impairment

yes, specific to nutrientreductions

not required not required

Eastern Virginia -required for purpose ofprotecting the quality of state waters

EnvironmentalInventory andEvaluation

yes, watershed-wide and addressing all landuse & water qualityissues

yes, specific to waterquality impairment

yes, specific to CBPmodel parameters andnutrient and sedimentreductions

yes, specific to stormwater dischargeissues

permissive componentsfor: conservation flood-plains drainage the designation of areas forimplementation of reasonable ground waterprotection measuresEastern Virginia - specific checklist itemsto protect quality of

Analysis ofStakeholderRoles andResponsibilities

detailed by stakeholder detailed by stakeholder broadly assesses responsibilities

describes permit holders' responsibilities

describes local govern-ment's responsibilities

Eastern Virginia - broadly assesses otheragency responsibilities

ImplementationStrategies andActions

yes, specific actions,timeframes and costs

yes, specific to sources,targeted and phasedrestoration activities

yes, broad, basin-wide yes, specific stormwateractions, timeframes andcosts

specific locations,character and extent ofeach physical featuresuch as roadwaysEastern Virginia - strategies and actions toprotect water quality

Identification ofNeededResources

yes, actual costs yes, actual costs forboth implementationand technical assistance

yes, broad, basin-wide yes no but may includecosts in capitolimprovement program

Eastern Virginia - yes -part of the action plan

Commitment toImplement

yes, by planning participants

yes, when federalmoney is available

yes yes yes

Monitoringand/or Tracking

yes yes yes yes yes

Eastern Virginia oversight by CBLAD

Deadlines 2010 2010 2004 July 2006 ongoing – updated andrevised every five years

Information for this tablewas provided by:

DCR Chesapeake BayOffice and C2KCommitment 2.2.1

DCR TMDL Program,WQMIRA

CBP website, memo toRuss Baxter

Stormwater ManagementAct of 2004

Code of VA 15.2-2223-2228 and 15.2-2232

41

APPENDIX D

Abandoned Mine Land ProgramThe Abandoned Mine Land (AML) Program of the Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals andEnergy, Division of Mined Land Reclamation (DMLR), was established in the late 1970s to abatepre-federal act coal mine related problems adversely affecting public health, safety, general welfareand the environment. Problems related to abandoned mine land include landslides, stream sedi-mentation, hazardous structures, dangerous highwalls, subsidence, loss of water, acid minedrainage and open mine portals. Virginia maintains an AML inventory of abandoned mine problemsthroughout the state. These high priority projects pose the greatest threat to public health and safe-ty and the environment.

Virginia’s AML Program is widely recognized as among the nation’s best. It provides technicalassistance and, when available, funding for projects that eliminate highwalls, cover and re-vegetateeroding outslopes and abate acid mine drainage problems.Contact: (276) 523-8206 or visit: http://www.dmme.virginia.gov/dmm

Chesapeake Bay Preservation ActThe Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act and Regulations established a cooperative programbetween state and local governments to improve water quality in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries by promoting the application of sound land use planning and management practiceson environmentally sensitive lands. The act requires local governments to incorporate generalwater quality protection measures into their comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances and subdivi-sion ordinances. Although Tidewater localities are required to adopt and implement the act, localgovernments outside of Tidewater may also adopt bay act programs. Adopting and implementing alocal program requires localities to map environmentally sensitive lands, develop or amend ordi-nances to implement performance criteria, amend comprehensive plans to address water quality,and evaluate their local ordinances and policies to identify and address any conflicts and barriersto protecting water quality.

Effective July 1, 2004, The Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation took overresponsibility for implementing act. The former Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department isnow part of DCR.

