Community-Based Watershed
Management in Ohio
Watershed Workshop
Morehead State University
May 11, 2006
Robert McCall
Center at Lima
Dana Oleskiewicz
Center at Wooster
Educators, Watershed Management
Ohio State University Extension
Objectives:
• Define Community-Based Watershed
Management (CBWM)
• Explore Two Ohio Case Studies
• Tools of the Trade
Water resource protection
through watershed management efforts
for the goal of high water quality
requires planning
by communities (stakeholders)
within the watershed.
a.k.a.
Community-Based Watershed Management!!
A Model for Success
Facilitating Agency
Community-Based Watershed Management
with Stakeholder Involvement
Community Organization
Steelman, Toddi. 1999.
Implementing the W-shed Approach
Build Public Support
 Establish
the core watershed group
 Create a mission statement
 Promote activities in the watershed
 Recruit new stakeholders
Create an Inventory
Implement & Evaluate
 Define
the watershed
 Measure progress
 Assess the quality of the water resource
 Revisit the action plan and make
adjustments where needed
 Examine the human and ecological
features that affect the quality of the water
resource
Define the Problems
 Identify
the pollutants causing the
problems
Create an Action Plan
 Set priorities
 Identify the sources of the pollutants
 Set timeframes
 Assign tasks
 Obtain funding
 Identify high quality areas to protect
Set Goals &
Develop Solutions
 Formulate a problem statement
 Evaluate
potential solutions for the
identified problems
 Set goals and measurable indicators
 Select solutions that achieve goals
Ohio EPA. “A Guide to
Developing Local Watershed
Action Plans in Ohio”. 1997.
The CBWM Approach
Build Public
Support
Create an
Inventory
Implement &
Evaluate
Define the
Problems
Create an
Action Plan
Set Goals &
Develop Solutions
Ohio EPA. “A Guide to
Developing Local Watershed
Action Plans in Ohio”. 1997.
Why Community-Based?
• Problems are complex
• Solutions exceed capabilities of one entity
• Collaborative decisions necessary
– Communities have vested interest
– Local people are crucial
• Define workable options
• Enforce management choices
• Monitor the effectiveness
Steelman, T.A. 1999.
Social Goals
•
•
•
•
•
Educate and inform the general public
Incorporate public values into decisions
Improve the quality of decisions
Resolve conflict among competing interests
Build trust in institutions
Beierle, T.C. & J. Cayford. 2002.
Environmental Behavior Model
• Entry-level - (awareness)
• Ownership - (knowledge)
• Empowerment - (attitude / skills)
• Citizenship (Steward) Behavior - (motivation)
Hungerford & Volk. 1990.
CBWM and Sustainability
Environmental
Biophysical /
Ecological
SocioEconomic
Quality of
Life!
Societal
Economic
Policy and Institutional
Watershed Management
Core Components
• Science-Based – Decisions based on data
• Community-Led – Stakeholders decide
• Sustainable – Long-term coordination
http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/nps/NPSMP/index.html
CBWM Core Components
Biophysical /
Ecological
Considerations
Science-Based
SocioEconomic
Considerations
Effective
Stakeholder
Participation
Community
-Led
Sustainable
Policy and Institutional Considerations
Implementation Continuum
Water Quality Attainment
Drinking Water Protection
5. Sustained implementation of endorsed WAP
4. WAP receives state endorsement
3. Group develops Watershed Action Plan
2. Coordinated, issue-based local group forms
1. Local water resource advocate / steward
http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/nps/NPSMP/index.html
Developing Capacity
Resources Needed
•
•
•
•
•
•
People - Staff
Technical - Knowledge
Financial - Money
Networking - Partnerships
Organizational - Efficiency
Legitimacy - Good Representation
Resources Delivered
Stakeholders!
Steelman, Toddi. 1999.
Management Challenges
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Low stakeholder involvement
Lack of local ownership
Planning at too great a scale
One-time study, not long-term management
Land use issues not addressed
Document too long or complex
Recommendations were too general
Center for Watershed Protection (www.cwp.org)
Successful Watershed Management
=
Strong Community-Based Effort
(Stakeholders)
+
Good Partnership-Building
(Buy-In)
+
Effective and Collaborative
Environmental Decision-Making
(Best Management Practices)
Case Study Watersheds
Case Study #1
Blanchard River Watershed
Partnership
Blanchard River Watershed Partnership
Stakeholders to date
County
City
Regional
Reg. Plan. Comm.
RC&D
Commissioners
Utilities Director
OSU Extension
Engineering
W W Treatment Plant ODNR
Extension
County Engineering Ohio EPA
Farm Bureau
Civic Groups
Non-profit orgs.
