Developing Interim Milestones & Criteria to Measure Progress November 30, 2017 Thomas E. Davenport tedavenport@comcast.net
Administrative vs. Resource Outcomes Based Management Goal Measures Administrative Outcome Approach Program Performance Administrative Actions Milestones Related to Administrative Performance (rate based) Resource Outcomes Approach Environmental Performance Indicator End-points Related to reductions in threats or improvement in quality
Administrative vs. Resource Adaptive Management Report Administrative Outcome Approach None Administrative Actions vs Transactions Resource Outcomes Approach Environmental Performance vs Expectations Indicators of change vs desired result Results Improve Programs Programs are Tools to Improve the Environment
Mean Daily Suspended Sediment Loading (Tons/Day) 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Percentage of Basin Acres ADMINISTRATIVE INDICATORS STRESSORS LEVEL 1: Ohio EPA awards 319 grants; goal is achieve restoration of impaired uses (meet WQS); Ohio DNR & NRCS develop NPS management & abatement strategies TMDL M&A Non Point Sources $$$$ WQS LEVEL 2: 60 50 40 30 20 10 Agricultural Producers Implement Conservation Practices Auglaize Basin Tillage Practices NO TILLAGE CONSERVATION TILLAGE 0 INDEX OF BIOTIC INTEGRITY (IBI) RESPONSE LEVEL 6: Biological assemblage improves 60 50 EWH 40 WWH 30 Auglaize River 20 12 1985 1991 2000 YEAR LEVELS 3-5: BMPs Produce Reduced NPS loadings 2000 1500 1000 500 0 STRESS & EXPOSURE Auglaize River near Ft. Jennings, Ohio 1970-74 1996-98 Annual Spring Summer Fall Winter TSS decreased, water quality & habitat improved
Most environmental indicators have been developed to report regularly on the state of the environment rather than the success of a specific project.
Day-to-day and year-to-year variability in E.coli and other parameters are often greater than reduction E. coli concentration (cfu 100 ml -1 ) 100000 10000 1000 100 Samples taken here suggest downstream 10 much higher than upstream and both are impaired 1 due to NPS program Samples taken here suggest upstream meets standards, downstream impaired; Sampling site downstream of cattle Sampling site upstream of cattle 8/27/00 9/16/00 10/6/00 10/26/00 11/15/00 12/5/00 10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 Discharge (m 3 s -1 )
Sneaker Index (Patuxent River) (this is a PR measure) Hundreds of people wade in each year until they can no longer see their feet Begun in 1988, the annual wade has attracted governors, congressmen, hundreds of people.
Conceptual model (measures) Reduction in pollution entering stream Improvement of water quality Program Activities skills attitudes capacity social norms constraints values knowledge awareness Use of water quality management Practices
Upper Illinois River Watershed Lake Michigan 2% Upper Illinois River Watershed Drainage Area Summary Conservation Practices All Plans, All Land Uses, All Resources for FY2004 98% N Measures need to be put in context, Why is this worthless?. HUC = 07120005 8 Digit-HUC W S E 90 0 90 180 Miles
Indicators measure progress towards our goals. For watershed management projects, our goals are based in the Clean Water Act. Restore and maintain chemical, physical, and biological integrity Fishable and swimmable streams So we use surrogates to track activities and look for responses
Your measures need to drive the adaptive management process. Achievement of measures over time become the basis of milestones
Value of Milestones Allows you to track actions various partners will take to achieve goals Relates project goals to how things are being accomplished Status of objectives/outputs easy to determine
Milestones Indicator (measure) and temporally based Stakeholders can relate to the time frame and measure. Specific to work plan activities and priorities. Milestones with water quality goals form the bases of the projects monitoring effort
Types of Milestones Tracking milestones (adminstrative process track BMPs, # of permits, etc against workplan expectations) Interim milestones (process/outcome training completed prior to BMP installation) Critical milestones (outcome/impact without this achievement the project will succeed must make changes)
Are there indicators to measure all these outcomes? Outcome Measurable? 1. Water is swimmable 2. E.coli is reduced to meet WQ std 3. Cows are no longer in stream 4. Farmers install fencing and alternate watering systems 5. Farmers believe cows should be out of stream 6. Farmers know how to exclude cattle (and cost-share)
Milestones - pollutants of concern E. coli Sources Real problem? Can we identify locations? Can we address source? Land owner willing? Livestock access to stream Y Y Y Manure land application areas Y No Y Manure storage (leaks, spills) maybe No No Failing septic systems maybe maybe maybe Dense wildlife areas maybe Y maybe
Types of Indicators Administrative Social Environmental
Environmental indicators include Condition Indicators Water quality, habitat quality, aquatic communities Stressor Indicators Less manure in the stream from cattle Reduction in nutrient loading Increase in forested riparian buffers Management Indicators (maybe some overlap with social indicators)
Critical milestone Lower Big Rib Priority Watershed project established a critical milestone to trigger management focus: after 5 years of implementation, the calculated sediment reduction based on cost share agreements, is less than 60% of the total cropland sediment reduction goal. Additional cropland fields will be classified as critical and eligible for assistance.
Social Indicators provide an intermediate measure of progress Section 319 and Other Related NPS Programs Intermediate Outcomes Improved Water Quality
Social Indicators Intermediate Outcomes Attitude, Behavior, & Awareness Consistent questions used before and after a project (and possibly mid project) Consistent questions used across projects in one region Surveys (when appropriate methodology) used rigorously and correctly {are we going in the right direction}
Behavior indicators
PLANNING INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES Programmatic investments i Activities Participation Short Medium Long term EVALUATION
Lake Sarah Watershed Management Plan Turbidity Objective Objective Activity Action Responsibility Time Frame Reduce turbidity in lake by 15 % by June 2010 Install riparian buffers Involve local landowners Partner group July 2001 July 2008 Cost Estimate XXXX
Evaluation Measurements Type/Time frame Indicator Administrative Beans (early) Environmental (end) Social (early-end) $ spent BMPs installed Loading reductions IBI changes # participants KSA changes
LOGIC MODEL Biological Endpoint INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES Technical Financial Social Capacity Building investments Activities BMP installation Flow Channel Biology What we invest What we do Who we reach What results SO WHAT??
Situation Excessive Soil Loss Causing WQ Impairments INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES Measures/Activities Products Short Medium Long-term Technical Financial I&E Ecucation Awareness Activities Management Capability is Increased Behavior Changes O&M Management Change Flow Stabilized Monitoring Project Profile Conservation Plan Developed Technical Assistance Provided Terrace Installed Additional BMPs Installed Reduced Availability of Pollutants IBI Shows Improvement Channel Change Impairment Eliminated Financial Assistance Allocated Decreased Pollutant Loading Decreased Peak Flow and Total Flow
Flashiness Index Frequency and rapidity of short term changes in streamflow Increased flashiness has been linked to lower biological scores Focus on matching flashiness to more natural flow regimes Source: Baker et al., 2004
No off site impact This diagram shows how development and its corresponding increase in impervious cover disrupts the natural water balance. In the post-development setting, the amount of water running off the site is dramatically increased.
Indicators & targets: short/long term 30
Milestones/Adaptive Management Project water quality goals are not modified based on lack of progress Implementation, monitoring, O&M activities are modified to achieve water quality goals Milestones help tell you when
Finally Make Adjustments Monitor water quality and BMPs Compare results to milestones Are you making progress? Did you do enough to meet your milestones? If you aren t meeting implementation milestones If you aren t making progress toward reducing pollutant loads. Then do it all over again!