DCR provides technical and financial assistance to local governments in developing andimplementing their programs. The agency also provides advice on better site design and lowimpact development.Contact: CBLAD, 1-800-CHES-BAY, or visit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov

Chesapeake Bay ProgramThe Chesapeake Bay Program, created in 1983 by the first Chesapeake Bay Agreement, is aunique regional partnership leading and directing restoration of the Chesapeake Bay. Partnersinclude Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, the District of Columbia, the Chesapeake BayCommission (a tri-state legislative body), the EPA and citizen advisory groups. In June 2000, part-ners signed Chesapeake 2000, a comprehensive and far-reaching agreement guiding efforts torestore and protect the bay through 2010. Chesapeake 2000 outlines 93 commitments critical torestoring the bay watershed’s health. More than in previous agreements, Chesapeake 2000 com-mitments recognize the importance of locally driven initiatives to restore and protect the bay.About one-third of the commitments address actions at the local government level. The Chesapeake Bay Program has developed a wide range of data and tools to help state andlocal governments and community organizations restore the bay. Contact: Chesapeake Bay Program

Appendix D

Data and Planning ResourcesThe programs described below provide technical and/or financial help for watershed management planning..

42

APPENDIX D

410 Severn Avenue, Suite 109Annapolis, MD 21403

Call (410) 267-5700 or ((880000)) YYOOUURR--BBAAYY, or visit: hhttttpp::////wwwwww..cchheessaappeeaakkeebbaayy..nneett

Forest Management and Preservation ProgramsThe Virginia Department of Forestry has numerous programs to promote sound forest managementand preservation including urban and community forestry initiatives, water quality reference streaminitiatives, a riparian buffer initiative and an extensive geographical information system with links toother useful planning databases.The riparian buffer initiative aims to ensure that adequate buffer protects all streams and shorelinesin the state through agency partnerships with organizations, businesses and private landowners toestablish, enhance and maintain riparian buffers. The program also seeks to conserve existing for-est buffers and enhance program coordination and accountability. The Riparian BufferImplementation Plan was published in July 1998.Contact: http://www.dof.virginia.gov/resinfo/index.shtml (resource data)

http://www.dof.virginia.gov/rfb/index.shtml (riparian forest buffers)

Rivers and Trails Conservation Assistance ProgramThe Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program, a.k.a. the Rivers and Trails Program, orRTCA, is a community resource of the National Park Service. Program staff works with communitygroups, localities and state governments to conserve rivers, preserve open space, and developtrails and greenways. The RTCA program developed a community toolbox, suitable for communityorganizations and professional planners, to facilitate community-based watershed projects, includ-ing planning. Visit: http://www.nps.gov/phso/rtca/

http://www.nps.gov/sero/rtca/se_rivers.htm

Virginia Nonpoint Source Pollution Management ProgramDCR coordinates and directs programs and services to prevent degradation of the state’s waterquality and quantity. Statewide nonpoint source pollution control programs and services supportindividual stewardship, and lend assistance to local governments with watershed-based resourcemanagement. Technical and financial assistance, education and research are enhanced by fundsfrom the federal NPS Pollution Control Program and the Chesapeake Bay Program. A statewidesystem of 494 watersheds analyzed for NPS pollution potential drives how these activities are tar-geted. Services are delivered to local governments, special interest groups and citizens by staff ineight regional watershed offices. Contact: 1-877-42WATER, visit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov

Virginia Water Monitoring Council (VWMC)The VWMC inventories Virginia’s various water monitoring programs including data collected byagencies, local governments, colleges, citizen groups, etc. The inventory is posted on the VWMC’swebsite: http://www.VWMC.vt.edu/vwmc Users search the inventory by major watershed,moni-toring parameter, county/city and organization type. Links to websites of water monitoring programsare also posted.

Because VWMC members represent state and federal agencies, local governments, environ-mental consulting firms. faculty at universities, citizens and others, the organization has an exten-sive collective knowledge of technical and practical information about watersheds and watershedplanning, as well as water monitoring). The VWMC shares information through workshops, its web-sit, e-mail, and to individuals.

