OPPORTUNITIES for ACTION an Evolving Plan for the Future of the Lake Champlain Basin

OPPORTUNITIES FOR ACTION An Evolving Plan for the Future of the Lake Champlain Basin

Prepared by the Lake Champlain Steering Committee April 2003

Lake Champlain Basin Program Bolton Center

P Bedford ik Venise en e Quebec Sutton Figure 1. Philipsburg R iv e

r QUEBEC Richford North Troy r ve Ri Champlain Swanton Enosburg River Falls i uo isq Chazy iss Ellenburg y M z Center a h C St. Albans Lake t a e r G

Plattsburgh Eden Fairfax er iv Lamoille er Champlain R Riv Clayburg

c Elmore a n ra a S Stowe Hardwick Burlington Basin Ausable Forks ver Ri ble usa ch A n W ra ino B h os t Jay c ki s n e a Willsboro W r Saranac Saranac t B Charlotte Lake Placid s Lakes Lake a E Essex Montpelier C is w r e e Lake e R Elizabethtown L i Barre k v Placid e r Westport Northfield Keene t e Vergennes u O q t o t B e Port r Henry

Middlebury Crown Point

Ticonderoga

Creek Orwell e rg o e G e k a L Rutland Poultney

Bolton Mettawee Landing Whitehall n i a l l River p a n m a Wallingford a C h Fort C Ann Lake George Granville Danby R iv e r NEW YORK VERMONT

Cover Photo: Converse Bay, Charlotte,VT. By Robert Lyons Photography. TOTHECITIZENS OF THE LAKE CHAMPLAIN BASIN:

On behalf of the States of New York and Vermont and the US Environmental Protection Agency, we are pleased to approve the revised Opportunities for Action: An Evolving Plan for the Future of the Lake Champlain Basin.

Opportunities for Action is comprehensive in its scope and focused in its mission. This revision of the 1996 plan builds on the successes of the past six years of plan implementation and responds to changing environmental conditions to Lake Champlainbetter protect the future of Lake Champlain. The successes achieved to date are the result of tremendous dedication and Basin Programhard work by thousands of individuals over the last decade since initiation of the planning process for Lake Champlain.

Combined federal and state funding has made a difference. Municipal wastewater discharges to the Lake have been dramatically reduced, agricultural best management practices have been introduced on farms throughout the Basin, and local watershed associations have coordinated unprecedented community involvement in pollution reduction. The states and the federal government are working together on programs to reduce the impacts of aquatic nuisance species, including lamprey control measures and water chestnut harvesting. New York Bond Act funds supported the successful cleanup of Cumberland Bay. The phosphorus reduction targets established in Opportunities for Action in 1996 have provided a sound basis for the new bistate load reduction programs to achieve the water quality goals of the federal Clean Water Act. Special attention is being given to the Missisquoi Bay area through a phosphorus reduction agreement between Québec and Vermont.

This revised Opportunities for Action presents several emerging priorities not included in the original plan, including the priority of human health protection from bacterial contamination and toxins associated with blue-green algae. New actions are recommended to identify conditions causing toxic blue-green algae blooms quickly, and new emphasis is being placed on ecosystem indicators to monitor change within the Lake's ecosystem. The Plan also recommends increased coordination among Vermont, New York, and Québec on cultural heritage tourism and improved recreational access.

Implicit in our approval of the revised Plan is a continuing commitment to direct the resources of our respective agencies towards the implementation of recommendations set forth in this plan, and recognition that adequate funding will be crucial to the continued success of Opportunities for Action. We also look forward to the continued commitment of citizens throughout the Basin to achieve cleaner water and a healthier economy so that future generations may enjoy Lake Champlain as fully as the current generation.

We congratulate the Lake Champlain Basin Program, its Steering Committee, advisory committees, and staff for their work on the revisions of Opportunities for Action. We look to continued cooperation among all parties to foster its actions and goals.

