![[logo] US EPA](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/eot2008/20081107122759im_/http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
1999 Progress Report: Developing Methods and Tools for Watershed Restoration: Design, Implementation, and Assessment in the Willamette Basin, Oregon
EPA Grant Number: R827146Title: Developing Methods and Tools for Watershed Restoration: Design, Implementation, and Assessment in the Willamette Basin, Oregon
Investigators: Bolte, John P. , Adamus, Paul , Gilden, Jennifer D. , Jepson, Paul C. , Lamy, F. , Langpap, C. , Li, Judith L. , Polasky, Steve , Santelmann, Mary , Smith, Courtland , Vache, K.
Current Investigators: Bolte, John P. , Jepson, Paul C. , Li, Judith L. , Santelmann, Mary , Smith, Courtland
Institution: Oregon State University
EPA Project Officer: Stelz, Bill
Project Period: October 1, 1998 through September 30, 2001 (Extended to September 30, 2002)
Project Period Covered by this Report: October 1, 1998 through September 30, 1999
Project Amount: $809,993
RFA: Water and Watersheds (1998)
Research Category: Water and Watersheds
Description:
Objective:The overall objective of this research is to refine and integrate models of watershed function and economic characterizations of restoration options with stakeholder-determined constraints and priorities, provide a tool for stakeholders to identify feasible restoration strategies, and evaluate the ecological and economic effectiveness of these strategies at addressing watershed-level function. Specific objectives include: (1) refine and integrate a set of simplified models relating land use, ecological factors, and watershed hydrology to measures reflecting water quality, habitat, and biodiversity endpoints at a watershed level; (2) coordinate with community-based watershed councils to identify and prioritize restoration goals and options for two diverse watersheds; (3) characterize potential restoration strategies from an economic and social perspective; (4) develop a decisionmaking framework integrating these models and characterizations, coupled with community-based prioritization strategies, for generating and prioritizing potential restoration activities; and (5) evaluate the impact of using this framework on stakeholder decisionmaking and transferability of the methodology using two watersheds in the Willamette Basin, OR. Progress Summary:
Progress was made on several fronts, including design and implementation of the decisionmaking framework, definition of rulesets for several restoration options, interaction with the two stakeholder groups involved in the research, development of economic and social data sets related to the research, and development of biodiversity models. These are discussed more fully below.
Decisionmaking Framework. The decisionmaking framework for this research was conceptualized as consisting of two primary components. The first of these is a landscape generator that is capable of processing site-specific rules in the form of logical if-then statements, with spatially explicit geographic information system (GIS) data sets and nonspatial data sets, to generate feasible alternative landscape scenarios for further evaluation. The second component involves a landscape optimizer capable of utilizing the feasible landscapes generated by the first component to evaluate a series of watershed-scale metrics. The first component was implemented and tested in the first year of the project. Additionally, a series of rulesets relating a range of landscape features to the utility of different restoration options at meeting various stakeholder objectives, applied at sites throughout the study watersheds, has been developed. A simple multiobjective decisionmaking algorithm has been implemented to allow the determination of optimal restoration alternatives, selected from a range of potential options, to be determined based on stakeholder priorities. Because the rulesets rely on GIS data sets to inform the decisionmaking process, a number of GIS data sets for the two study watersheds also have been created and made available through the project Web site (http://biosys.bre.orst.edu/restore). Some of the preliminary results from these analyses are being reviewed with the two stakeholder groups involved in the project.
Biodiversity. Major activities of the biodiversity team in the first year of the project have been the generation of the draft species-habitat matrix for evaluative modeling and exploratory analysis and mapping of the spatial data indicating wetland position and location in the two watersheds. The teams have generated maps for both watersheds in which wetlands demarcated in the National Wetlands Inventory are overlain with: (1) wetland classes of land cover maps developed by the Oregon Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, and (2) hydric soil types.
Members of the biodiversity team have attended watershed council meetings and events in both watersheds. The team also has participated in field surveys of wetlands and riparian areas in both watersheds with the other teams. Participation in project meetings and helping to generate the decisionmaking framework also have been important activities.
