Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP)
Maintain Healthy Watersheds Goal Implementation Team (GIT)
Tracking Workgroup Conference Call
August 25th, 2014
2 PM – 3 PM
Participants:
Renee Thompson, USGS, CBP Office, Chair
Tuana Phillips, Chesapeake Research Consortium, Staff
John Wolf, USGS, CBP Office
Daniel Rosen, Maryland Department of Planning
Todd Janeski, VA Department of Conservation and Recreation
Helen Stewart, MD Department of Natural Resources
Kevin Anderson, Trout Unlimited
John Schneider, DE Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control
Laura Gabanski, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Tim Craddock, WV Department of Environmental Protection
Bevin Buchheister, Chesapeake Bay Commission
Sally Claggett, USFS, CBP Office
Summary of Action Items:
 Maryland will finalize their baseline conditions of healthy watersheds based on Tier 2
watershed information. Maryland will work with Healthy Watershed GIT leadership to
have their portion of the State-identified healthy watersheds map updated as soon as
possible.
 Workgroup members are encouraged to submit data layers to be included in the evolving
document of potentially useful layers for the workgroup’s tracking framework. Please
send the data layer name and short description or link to more information to Tuana
Phillips at Phillips.tuana@epa.gov. The evolving document can be found at the
following link:
http://www.chesapeakebay.net/channel_files/22015/potential_data_layers_aug_2014.xlsx
 GIT Staff and select members participating in the Watershed Forum healthy watersheds
session will finalize questions to be asked to the audience.
 GIT staff will work with TNC and WV DEP to further refine and develop the GIT
funding project proposal and identify the appropriate funding mechanism.
Welcome and Introductions:
Renee Thompson, Chair of the Workgroup and Coordinator of the Maintain Healthy Watersheds
Goal Team, welcomed everyone to the call, confirmed participants, and went over the Agenda.
Tracking Healthy Watersheds Potential Prototype Tool:
John Wolf presented a prototype of the Chesapeake Bay Landscape Modeler, a tool that has been
initially developed as a way to display and conduct analysis on Chesapeake Bay related data
layers. The Tracking Workgroup could maybe use this tool toward the Healthy Watersheds Goal
to: Sustain state-identified healthy waters and watersheds recognized for their high quality and/or
high ecological value.
For more information on the Landscape Modeler and this project:
 https://marketplace.arcgis.com/listing.html?id=58e5b2fe5aaa4aa782175c334734e0a9
 The prototype has been developed using the ESRI Landscape Modeler, which is a
suitability analysis planner to assist researchers in determining which locations are
best suited for certain uses. It allows users to customize specific environmental
factors and weighting to compare various data inputs and visualize them on the
landscape.
 The Chesapeake Bay Landscape Modeler will include various Chesapeake Bay
Program and Mid-Atlantic state layers. This will give users the ability to select two
or multiple layers of interest to produce their own maps with a range of composite
scores. Eventually, USGS CBP Office will incorporate map layers and other features
on Chesapeake Stat: http://stat.chesapeakebay.net/ .
 The tool works on ArcGIS online.
Other discussion points:
 If this tool ends up being used by the Tracking Workgroup, it will not be used to track
the baseline conditions of healthy watersheds. Instead, it will be most likely used to
track healthy watershed protection in a more standardized manner. This is in line
with the Workgroup’s charge.
 It is important to track a consistent, periodic cycle (e.g., every 5 years), as well as
tracking what is being done to ensure that the watersheds are protected (e.g.
conservation easements, controlling of non-point source pollution, connectivity, and
enhancement of healthy watersheds).
 Additional data related to not only urban development threat but also energy
development should also be considered.
 There is an interagency group in Maryland and has developed a matrix of data related
to Water Resources Registry work. This may be useful for this group as well.
 It was reiterated that the workgroup does not want to create undue burden for the
states, and will use layers that will be or already have been developed. Healthy
Watersheds GIT staff have developed an evolving document of potentially useful
documents, which can be found at the following link:
http://www.chesapeakebay.net/channel_files/22015/potential_data_layers_aug_2014.
xlsx .
 Workgroup members are encouraged to share the document with other groups and
contribute to the document by contacting Tuana.
Watershed Forum: Healthy Watersheds Session
The Forum will take place at the USFWS National Conservation Training Center in
Shepherdstown, WV, from Sept 26-28. The Healthy Watersheds GIT is organizing a session, in
which GIT speakers will highlight some of the work of the GIT as well as the Local Engagement
and Tracking Workgroup. Ideally though, the session will be an opportunity to reach out to a
broader audience of watershed professionals to gain input into our key workgroup task: how to
track and report the identification, health and protection status of State-identified healthy
watersheds.
Renee proposed a few example questions that can be asked to audience members during the
session:
 Besides Tracking Land Protection, what other indicators should we investigate to help
evaluate watershed health?
 Who are the key stakeholders that we should invite to be part of this discussion?
Additional discussion points related to Watershed Forum stakeholder input:
 Think more broadly than the healthy watersheds outcome. What indicators are common
across large landscapes that could be utilized?
 Should we be monitoring watershed protection (e.g. strength of local policies, level of
land use regulation, specific presence of lack of a policy, etc.?)
 USGS at the CBP office develops a layer of vulnerability to development. MDP, too, has
its own land use stability model. What are other ways in which agencies and
organizations are gaging development pressure?
 What can we do to incentivize reporting from municipal, local, and state governments?
Or is that something we have to take on ourselves?
 Could 319 plans be used to track protection? States are in the process of rewriting their
319 plans, and they are paying more attention to protection. WV, for instance, is working
on developing a protection plan for Backcreek. This plan includes conservation
easements, farmland conservation, and natural stream restoration projects. Backcreek
was chosen in particular because it is a community with an active watershed organization
and good community base.
GIT funding: Identifying Additional Healthy Watersheds
The Chesapeake Bay Program has awarded over $850K to Goal Implementation Teams for
projects related to their outcomes. One of the approved projects is $50,000 to identify additional
State Healthy Watersheds. After consultation with GIT leadership, it has been determined that
this initial money may be best spent in WV to further develop the Watershed Assessment Pilot
Project that was presented at the December 2013 Healthy Watersheds GIT membership meeting:
http://www.chesapeakebay.net/channel_files/21119/wv_chesapeakebayprogram_20131219.pdf
Renee recently spoke with our WV team member, Tim Craddock as well as with the TNC
principal Project Manager regarding this idea and both are receptive to expanding the pilot
project with the aim of creating a more robust State-identified Healthy Watershed GIS layer for
the Chesapeake Bay Watershed portion of West Virginia.
Discussion: should the Tracking Workgroup make a recommendation to the Healthy Watersheds
GIT that this is an appropriate use of the awarded $50,000 dollars?
 Members agreed that this idea is an appropriate use of the awarded money, as long as the
project results in additional healthy watersheds being identified and there is a seat at the
table for the GIT to learn about the process.


As the project develops, it might be worth using a disclaimer. TNC is leading the work
on behalf of the state, but we want to make sure everyone is welcome and kept in the
loop.
Other things to consider: how is drilling monitored? How will climate change be
incorporated into the assessment?