Howard Dean, MD James H. Douglas George E. Pataki Governor of Vermont - January 2003 Governor of Vermont - April 2003 Governor of New York - April 2003

Robert W. Varney Jane M. Kenny Regional Administrator, EPA New England Regional Administrator, EPA Region 2

Lake Champlain Basin Program i The Lake Champlain Steering Committee members are pleased to recommend to the Governors of New York and Vermont and the Administrators of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency these revisions of Opportunities for Action.

C. Randall Beach Gérard Cusson Francis M. Keeler Daniel L. Stewart

Tamsen Benjamin Canute Dalmasse Steven E. Lanthier David A.Tilton

Michèle Bertrand Mario Del Vicario Gérard Massé Emily Wadhams

Gérard Boutin Lawrence K Forcier Ronald Ofner Mary Watzin

Stuart A. Buchanan Leon C. Graves Gerald Potamis

Peter Clavelle Buzz Hoerr Robert W. Reinhardt

ii Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Lake Champlain Basin Program iii VISION STATEMENT The Lake Champlain Management Conference represents a broad-based diverse group of interests that share a common goal of developing a management program to protect and enhance the environmental integrity and the social and economic benefits of Lake Champlain and its watershed.

The Management Conference envisions a Lake Champlain which supports multiple uses—including commerce, a healthy drinking water supply, wildlife habitat, and recreation such as swimming, fishing, and boating. These diverse uses will be balanced to minimize stresses on any part of the Lake system. The Management Conference recognizes that maintaining a vital economy which values the preservation of the agricultural sector is an integral part of the balanced management of the Lake Champlain Basin. Implementing a comprehensive management plan will ensure that the Lake and its Basin will be protected, restored, and maintained so that future generations will enjoy its full benefits.

The Lake Champlain Steering Committee continues to support the vision statement, prepared in 1996 by the Lake Champlain Management Conference, exactly as written.

The Lake Champlain Steering Committee is pleased to dedicate this edition of Opportunities for Action to Ron Manfredonia of USEPA, New England (retired) who chaired the Lake Champlain Management Conference with great skill, wisdom, and foresight. The excellent work of the Management Conference is greatly appreciated by the Steering Committee.

iv Opportunities for Action - April 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS

SOMMAIRE EXÉCUTIF CHAPTER SIX:ECONOMICS IN THE LAKE CHAMPLAIN BASIN 105 • Plan Summary in French 1 REFERENCES: • References 117 CHAPTER ONE:INTRODUCTION • Glossary 119 • Lake Champlain Basin Resources 3 • List of Acronyms 125 • Resource Issues Facing Lake Champlain 3 • Lake Champlain Special Designation Act 5 APPENDIX A: • Lake Champlain Special Designation Act (1990) 126 • Lake Champlain Basin Program 5 • Daniel Patrick Moynihan Lake Champlain Basin Program Act of 2002 128 • Overall Themes of the Plan 6 • Statement of Legislative Intent 129 • Priorities for Action 8 • An Evolving Plan 9 APPENDIX B: • List of LCBP Reports 131 • What is in the Plan? 10