Macroinvertebrate Studies. Macroinvertebrate studies were designed to examine biological connectivity between wetlands and adjacent riparian zones. The project targets three groups of insects that are variable in their mobility between these zones. With advice from wetland biologists, local farmers, and watershed councils, 13 wetland sites throughout the valley were visited and surveyed. Six study sites, under private and public ownerships within or near the South Santiam and Long Tom Watersheds, were selected that are surrounded by varying land uses, and represent different degrees of passive and active restoration. Beginning in June 1999, terrestrial insects were surveyed by deploying three transects of pitfall traps monthly at each site. Adult dragonfly (order Odonata) populations were surveyed at each of the sites throughout the summer by aerial collection.
Economic Studies. The major focus has centered on finding the costs of the different restoration activities defined by the rest of the team, which include capital and opportunity costs. The following information has been found:
- Land values for Lane and Linn Counties were collected from the tax assessor's offices, which are the best available approximations for the market value of land. These values will be used when that land is assumed to have been sold as part of a restoration project.
- Rental rates for land for Lane, Linn, Benton, and Marion Counties obtained from the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program will be used when it is assumed that land is taken out of production due to a restoration project, but there is no change in ownership.
- Net benefits from production of various crops included under the land use categories considered in the project were obtained from Enterprise Budgets written by Oregon State University's Extension Service. These data will be used to estimate the cost of switching from one type of crop to another as part of a restoration project. Age classes and corresponding volumes for hardwood and softwood trees, and market prices of lumber per unit of volume have been obtained from the Forestry Department at Oregon State University, and will be used to estimate the cost of switching from forest to another type of land use, or the cost of not harvesting the wood, as part of a restoration project.
The capital costs of some restoration activities have been found, and costs of the remaining ones are presently being obtained. This information was obtained from Battelle Research Centers and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Other watershed councils in the state are being contacted to obtain cost information, as well as the Forest Service, the City of Eugene, various soil and water conservation districts, and Oregon Watersheds. Although this information may not be directly transferable to the area under consideration in the study, it is believed that it provides a good reference point to estimate the relative costs of different restoration activities.
Sociological Studies. The sociological component of the research has focused on the following areas: (1) analyzing the factors influencing watershed council decisions, including a pre- and post-assessment of how watershed council discussions and decisions are affected by the GIS-based decision tool developed by the project; (2) producing a historical review of landscape change in Willamette Valley watersheds to give the watershed councils a better idea of how landscape patterns in their areas have changed; and (3) developing a technique to enable watershed councils to check how well they represent local interest groups and stakeholders.
The assessment of the watershed councils' priorities before the introduction of the GIS-based decision tool has been completed. The assessment was based on a content analysis of meeting minutes; review of newsletters, action plans, and vision statements; and observations of meetings. For the study of historical patterns of landscape change, an extensive timeline and two posters highlighting conditions in the two watersheds in the early 19th century were prepared. This information was included in the historical chapters of the Long Tom Watershed Council and South Santiam Watershed Council assessments. The database to assess representation on watershed councils is nearly complete, and the analytical technique has been tested.
Thus far, the primary conclusions drawn from the research include:
- As watershed councils develop, they shift from process concerns to identifying and completing projects. During the initial stages of formation, watershed councils focus most on their organizational identity and structure. As they become more organized, their interest shifts to restoration projects.
- yThe Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (formerly the Governor's Watershed Enhancement Board), which funds watershed councils and their assessments, encourages councils to complete a watershed assessment as one of their first actions. Upon completion of the assessment, watershed councils set priorities for future actions. Prioritization has resulted in a strong emphasis on water quality monitoring and grant writing for restoration project funds. Opportunism, rather than a holistic view of the watershed, often influences which projects the councils pursue. Councils initiate projects when funding, landowner cooperation, and social networks come together at a particular site. Many sources of funds are available to watershed councils, and each funding source has different criteria for awarding grants. Meeting grant review requirements is more important than a holistic approach to watershed restoration in practice, if not in principle.
