Download as PDF, PPTX
Uploaded bySoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Community Based Wetland and Watershed Management
The document outlines the objectives and activities of the Southeast Alaska Watershed Coalition (SAWC) in promoting community-based wetland mitigation and watershed management in Southeast Alaska. It emphasizes the importance of local citizen engagement, science-driven decision-making, and collaboration among stakeholders while addressing the challenges of wetland mitigation practices. The SAWC fosters economies of scale, supports training, and aims to enhance the health of watersheds to benefit local communities and economies.
More Related Content
Similar to Community Based Wetland and Watershed Management
More from Southeast Alaska Watershed Coalition
Community Based Wetland and Watershed Management
- 1. Community Based Wetland Mitigationand Watershed Planning Nolan Center, 10/17/11
- 2. Objectives — Introduce theSoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition and what we do — Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources- 2008 Final Rule — Our work to support Wetland Management on the local level — Watershed Assessments and Planning for Mitigation
- 3. Southeast Alaska WatershedCoalition (SAWC) • Focuses on the watershed We advocate on the local, state and • Uses science, local federal level for knowledge and research Community-based to inform decision-making Watershed • Emphasizes collaborative Management problem solving, and (CBWM) • Local citizens, institutions and organizations are the primary stakeholders
- 4. Why Community-Based Watershed Management? — The health of our communities and economies depend on the health of our watersheds. — The concerns of the community and the benefits derived from the opportunities within our watersheds should be central to natural resources and land management planning and decision making.
- 5. How SAWC SupportsCBWM in SEAK — Sharing knowledge and resources — Building economies of scale — Building a regional voice for Community Based Watershed Management
- 6. Why is wetlandmitigation management on the local, state and federal level important to us? — Watershed practitioners on the local level are mitigators. — The majority of the projects these groups develop and carry-out support the development of community-based mitigation priorities and/or are forms of mitigation
- 7. Mitigation is Definedas: — The act of restoring, enhancing, creating, stewarding/ preserving prioritized and/or critical habitat in a watershed.
- 8. Compensatory Mitigation-2008 Federal Rule — Mitigationprojects were not achieving functional lift of habitat and the nation was failing to reach its goal of “no net loss” — State to state and within states there were vast discrepancies in how wetland mitigation was being carried out
- 9. What is theIntention of the New Rule? — Provided a standard “outlined” process for federal, state and local agencies to utilize in developing management strategies for wetland mitigation — Use of best available science — Predictability and efficient — Improves the planning, implementation and management of compensatory mitigation projects — Clarifies the Watershed Approach
- 10. SAWC’S Role inLocally Based Wetland Planning and Management Coordinating trainings on wetland mitigation processes for community professionals: — Wetland delineations — Watershed Planning — Developing a third-party mitigation program — Mitigation Banks — In-lieu Fee Programs — Ad hoc
- 11. SAWC’S Role inLocally Based Wetland Planning and Management — Working with communities to identify mitigation opportunities — Mitigation Programs — Mitigation Projects — Working with state and federal agencies to shape policy strategies that respond to the unique characteristics of SE communities
- 12. Who/What Benefits fromWetland Mitigation Management and Programs Community Economy — Jobs — Developers — Less money, resources, time wasted — Landowners during permitting and constructing — Improve recreational/tourist sites — Local citizens — Mitigate important habitat for — Local governments commercial species — Flood prevention — Tribes — Water quality — Subsistence users — Subsistence
- 13. Who/What benefits fromwetland mitigation management and programs Watersheds — Sustainable development: strategically planned development — Conservation and restoration — Water quality — Water quantity — Subsistence resources
- 14.
- 15. Juneau Watershed Partnership — Formed in 1998, local citizen and agency stakeholder group — Non-profit organization that works to promote sustainable use and community stewardship of Juneau’s watersheds — Raised over $1 million in grant and individual donations since 1998
- 16. Objectives — Community BasedWetland Mitigation and Watershed Planning in Juneau — Benefits of Community Based Watershed Planning — Case Study: Auke Lake Watershed Assessment — Identifying and Prioritizing Restoration and Enhancement Activities for Mitigation
- 17. Juneau’s Community BasedWetland Mitigation and Watershed Management — Watershed Assessments and Management Plans — Community Events and Community Meetings — Support Local Restoration, Enhancement and Mitigation Trainings — Evaluating Past Restoration, Enhancement and Mitigation Projects (REM Report) — Prioritizing and Digitizing Restoration, Enhancement and Mitigation Opportunities. (REM Part 2) — Partnering with SAWC on regional efforts
- 18. Benefits of WatershedAssessments — Engaging Community/ Stakeholders Proactively — Participation and Collaboration — Ecological/ Landscape Approach — Baseline “Snapshot of Time” = Documenting Existing Conditions — Framework for grant opportunities, planning priorities, mitigation
- 19. Case Study- AukeLake — Identified Problem — Recommendations for Sustainable Use and Development, Restoration and Enhancement — Agency, Landowners and Community Collaboration — Compile Existing Data to Inform Development
- 20. First Steps — IdentifiedGoals and — Assembled an Advisory Objectives Group — Key Stakeholders — Hosted meeting, - GIS maps, Outline, Past — Project Scope Research — Baseline Maps
- 21. Project Partners — Municipalities — Non-Profits — US Forest Service — University of Alaska — AK Fish and Game — Wetland Review — AK DEC Board — NRCS — User Groups — Tribal Governments — Neighbors
- 22. Components of aWatershed Assessment Watershed Delineation Hydrology/ Hydrological and Description Function — Land Ownership — Contributing Water Sources — Land Use Planning — Rivers, Stream, Tribs, Lakes, Wetlands
- 23. Components of aWatershed Assessment (Cont.) Water Quality Landforms/ Geology Habitat Conditions — Water Use Designations — Channel Alterations — Water Rights — Bank/Riparian Disturbances — Known Pollutants- Point Source — Fish Passage — Other Pollutants- Non-Point Source
- 24. Components of aWatershed Assessment (Cont.) Fish and Fish Habitat Geology, Plants, Wildlife — Species Present — Invasive Plants — Seasonal Distribution — Wildlife Corridors and — Studies, Counts, Habitat Hatchery Stocking
- 25. Components of aWatershed Assessment (Cont.) Cultural, Historical and Management, Recovery, Current Human Use Stewardship — Land Use/ — Goals and Action Development Items — Recreational/ — Restoration, Commercial Use Enhancement
- 26. Community Involvement Neighborhood Survey — Activities (Use), Values, Concerns, Suggestions for Change Community Meeting — Feedback on draft plan and maps — Concerns, Uses (Past and Present), Values
- 27. Project Outcomes — Distributedto municipality, local agencies, community groups — Posted online on our Electronic Watershed Resource Library — Auke Lake Action Plan — Mitigation Planning
- 28. Other Forms ofWatershed Plans — Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) — Watershed Assessments — Watershed Management Plans — Watershed Conservation Plans — Watershed Action Plans — Wetland Function and Values Analysis — Comprehensive Plans
- 29. Documenting and PrioritizingPotential Restoration and Enhancement Projects — Geographic Footprint — Identifying Problems by Watershed — Landownership — Land Use Designations — Impacted/ Impaired Function — Expected Outcomes — Recommended Action
- 30. Documenting and PrioritizingPotential Restoration and Enhancement Projects — Agency, Landowner, Stakeholder, Tribal Entity, and Native Corporation Collaboration Opportunities — Constraints/ Complications — Budgets — Permits — Potential Partners
- 31. Questions or Comments? alaskawatershedcoalition.org Thank you!