CHAPTER TWO:WATER QUALITY AND THE HEALTH OF THE LAKE APPENDIX C: • A Process for Developing Phosphorus Targets for Lake Champlain 134 • Reducing Phosphorus Pollution 11 • Preventing Pollution from Toxic Substances 23 FIGURES: • Protecting Human Health 31 1. Lake Champlain Basin (inside front cover) CHAPTER THREE:LIVING NATURAL RESOURCES 2. Lake segment boundaries with current phosphorus concentrations and in-lake criteria 13 • Managing Fish and Wildlife 37 3. Drainage by Lake segment and targeted watersheds 15 • Protecting and Restoring Wetlands, Streams, 4. Sites of concern and cleanup actions as of 2001 26 and Riparian Habitats 45 5. Lake Champlain aquatic food web 39 • Managing Nonnative Aquatic Nuisance Plants 6. Upland and wetland habitat restoration in the Lake Champlain Basin 49 and Animals 53 7. Miles of stream banks restored in the Lake Champlain Basin 49 8. Lake Champlain water chestnut management: annual funding 56 CHAPTER FOUR:RECREATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES 9. Zebra mussel distribution in the Lake Champlain Basin 59 • Managing Recreation 61 10. Lake Champlain underwater mapping, 1996-2000 72 • Protecting Cultural Heritage Resources 69 11. Lake Champlain Basin Program operating structure 86 12. Lake and tributary sites in the Long-Term Monitoring Program 101 13. Fiscal year 2001 federal Lake Champlain appropriations 104 CHAPTER FIVE:ASTRATEGY FOR IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN 77 • Key Partners and Their Potential Roles 78 TABLES: • Framework for Plan Implementation 81 1. Phosphorus loading targets, 1991 and 1995 phosphorus loads 14 • Key Functions for Plan Implementation 83 2. Toxic substances of concern 24 • A Framework for Carrying Out Key Functions 85 3. US population: Lake Champlain watershed areas, 1950-2000 111 • Informing and Involving the Public 91 4. Population change: Lake Champlain watershed areas, 1950-2000 112 • Building Local-Level Implementation 95 • Measuring and Monitoring Success 99 • Strategies for Funding Implementation 103 Lake Champlain Basin Program v Lake Champlain Near Apple Tree Bay. Credit: Ben Wang vi Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Introduction SOMMAIRE EXÉCUTIF

une préoccupation d'intérêt public majeure et palités et organismes non gouvernementaux LES RESSOURCES DU demeure un enjeu prioritaire au niveau de l'al- se sont engagés dans la planification de location des ressources. Gérer les ressources l'avenir du lac Champlain. Le point de vue BASSIN DU LAC de manière à soutenir tous les usages actuels des citoyens est aussi considéré. Plusieurs et futurs, voilà le défi de taille que les gou- centaines de Québécois(es) ont d'ailleurs CHAMPLAIN vernements américains et québécois se sont pu exprimer leur avis lors de rencontres engagés à relever. publiques d'information. L'implication con- La réputation du bassin du lac Champlain n'est crète du Québec se traduit par la participation plus à faire. Reconnu comme l'une des plus de représentants dans divers comités, dont le belles ressources naturelles du continent nord- OPPORTUNITIES FOR Comité consultatif des citoyens, le Comité américain, il s'étend des cimes des Adirondacks pour l'éducation et la sensibilisation, le Comité aux Montagnes Vertes et fait même une incur- ACTION consultatif technique et le Comité consultatif sion au Québec dans sa section nord (figure pour le patrimoine culturel et les loisirs. 1, couverture intérieure). La région est habitée Le 5 novembre 1990, le Congrès américain depuis longtemps par les autochtones et entérinait la loi sur la désignation spéciale compte maintenant plus de 600 000 résidents. du lac Champlain (“ Lake Champlain Special THÈMES GÉNÉRAUX Le bassin accueille chaque année des millions Designation Act ” (Annexe A). Destinée à pro- de visiteurs qui viennent profiter de ses eaux et téger le bassin versant du lac Champlain, cette ABORDÉS DANS LE PLAN de tous ses autres attraits naturels et hisoriques. loi reconnaissait le principe de confier à des personnes aux intérêts divergents la respons- • Approche basée sur le partenariat Les ressources du lac sont exploitées à des abilité d'élaborer un plan concerté de préven- • Approche par bassin versant fins multiples dont l'approvisionnement en tion de la pollution, de suivi et de restaura- • Prévention de la pollution eau potable, les activités récréatives, l'agricul- tion. Rendu public pour la première fois en • Approche concertée de prisede ture, les activités industrielles et le rejet des 1996, le plan intitulé “ Opportunities for décision déchets. Comme le lac contribue grandement Action: An evolving Plan for the Future of the • Approche écosystémique à l'essor économique de la région, il importe Lake Champlain Basin ” a permis la réalisation • Intégration des objectifs environ de préserver la qualité de son eau et de toutes de nombreux projets. nementaux et économiques les ressources naturelles qui y sont reliées. • Souplesse L'évaluation économique de la diversité En tant que membre du Comité mixte sur la biologique et de la beauté des paysages gestion du lac Champlain (PBLC), le Québec s'avère complexe, il reste néanmoins que la est appelé à jouer un rôle important dans la préservation de cet environnement constitue protection du lac. Plusieurs ministères, munici-