- Water quality is the top priority for both watershed councils; bacteria and temperature are the two most important water quality issues. After water quality, riparian habitats (primarily restoring vegetation to more natural conditions) and fish passage are the next priorities. Wetlands, macroinvertebrates, and biodiversity receive less attention.
- Social networks are important for watershed councils in organizing and conducting projects. Newly emerging watershed councils generally have narrow social networks, but their social networks can be significantly broadened through the efforts of a full-time coordinator.
- Watershed council coordinators perform a critical role in maintaining the organization of the councils and in competing for projects. The coordinators provide needed continuity that can get lost in the volunteer nature of council participation.
Our future activities for the four study components are presented below. Decisionmaking Framework. The second year of the decisionmaking component will focus on two primary areas: (1) further development of rulesets for assessing the utility of different restoration options at meeting various stakeholder objectives utilizing site-specific information; and (2) initial development and implementation of a watershed-scale evaluative component utilizing spatially distributed models of hydrology, stream temperature, water quality dynamics, biodiversity, and economics. These are anticipated to be largely complete by the end of the second year, and decision optimization will be the focus during the third year of the project. Additionally, working groups have been formed within each watershed council to review and refine the restoration objectives and rules that are being developed for the site-specific restoration alternatives analysis. Biodiversity. At the present time, the biodiversity team is in the process of planning a set of workshops for expert review of the species-habitat matrix. The first workshop is tentatively planned for February. In the upcoming year, major tasks will include: 1. Helping to finish the decisionmaking framework for allocating restoration options. 2. Completing the final version of the species-habitat matrix and applying it to evaluate the current land cover of the watersheds as habitats for vertebrates, as well as the landscapes generated by implementing restoration options. 3. Developing and calibrating the demographic model (PATCH) for a subset of target species in the watersheds. 4. Working on developing and refining methods for evaluating wetland restorations and their potential value for improving habitat and water quality, possibly applying the new wetland assessment method being developed by the Oregon Division of State Lands. Team members participated in the pilot field survey and application of this methodology to Willamette Valley wetlands in the fall of 1999. 5. Analysis and GIS-based statistical summary of land use context of wetlands in the study watersheds for use in evaluative model development. Macroinvertebrate Studies. Dragonfly nymphs and caddisfly (order Trichoptera) larvae will be sampled with aquatic activity traps during the winter and spring of 2000. Pitfall samples from the 1999 field season are presently being sorted; patterns among population assemblages of terrestrial invertebrates, with a special emphasis on carabid beetles (order Coleoptera, family Carabidae), will be examined, and the preliminary data will be used to establish experiments to be performed in the 2000 field season. Sociological Studies. Watershed council meetings will continue to be attended to monitor their activities and interact with stakeholders; the activities and discussions of watershed councils will be reviewed to help determine their priorities and concerns. Additionally, the sociological teams will assist in the stakeholder working group meetings focused on reviewing objectives and rulesets for allocating restoration activities on the landscape. Journal Articles:
No journal articles submitted with this report: View all 33 publications for this project
Supplemental Keywords:watershed restoration, ecological models, decision support systems, multiobjective decisionmaking, hydrology, biodiversity, economics, sociology. , Ecosystem Protection/Environmental Exposure & Risk, Water, Geographic Area, Scientific Discipline, RFA, Ecosystem/Assessment/Indicators, Water & Watershed, Restoration, Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, Ecological Indicators, Hydrology, Watersheds, Ecological Effects - Environmental Exposure & Risk, Ecosystem Protection, Monitoring/Modeling, Economics, State, risk assessment, stakeholder feedback, water quality, environmental rehabilitation, public policy, socioeconomics, watershed restoration, econometrics, ecology assessment models, socioeconomic, decision making, land use, ecological recovery, stakeholder groups, community values, conservation, GIS, Oregon, web site development, aquatic ecosystems, integrated assessment, economic, community involvement, OR, biodiversity
Relevant Websites:
http://www.biosys.bre.orst.edu/restore
Progress and Final Reports:
Original Abstract
2000 Progress Report
Final Report