TThhee ffoolllloowwiinngg DDCCRR pprrooggrraammss ssuuppppoorrtt llooccaall wwaatteerrsshheedd mmaannaaggeemmeenntt ppllaannnniinngg::Conservation Lands DatabaseThe database includes mapped boundaries and certain characteristics of public and certain privatelands in Virginia that have conservation, recreation and open-space. Included are many federal and state lands, parks and undeveloped or partially developed lands owned by localities. Also,lands owned as preserves by nonprofit conservation organizations such as The Nature

43

APPENDIX D

Conservancy, and conservation easements held by the Virginia Outdoors Foundation, land trustsand others, are covered. This geographic information system (GIS) is in ArcView shape file formatand can be viewed, queried and manipulated using appropriate GIS software.Contact: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/olc/

Virginia Floodplain Management ProgramDCR coordinates the National Flood Insurance Program at the state level. The agency’s floodplainmanagement staff works with localities to establish and enforce floodplain management zoning.Localities use the program’s model ordinances, which set minimum federal standards, to write andenact their own floodplain management ordinances. Local governments can set more restrictivestandards for greater protection in flood hazard areas. Floodplain zoning regulates developmentwithin floodplains. A city, town or county must participate in the National Flood Insurance Programfor its business and residential properties to be eligible for national flood insurance purchase.Visit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/sw/damsafty.htm

Stream Restoration and Corridor ProtectionDCR has developed the Virginia Stream Restoration and Stabilization Best Management PracticesGuide to help community groups, local governments, state and federal land management agencies,environmental regulatory agencies and watershed management planners develop stream corridorprotection, conservation and restoration components of watershed management plans. DCR alsohas staff to provide limited technical assistance. Contact the local DCR Watershed Office or call 1-877 42WATER for details.Visit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/sw/index.htm to download the guide.

Virginia Karst ProgramThis program addresses nonpoint source pollution in Virginia’s 27 counties that contain karst land-scapes. It provides on-call technical assistance to localities, businesses, individuals and othergroups. The staff specializes in watershed delineation, sinkhole and sinking stream protection, ero-sion and sediment control, and stormwater and nutrient management. The state karst educationcoordinator conducts workshops for various audiences provides Project Underground curriculumused to train teachers and other environmental educators, who then pass the knowledge on to their students. Call (540) 831-4056.

Virginia Outdoors PlanThe Virginia Outdoors Plan (VOP) is the state’s official conservation, outdoor recreation and openspace plan. It guides all levels of government and the private sector. Implementing its recommenda-tions can ensure that Virginia’s rich outdoor heritage is passed on to future generations. The plan also meets criteria for participation in various land conservation grant programs.Contact: 1-804-786-5046 or visit: http://www.dcr.virginia.gov/prr/vopfiles.htm

TThhee ffoolllloowwiinngg DDEEQQ pprrooggrraammss ssuuppppoorrtt llooccaall wwaatteerrsshheedd mmaannaaggeemmeenntt ppllaannnniinngg::Virginia Water ProgramsDEQ administers the federal Clean Water Act and enforces state laws to improve the quality ofVirginia’s streams, rivers, bays and ground water for aquatic life, human health and other water uses. Permits that take into account physical, chemical and biological standards for water quality areissued to businesses, industries, local governments and individuals. Water quality monitoring,assessment and planning are used to determine how clean Virginia’s waters are and if they are asclean as it should be. Contact: 1-800-592-5482 or visit: http://www.deq.virginia.gov

Virginia Coastal ProgramThe Virginia Coastal Program, established in 1986 as a network of state agencies and local govern-ments, is dedicated to preserving, protecting and restoring the natural beauty and ecological func-tion of Virginia’s coastal zone while fostering appropriate economic growth and development. Thisbalance is achieved through the cooperation of supporting projects and programs throughout

Tidewater Virginia that address coastal issues. One example is development and implementation ofSpecial Area Management Plans (SAMPs) – long-term, locally supported planning and implementa-tion projects. SAMPs are rooted in the principle of coordinating multi-level planning to protect sig-nificant natural resources through the development and implementation of enforceable policies.Visit: http://www.deq.state.va.us/coastal/