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 1 Introduction

et la sensibilisation en sont d'autres. Pour PRIORITÉS D'ACTION chaque secteur, les actions ont été énumérées QUE CONTIENT LE PLAN? en fonction du niveau de priorité qui leur a Le plan Perspectives d’actions identifie des été attribué: très grande priorité, grande prior- Le plan Perspectives d’actions comporte six objectifs et des actions visant à protéger et ité, priorité et autres actions à considérer. chapitres. Le premier présente l'ensemble des à remettre en état les ressources écologiques thèmes et des priorités du plan. Le chapitre et culturelles du bassin tout en maintenant Les niveaux de priorité sont sujets à des modi- 2 porte sur les actions visant la protection la vitalité de l'économie régionale. À la suite fications selon les problèmes qui surviendront. et l'amélioration de la qualité de l'eau du des commentaires émis lors des rencontres Le plan fera l'objet d'une mise à jour constante lac Champlain. Le chapitre 3 examine les publiques et des recommandations des et la mise en œuvre des actions, peu importe ressources naturelles vivantes et le chapitre comités consultatifs, les objectifs suivants leur niveau de priorité, dépendra de la 4, les ressources culturelles et récréatives du ont été désignés prioritaires: disponibilité des fonds. bassin. Le chapitre 5 répertorie les stratégies pour la mise en place du plan, dont les Selon le Conseil directeur du lac Champlain, recommandations pour un cadre institutionnel ces objectifs constituent les quatre champs UN PLAN EN ÉVOLUTION pour l'avenir. Il comprend également des sec- d'action les plus importants pour le maintien tions traitant de l'engagement local, de la sen- à long terme de l'intégrité du bassin du lac CONSTANTE sibilisation et de la participation du public, du Champlain. La faune, les activités récréatives suivi et de la mesure du taux de réussite ainsi et le patrimoine culturel ainsi que l'éducation Depuis 1991 un grand nombre de rencontres que de l'obtention de subventions. Ces sections publiques, de sondages, de discussions ciblées ont été regroupées dans le chapitre de la mise et d'ateliers techniques ont eu lieu dans le cadre en place du plan, car c'est principalement par OBJECTIFS du Programme de mise en valeur du lac elles que les recommandations seront mises Champlain. Des projets de recherche, de suivi de l'avant. Le chapitre 6 décrit les conditions 1) Réduire les apports de phosphore dans le et de démonstration ont été menés annuelle- économiques qui prévalent dans le bassin et lac Champlain afin de favoriser l'intégrité et la ment. Selon les informations fournies par le l'importance des questions économiques pour diversité de l'écosystème ainsi que l'utilisation public au moment d'entreprendre l'élaboration la mise en place du plan. Le document con- durable du lac pour les usages humains et la du plan, les éléments suivants du plan doivent tient en dernier lieu des références, un glos- satisfaction procurée lors de sa fréquentation. être maintenus: saire, des abréviations et des annexes.