Regional Planning
Parks District
Industry
SWCD
Farm Service Agency
Dept. of Health & Human
Consultants
Services
Township Trustees
General Public
Blanchard River Watershed Partnership
Issues of Public Concern
Ottawa, Ohio (04/20/04
Water velocity, erosion and
sedimentation
Flooding
Drinking water quality
Recreation
Septic discharge
Fertilizer use
Maintaining drainage for
agr. production
Bluffton, Ohio (04/28/04)
Get youth interested and
involved in the basin
Water quality and run-off
Local ditching projects,
removal of Riparian area
Erosion and sedimentation
Flooding and results of
flooding
Water and smart growth and
its effects
Non-point source pollution
Blanchard River Watershed Council
Issues of Public Concern
Findlay, Ohio (03/29/04)
HSTS Plans
Sedimentation in waterways
Sustainable development
Flooding and drainage
Agricultural run-off
River water quality impacts on
reservoir
Treatment costs for drinking
water
Quantity and quality of water
resources
Flow management and drainage
Stream bank erosion
Total maximum daily load
(TMDL = OEPA Assmnt.)
Flooding and water quality
Loss of wetlands
Riparian habitat, wetlands
and water quality
Stakeholder driven solutions
and watershed planning
Recreation (fishing,
canoeing, wildlife habitat)
BRWP: Where are they now?
• Working on watershed inventory
• Reviewing 501c3 options
• Soliciting sponsors for a Watershed
Coordinator Grant
Potential Organizational
Development Model
Staff:
Coordinator
Interns?
Supp. Staff?
Steering Committee
Executive
Committee
Project Sponsor:
Funding &
administrative
support.
Standing Committees under the Steering
Committee, including the Executive Committee
Marketing &
Communication
Education
Membership
Development
& Fundraising
Water
Stream Flow &
Habitat
Wastewater
Agriculture
Watershed Action Plans to work on.
Sub W-S
#1
Sub W-S
#2
Sub W-S
#3
Sub W-S
#4
Sub W-S
#5
Sub W-S
#6
Current Organizational
Development Model
Steering Committee
Staff:
Coordinator
Interns?
Supp. Staff?
Executive
Committee
Project Sponsor:
Funding &
administrative
support.
Standing Committees under the Steering
Committee, including the Executive Committee
Marketing &
Communication
Water/Wastewater
Development
& Fundraising
Outreach/Ed./Membership
Stream Flow &
Habitat
Agriculture
Currently gathering watershed assessment
information for the entire watershed
Coordinator Sponsor Survey?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Fiscal capabilities
Adm. Support
Technical Support
Housing
Equipment
Overhead
Experience with NP, PS, Pr S.
Case Study #2
Sugar Creek Watershed
Partnership
METHOD USED IN UPPER SUGAR
CREEK SUBWATERSHED
DISTRUST OF
EPA DATA
1 TEST SITE
PER SQ MILE
EVERY 2 WEEKS
MORAL
DILEMMA ABOUT
GOOD STEWARD
SELF-CONCEPT
HOT
SPOTS
SOCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY
BASED WQ
TESTING
INVITATION
TO HOT SPOT
FARMERS TO
JOIN TEAM
CORRELATION OF HOT
SPOTS WITH PRIMARY
HEADWATERS
PARTICIPATORY TEAMS
SUGAR CREEK FARMER TEAMS
PARTICIPATORY
TEAMS IN
SUBWATERSHEDS
UPPER SC
Self selected group
of neighbors
LITTLE SC
No group yet but
likely
NORTH FORK
Task Force of Leading
Citizens
SOUTH FORK
Farmerstown South
Church District / Maple
Grove School
--Joint buffer by neighbors
--Hot Spots
--Kingsway C.S.
--DOT wetlands/30 BYPASS
--Troyers
--Amish/non Amish
tributary joint action
--Amish marketing coop
--Kidron Drinking Water
--temporary livestock
exclusion
--Amish marketing coop
--Interest in septic systems
BUILDING COMMUNITY
• Summer 2000 - Low trust in EPA
• Fall 2000 - Desire to be good stewards
• Winter 2001 - Joint reconnaissance mission
by farmer and researchers
• 2001-2002 - Collect own data and inquiry
• Summer 2001 - Approve EPA grant proposal
• Summer 2002 - Invite EPA on Stream Walk
SOCIAL INDICATORS
According to Farmer Team
• Decision to be good land/water stewards
– Regardless of EPA data
• Realize their inquiries have scientific merit
• Request samples for specific questions
• Neighbors chosen for purposeful action
– “hot spot” approach
• Smithville Town Council involved
Decisions and Actions
SOCIAL INDICATORS
According to Farmer Team
•
•
•
•
•
Letters to neighbors
Going out to lunch together for first time
Dreaming about a buffer hunting zone
Talking about project at high school games
First farm family to put in a riparian buffer
Unity, Significance, and Purpose
CASE STUDY
Richard H. Moore, Associate Professor
Human and Community Resource Development.
Ohio State University.
(moore.11@osu.edu)
http://sugarcreekmethod.osu.edu/
Sugar Creek Method:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Focus on headwaters and benchmark water quality
Treat each stream as unique
Survey community values, concerns, and aspirations
Catalyze local level participatory learning
Collaborate with downstream teams
Build on “healthy environment, healthy people”
Seek to find suitable methods of protection
Tools for Watershed Action Planning
http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/nps/guide.html
Tools for Stakeholder Involvement
•
•
•
•
•
Conduct a thorough search for stakeholders
Build relationships and make it fun
Employ conflict resolution
Remain vigilant and get organized
Remember – calendars and “to do” lists!