Virginia Total Maximum Daily Load ProgramTotal maximum daily load (TMDL) describes the amount of pollution a stream can receive and stillmeet Virginia’s water quality standards. TMDLs are required for water bodies considered “impaired”by Virginia’s water quality assessment procedures. The Virginia TMDL program is governed by afederal court order Consent Decree that lays out a schedule for TMDL development through 2010.Local watershed management planning that involves an impaired segment of waterway or a com-pleted TMDL should be coordinated with the TMDL process.Visit: http://www.deq.virginia.gov/tmdl/

Virginia Citizen Water Quality Monitoring ProgramThe Virginia Citizen Water Quality Monitoring Program is a public-private partnership among theAlliance for the Chesapeake Bay, DCR, DEQ, and Virginia Save Our Streams. The program providesassistance to organizations and local governments identifying available monitoring data. It can be an avenue to connect active stakeholders to watershed planning. It provides technical and, whenavailable, financial assistance to community groups for the collection and use of meaningful waterquality monitoring data.Visit: http://www.deq.virginia.gov/cmonitor/

Water Quality Assessment ActivitiesThe DEQ extensively tests Virginia’s rivers, lakes and tidal waters for pollutants. Waters are tested for more than 130 pollutants to determine if the waterways can be used for swimming, fishing anddrinking. Most rivers, lakes and estuaries in Virginia meet standards as described in biennial WaterQuality Assessment Reports. Waters that do not meet standards are reported to the citizens ofVirginia and the EPA in the Impaired Waters Report. This information is available online for localplanning initiatives.Visit: http://www.deq.state.va.us/water/reports.html

http://www.deq.virginia.gov/wqa/

Water Quality Management PlansWater Quality Management Plans are being written under the ‘Continued Planning Process’ estab-lished by Section 303(e) of the Clean Water Act. These plans will serve as a repository for TMDLplans and for TMDL implementation as approved by the State Water Control Board. Visit: http://www.deq.state.va.us/watersheds/programs.html

Other Useful Websites:

Virginia Cooperative Extensionhttp://www.ext.vt.edu

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisherieshttp://www.dgif.virginia.gov

Virginia Economic Development Partnershiphttp://www.yesvirginia.org

Virginia Marine Resources Commissionhttp://www.mrc.virginia.gov

44

APPENDIX D

45

APPENDIX E

At the outset of a visioning process, goals and priorities may differ, but, more often than not, thoseinvolved have common values. Such shared values may be the importance of a clean water sup-ply, abundant recreational offerings or natural beauty. All may not agree on how to achieve thesegoals or how natural resources should be protected, but a shared community understanding ofthe watershed’s role and significance can still be developed.

A community-based watershed visioning process can involve a survey to gauge communityawareness and interest, and meetings and other venues wherein people can share ideas anddevelop mutual understanding and shared outcomes. The community vision is then used to guidedevelopment of watershed planning goals.

Key elements for an effective vision statement should:Be only one or two sentencesDescribe the desired conditionIdentify issue(s) (e.g., clean water, healthy communities) of concern

Optional vision statement elements:May set a timeframe (e.g., by 2020) or simply state the “future”It should inspire and identify the importance, urgency and uniqueness of the issue (e.g., protecting the last-remaining, most unique, exceptional, etc.)

Elements to avoid:Don’t be overly general, e.g., “Protecting all waters for the future,” or rely on jargon such as “Achieving community sustainability.” While important, these are too general to provide direction.

Sample Vision Statement:

“The Fluvial River shall flow freely and support an abundant and diverse ecology ofnative plants, fish and animals for future generations of citizens.” This vision statement describes a future where the river is not dammed, supports a diverse nativeecology, and provides for public use and enjoyment. A vision statement does not need to beachievable in the short term; it is an ideal to strive for. Residents in Madison County, Va., developedsix vision statements to address different aspects of their community. Their environmental visionstated, “We visualize our region and communities as ‘places of beauty’ – vistas of rural farms,orchards, historic places and unspoiled scenic beauty, as well as protected habitats and areas ofnatural resources for retreat, discovery and recreation.”

