Regional Watershed Groups: Challenges and Successes  

Watershed Coalition, Watershed Watch, Watershed Management District, or Environmental Commission: call it what you will, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet!

Challenges

Anyone who has ever tried to get a group of busy people to attend meetings together on a regular basis, let along accomplish anything, is aware of the challenges facing regional watershed groups. Although gathering watershed stakeholders together from multiple municipalities sounds like a great idea, it’s not as easy as it seems. Who is in charge?  Who is going to pay for the project? What are the legal and regulatory implications? And to top it all off, the municipality at the far end of the watershed wants to know how all this work is going to benefit them? Although the challenges may seem insurmountable at first, developing a regional watershed group is an excellent way to tackle problems on a watershed scale. The more people involved in the decision-making process, the greater the likelihood that the resulting watershed management, greenways, open space, or development plan will meet the needs of all the stakeholders.

Action

Admittedly, regional watershed projects involving multiple municipalities work best when all of those involved are convinced that the project is beneficial to their taxpayers. For example, maybe the watershed attracts significant tourism revenue. Or perhaps the region is experiencing rapid growth and the municipalities are concerned about preserving their natural resources or cultural character. Whatever the reason for initiating the project, a thorough, organized presentation of the issues during a project kick-off meeting involving all of the stakeholders is essential. It is important to include not only the watershed municipalities and regional authorities, but also private organizations, farmers, developers and other stakeholders. Inviting members of the state regulatory authority and/or funding agency can also be beneficial so that regulatory or “housekeeping” issues can be more readily discussed. Once the group is formed, good communication between all parties is critical for ongoing success. Formulating a specific mission statement or list of goals is important to ensure that all members of the group are on the same page.

The next step is to evaluate the needs and resources of the watershed community. This may involve a thorough watershed assessment, or perhaps a more general audit of watershed protection opportunities. The Center for Watershed Protection has several publications, including a “Code and Ordinances Worksheet” and a “Watershed Protection Audit,” available for download at http://www.cwp.org/pubs_download.htm. These worksheets can help groups document existing resources and determine future watershed protection needs. Other watershed protection organizational tools can be found on the US EPA’s Watershed Protection website at http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/publications.html.

One of the most critical components of a regional watershed management plan is the evaluation and subsequent improvement of local watershed protection ordinances. Many municipalities have existing zoning and/or subdivision and land development ordinances (SALDOs). These ordinances can be modified to concentrate development in specific areas and to preserve open space or buffers around critical riparian areas. In addition, stand-alone ordinances can be adopted to address specific concerns. These separate ordinances have the advantage of being more easily revised if future needs change than the larger, more comprehensive zoning ordinances or SALDOs. Examples of municipal watershed protection ordinances may include natural features conservation, stormwater management, riparian buffer conservation, steep slopes, open space preservation, noxious weed control, natural landscaping, forest conservation, groundwater protection, surface water protection, vernal pool protection, or shoreline protection ordinances. The regional watershed organization can develop a set of model ordinances that the individual municipalities can then implement in their own towns. This strategy has been successful for many large regional watershed groups, including the Ten Towns Great Swamp Watershed Management Committee in New Jersey and the Lake Wallenpaupack Watershed Management District in Pennsylvania.

In some cases, it may be most beneficial for the regional watershed management organization to be made up of members of an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) from each municipality. The EAC serves as a liaison between the municipality’s elected officials and the community. EACs are typically comprised of three to seven community residents appointed by the locally elected municipal officials. These individuals volunteer their time to provide the municipality and the watershed management organization with the information they need to make sound environmental decisions. Pennsylvania has a very active EAC network. Visit the Pennsylvania EAC network website at http://www.greentreks.org/eacnetwork/index.asp for ideas and information that may pertain to Pennsylvania or other states.

Success

One secret to regional watershed group success is the ability to procure funding. Often times, governmental and private funding agencies are impressed by projects involving larger watershed coalitions. It shows that the project has widespread community support. It also demonstrates a greater likelihood for project completion since a larger group has committed to the project, and allows for a larger pool of matching funds. The following is an example of one watershed group’s success:

The Association of New Jersey Environmental Commissions (ANJEC) recently named the Crosswicks Creek/Doctors Creek Watershed Greenway Plan as one of the recipients of its 2004 Environmental Achievement Awards for outstanding or innovative projects that benefit the local environment. The Greenway Plan was a multiple-town cooperative effort initiated by the Allentown Environmental Commission. The group's six participating municipal environmental commissions, from Allentown, Hamilton, Millstone, Plumsted, Upper Freehold and Washington (Mercer) Townships, combined resources, including matching funds for NJDEP grants, to develop a greenway plan for the Crosswicks and Doctors Creeks. The group conducted public information sessions, acted as liaisons to local boards and officials, and collected data.  F. X. Browne, Inc., worked with the planning group, presented at several public meetings, developed a GIS database, created maps of the proposed greenway and the existing conditions, and wrote the greenway plan. Two representatives from each of the towns as well as the consultant attended monthly meetings throughout the planning process. Planners and landscape architects from Monmouth County Parks and Planning Board also provided input for the plan, which identifies preservation and management strategies to protect local environmental, scenic, historic and recreational resources.

To find out more about the Crosswicks Creek/Doctors Creek Watershed Greenway Plan, developing model ordinances, or watershed protection strategies, contact F. X. Browne, Inc. at (215) 362-3878 or info@fxbrowne.com.