Tools for Stakeholder Involvement
Community Invitees
•
•
•
•
•
Building & Development
Community Services
Economic Development
Health Department
Land Records & Property
Transfers
• Libraries
• Mapping & Geographic
Information
• Parks and Recreation
• Planning & Zoning
• School Boards
• Social Services
• Tourism Board
• Water & Sewer Services
MacPherson & Tonning, Tetra Tech, Inc.
Tools for Stakeholder Involvement
Community Invitees
•
•
•
•
•
Dept. of Transportation
Civic Organizations
Religious Groups
Rec. Organizations
Historical / Cultural
Associations
• Business Organizations
•
•
•
•
•
Financial Institutions
Home Associations
Realtors
Political Organizations
Parent-Teacher
Associations
• Major Landowners
Tools for Stakeholder Involvement
•
•
•
•
•
•
Make the invitation - direct ask and early on
Distribute the materials - widely cast the net
Know the audience - carefully craft the message
Understand their needs - address their concerns
Continue to inform - don’t give up
Create the forum - make it easy!
Tools for Stakeholder Input
The Meeting
Goal – Inform the community, garner trust, and collect opinions
Challenge – To gather a crowd and be efficient
•
•
•
•
•
Communicate clearly and often
Call meetings only when necessary
Use collaborative processes and good facilitation
Provide advanced notice and prior written information
Develop a strong agenda and employ time management
Tools for Stakeholder Input
The Interview
Goal – Better understand the community and build relations
Challenge – Is time-intensive
•
•
•
•
•
•
Reach the un-reached audiences
Be strategic in selecting interviewees
Begin with good questions
Avoid responsive body language or comments
End with “Do you have anything else to say?”
Record and transcribe interviews with paraphrasing
Tools for Stakeholder Input
The Exercises
Goal – Gather the wants and needs of the community
Challenge – Make it effective and informative
•
•
•
•
•
•
“Brainstorm” on problems and possible solutions
Use “Vision to Action” to move group agenda forward
Employ “Group Discussion” to record audience thoughts
Create and send a “Survey” for quantitative information
Present a “Dot Matrix” to prioritize issues
Appreciative Inquiry Process to avoid negative focus
Tools for Success
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Make it exciting and worthwhile
Plan for results
Manage the process effectively
Involve stakeholders as soon as possible
Be honest and listen carefully
Recognize differences early on
Don’t leave out difficult stakeholders
MacPherson & Tonning, Tetra Tech, Inc.
Tools for Success
•
•
•
•
•
Set realistic goals
Focus on their issues
Establish mini-milestones to celebrate
Give feedback and praise
Commit the needed resources to succeed
Tools for the Organization
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Effective organizational by-laws
Efficient working structure
Good accounting and tax reporting practices
Annual strategic planning
Regular Board trainings
Continually cultivate a new workforce
Celebrate successes and hold social activities!
Tools on the Internet
• Ohio State University Extension
– Ohio Watershed Network (http://ohiowatersheds.osu.edu/)
– Ohio Watershed Academy (http://ohiowatersheds.osu.edu/owa/)
• 16 On-Line Modules to choose from
– Ohioline Factsheets (http://ohioline.osu.edu/)
• Ohio EPA
– Ohio NPS Plan
(http://www.epa.state.oh.us/dsw/nps/NPSMP/index.html)
• Ohio Department of Natural Resources
– Coastal NPS
(http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/soilandwater/Coastalnonpointprogram.htm)
Tools on the Internet
• US EPA
– National TMDL Program
(http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/overviewfs.html)
– National Watershed Program
(http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/)
References
Beierle, T.C. and J. Cayford, 2002. “ Democracy in Practice: Public
Participation in Environmental Decisions.” Resources for the Future:
Washington, D.C.
Hungerford, H.R. and Volk, T.L. 1990. “Changing learner behavior through
environmental education.” The Journal of Environmental Education. 21(3),
8-22.
Kenney, D.S. and W.B. Lord. 1999. “Analysis of Institutional Innovation in the
Natural Resources and Environmental Realm: The Emergence of
Alternative Problem Solving Strategies in the American West.” Research
Report (RR-21). Natural Resources Law Center, University of Colorado
School of Law: Boulder, CO.
MacPherson, C. and B. Tonning. “Getting in Step: Engaging and Involving
Stakeholders in Your Watershed.” Tetra Tech, Inc.
http://www.ttwater.com/downloads/StakeholdrGuide-All.pdf.
Steelman, T.A.. 1999. “Community-Based Environmental Management:
Agency- and Community-Driven Efforts.” Presented at the 21st Annual
Research Conference of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and
Management. Graduate School of Public Affairs, University of Colorado:
Boulder, CO.
Robert McCall
Watershed Management Educator
Ohio State University Extension
Center at Lima
1219 West Main Cross
Suite 202
Findlay, OH 45840
419-422-6106
Mccall.57@osu.edu
Dana Oleskiewicz
Watershed Management Educator
Ohio State University Extension
Center at Wooster
1680 Madison Avenue
OARDC Administration Building
Wooster, OH 44691
330-263-3799
oleskiewicz.1@osu.edu