Initiating a Visioning ProcessCommunity surveys and meetings are two ways to initiate the visioning process.

Community Vision SurveysSome communities initiate visioning by conducting surveys in which citizens are asked to rankitems to get a sense of the knowledge and community priorities concerning the watershed.Professional assistance may be needed to design the survey. Additionally, if statistically significantresults are needed, survey professionals can design the sample area, size and method. However,a qualitative survey may be enough to gain an initial understanding of community values. Thereare many references available on survey methodology and design.

Appendix E

Visioning Process

46

APPENDIX E

The survey can:Provide a starting point of initial interests and priorities for developing the visionShow current community awareness regarding watershed issues and reveal what additionaleducation is neededHelp community members consider assumptions and values about the watershed

Community Visioning MeetingsCommunity forums are another way to engage the public in a visioning process. These forumswork best when preceded by widespread community outreach. This ensures that a diverse cross-section of the community attends. For example, hosting an evening meeting in the local library mayonly reach those who regularly attend public meetings. To attract a broader constituency, considera community picnic or festival instead.

At any visioning session, give those attending information about the watershed’s status. If acommunity watershed survey was used, present those findings to be used to develop a vision forthe watershed.

People can creatively voice ideas through plays, poems… even singing or dancing. The key isto get people communicating. One community forum began with a woman singing an original songabout the river, past and present, while images depicting its many unique facets flashed on ascreen behind her. Students performed a river dance, and local residents and historians told talesabout the river they remembered from the 1930s and 1940s and values and uses they hoped torestore. A biologist described the ecological state of the river. All the presentations engaged theparticipants and broadened their perspectives before they were asked for opinions and ideas.

Facilitators from outside the community can run the forum so that community members acceptthe process as neutral, one in which they can more freely share ideas. If the group has more than40 people, break it into smaller groups so that everyone has a chance to speak. Divide groups sothat various interests are spread throughout the groups (e.g., don’t have all farmers in one group).

Developing the Watershed VisionIf a survey was used, findings can form the basis for an initial discussion to develop a vision. Thequestions below will help frame a discussion about concepts and values that can form the basis ofthe community’s watershed vision. Facilitators can ensure that no one dominates the discussionand that all views are heard and recorded.

1) What image comes to mind when you think of the Little Mill Creek Watershed, e.g., a degradedurban ditch, a pristine escape from the urban world, an unseen treasure, etc.? (Note: If a surveywas conducted, use it to determine if residents agree or disagree with the findings.)

2) What are the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to the protection of the water-shed? List these on a four-column table. This approach is called a SWOT analysis.)

3) What would you most like preserved in this watershed – for the land, people and natural func-tions? Or, “Why did I move here and why do I stay?”

4) Which of those identified in question 3 are the top three things?

5) Based on the SWOT analysis, which are most in danger of being lost?

6) What should be preserved, protected, sustained or restored? Or think of it this way: When yourgreat-grandchildren visit the watershed, what should they find? Which of these ideas should formthe basis for a vision statement?

7) Which ideas from question six do you think are key aspects of a watershed vision for the water-shed? What key phrases should be considered for a vision? List them.

The facilitator can help the group begin drafting a statement using these key words and ideas, orthe ideas can be given to the watershed’s planning team to create a vision statement. If there is asteering committee, it can use these ideas to devise a vision statement.

Once a draft vision statement is developed, circulate it to other groups and other forums. Thecommunity’s vision statement should be publicized and updated over time. Ongoing work isrequired to raise awareness of the vision in the community and to seek buy-in from new residentsand elected officials. The vision may need to change periodically, to incorporate new information andperspectives.

In summary, an effective vision statement addresses what you have, where you’re headed andthe future you want for your community, your watershed and yourselves.

It can give direction to a locality’s comprehensive plan, local watershed plans, and planning forparks and recreation. It can be used to consider choices on growth and development. Be sure towrite a vision statement people can understand, support and sustain over time.

47

APPENDIX E

48

APPENDIX F

“Applied River Morphology.” 1996. This technical publication outlines the fundamental principles ofriver function and the classification of natural rivers, depicting major stream types. It’s useful forwatershed management, ecosystem assessment, fish habitat evaluation, river restoration and non-point source pollution reduction. Source: Wildland Hydrology Books, 1481 Stevens Lake Rd.,Pagosa Springs, CO 81147. Call (970) 264-7100. ($89.95 plus shipping and handling)

“Better Site Design: An Assessment of Better Site Design Principles for Communities ImplementingVirginia’s Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act.” Source: Center for Watershed Protection, 8737Colesville Rd., Suite L105, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Call (410) 461-8323 or e-mailmrrunoff@usapipeline.com. ($35)

“Check Your Success.”A guide to developing indicators for community based environmental proj-ects, useful for benchmarking and measuring progress. Source: Virginia Tech, Department of Urban Affairs & Planning and USEPA. Available online at http://www.uap.vt.edu/checkyoursuccess/manual.html.

“Clean Water in Your Watershed: A Citizens Guide to Watershed Protection.” Provides a process forcitizen-based watershed project planning. Source: Terrene Institute, 1717 K Street, NW, Suite 801,Washington, DC 20006 Call (202) 833-8317, http://www.terrene.org.

“Collaboration: A Guide for Environmental Advocates.” 2001. This guide is useful for determining if acollaborative approach is appropriate for resolving environmental issues. It includes processes andtips for designing and implementing collaborative approaches. Source: Institute for EnvironmentalNegotiation, 164 Rugby Rd, P.O. Box 400179, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4179.(Free PDF copies available online at: http://www.virginia.edu/ien/; Bound copies $8)

“Community Watershed Assessment Handbook.” 2003. Source: Chesapeake Bay Program, 410Severn Ave., Suite 109, Annapolis, MD 21401. Call (800)YOURBAY. (Free PDF copies availableonline at www.chesapeakebay.net)

“Community Watershed Forums: A Planner’s Guide.” 2002. This guide describes how to plan andhost community forums to engage your community in watershed planning. Source: Institute forEnvironmental Negotiation, 164 Rugby Rd, P.O. Box 400179, University of Virginia, Charlottesville,VA 22904-4179. (Free PDF copies available online at http://www.virginia.edu/ien/) Paperback $25)

“A Framework for Analyzing the Hydrologic Condition of Watersheds.” This document details techni-cal procedures for analyzing existing conditions in a watershed. The procedures detail yield, timingand quality of water. Source: USDA-Forest Service and USDI-Bureau of Land Management, June1998. Item numbers BLM Technical Note 405 and BLM/RS/ST-98/004+7210

“Getting In Step: A Guide to Effective Outreach in Your Watershed.” Provides tools and approach todevelop and implement an effective watershed outreach plan. Source: Council of StateGovernments, PO Box 11910, Lexington, KY 40578-1910 Call (859)244-800. (Free PDF copies avail-able online at http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/outreach/documents)

Appendix F

Resource BibliographyHere are additional resources for watershed planning and community involvement.

“Getting In Step: Engaging and Involving Stakeholders in Your Watershed.” This guide provides toolsneeded to effectively engage stakeholders to restore and maintain healthy environmental conditionsthrough community support and cooperative action. Source: Tetra Tech, Inc. (Free PDF copies available online at http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/outreach/documents)

“Guidance Manual for Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plans.” A must-have for any localwatershed management planning that includes a TMDL planning effort. Source: Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, TMDL Program Manager. Call: (804) 786-3199.

“Know Your Watershed Guides.” This series provides guides for watershed partnerships. Source: http://www.ctic.purdue.edu/KYW/kyw.html

“The Practice of Watershed Protection: Techniques for Protecting and Restoring Urban Watersheds.”A compilation of 150 articles on all aspects of urban watershed protection from the journal,Watershed Protection Techniques. Source: Center for Watershed Protection. Call (410) 461-8323;copies available online at http://www.cwp.org. ($80)

“Rapid Watershed Planning Handbook.” This handbook includes a comprehensive approach fordeveloping a cost-effective watershed plan. It covers management options, analysis tools and watershed plan case studies. Source: Center for Watershed Protection. Call (410) 461-8323 orcopies available online at http://www.cwp.org. ($40

“Restoring Streams in Cities: A Guide for Planners, Policymakers and Citizens.” 1998. The book cov-ers urban stream restoration concepts for use by citizens, mayors, county commissioners, flood control engineers and others interested in improving local waterways. Source: Island Press, Box 7,Department 2NET, Covelo, CA 95428 Call (800) 828-1302. ($35 paperback)

“Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated Guide to Field Technique.” This is a 61-page techni-cal guide on establishing permanent reference sites for gathering data about physical characteristicsof streams and rivers. Source: U.S. Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Publications, 3825 E. Mullberry, Fort Collins, CO 80524. Call (970) 498-1100 and ask for General Technical Report 145. (Free)

“A Stream Corridor Protection Strategy for Local Governments.” 2002. This handbook contains thecumulative wisdom of watershed experts from across the Chesapeake Bay watershed and coversstream protection strategies and tools, such as stream buffers and zoning overlays, and resourcesfor conducting a protection strategy. Source: Institute for Environmental Negotiation, 164 Rugby Rd,P.O. Box 400179, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4179. (Free PDF copies available at:http://www.virginia.edu/ien/stream%20guide_final.pdf%202; bound copies $8)

“Water in Environmental Planning.” 1978. Technical reference for watershed planning principles.Source: W.H. Freeman and Co., 4419 West 1980 South St., Salt Lake City, UT 84104. Call (800) 877-5351. ISBN No. 07167-0079-4. ($87.95, plus shipping and handling)

“Living With Karst – A Fragile Foundation.” This book vividly illustrates what karst is and why karst-rich areas are important. It covers karst-related environmental and engineering concerns, guidelinesfor living with karst and sources of additional information. Source: American Geological Institute,4220 King Street, Alexandria, VA 22302. (703) 379-2480. www.agiweb.org Copies also availablethrough the Virginia Karst Program.

“Living on Karst – A Reference Guide for Landowners in Limestone Regions.” This guide helps resi-dents of karst areas learn about how day-to-day activities affect their groundwater and fragileecosystems. Source: Cave Conservancy of the Virginias, 13131 Overhill Lake Lane, Glen Allen, VA23059. Available online at: www.caveconservancy.org.

49

APPENDIX F

AcknowledgmentThe impetus for this document was the emphasis placed on watershed management and planning in the Chesapeake Bay

Agreement – Chesapeake 2000. However, over the course of developing this guide, it became clear that many Virginialocalities are involved in watershed planning in some form or fashion, and that the voluntary principles of watershed

management planning could benefit water quality and localities statewide. Therefore, this guide is intended to provideguidance and consistency to watershed planning efforts across Virginia.

Many were involved in the guide’s development: the Virginia Watershed Advisory Committee and their publication, LocalWatershed Management Planning in Virginia, developed the Virginia approaches, structure and appendices in the guide.

The University of Virginia Institute for Environmental Negotiation provided much of the text and detail.

We hope the results will be useful.

Virginia Watershed Advisory Committee member organizationsVirginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Chair

Alliance for the Chesapeake BayCanaan Valley Institute

City of ChesapeakeChesapeake Bay Foundation

Fairfax CountyFriends of the Rappahannock

Hampton Roads Planning District CommissionNorthern Virginia Regional Commission

Office of the Secretary of Natural ResourcesUS Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service

Virginia Association of CountiesVirginia Association of Soil and Water Conservation Districts

Virginia Department of Environmental QualityVirginia Department of Forestry

Virginia Department of Game and Inland FisheriesVirginia Municipal League

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Virginia Cooperative Extension

Institute for Environmental NegotiationKaren E. Firehock, Contributing Author

Virginia Department of Conservation and RecreationR. Gary Waugh, Jr., Editor

Frances C. Geissler, Project Manager