2) Réduire la contamination par les produits • Le plan ne devrait inclure que les projets Pour de plus amples informations ou pour toxiques dans le but de protéger la santé bénéficiant de subventions. obtenir un exemplaire des documents du publique et l'écosystème du lac Champlain. PBLC, veuillez communiquer avec le • Le plan devrait mettre l'accent sur l'éduca- Programme de mise en valeur du lac 3) Contrôler l'introduction, la prolifération et les tion au lieu de la réglementation accrue. Champlain au (802) 372-3213. Des infor- effets des espèces nuisibles étrangères dans le • Le plan devrait encourager et stimuler la mations sont également disponibles à la but de préserver l'intégrité de l'écosystème du vitalité des organismes actuels. Corporation Bassin Versant Baie Missisquoi lac Champlain. (CBVBM) au (450) 248-0100. 4) Minimiser les risques à la santé humaine causés par les dangers potentiels liés à l'eau dans le bassin du lac Champlain.

Page 2 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

millions in revenues annually. Bird and other LAKE CHAMPLAIN BASIN wildlife viewing activities generate more than $50 million a year in Vermont (Ver- RESOURCES mont Agency of Natural Resources, 1996). City of Burlington Tourism brought an estimated $3.8 billion The Lake Champlain Basin, stretching from dollars overall to the Basin in 2000. the peaks of the Adirondacks to the Green Mountains and north into Québec, is ren- Dollar figures alone cannot convey the full owned as one of North America's most value of Lake Champlain's resources. The beautiful and valued resources (See Figure biological riches of the area and unparalleled 1, inside front cover). Long home to Native beauty of the mountains, historic resources, Americans and inhabited by more than agricultural landscapes, small towns and villages, 600,000 people today, the Basin draws mill- and rivers that flow into the magnificent Lake ions of visitors to its waters and other natural provide experiences and opportunities unique and historic features. Virtually everyone in to the Lake Champlain Basin. While the benefits the Basin depends on the resources the Lake of healthy resources are difficult to quantify, provides for a wide variety of uses, from drink- they are equally important to any evaluation ing water and recreation to agriculture, indus- of the costs and benefits of resource man- try, and waste disposal. The challenge is to agement decisions. manage our resources in a way that sustains all of these uses now and in the future. ESOURCE SSUES ACING The importance of the Basin's healthy natural R I F resources to many of the region's industries LAKE CHAMPLAIN and to the economy as a whole is indisputable. Agriculture in the Basin, for example, which Although Lake Champlain remains a vital lake requires land for production and clean water with many assets, there are several serious for animals, generated about $526 million in environmental problems that demand action. Lake Champlain’s 587 miles of scenic shoreline include sales of agricultural products—such as milk, wide, sandy beaches, secluded bays, bustling harbors, Phosphorus levels in parts of Lake Champlain, and rocky outcrops. cheese, maple syrup, and apples—in 1997. such as those found in Missisquoi Bay, are so Recreation-related industries also depend on high that they cause excessive algal growth. a clean lake. Sport fishing generates tens of

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 3 Introduction

This turns the water green and increases appropriate restoration strategies for contami- growth of aquatic plants, which in turn in- nated sections of the Lake. hibits recreational use of the water, reduces oxygen levels, and causes other problems for The fish, wildlife, and other living resources the aquatic life in the Lake. The phosphorus of the Lake Champlain Basin have been nega- that is causing these problems is coming from tively impacted by the introduction of nonna- both sewage treatment plant discharges and tive aquatic nuisance species, such as sea stormwater runoff from land in agricultural, lamprey, water chestnut, Eurasian watermilfoil, residential, and urban uses. Although much zebra mussels, and most recently alewives. progress has been made in the last five years Each of these species interferes with the recre- to reduce phosphorus, primarily at sewage ational use and ecological processes of the treatment facilities and on agricultural lands, Lake. Zebra mussels, for example, can clog phosphorus inputs from point and nonpoint residential, municipal, and industrial water sources must be further reduced to promote intake pipes, foul boat hulls and engines, a healthy ecosystem and full human use and and obscure priceless underwater archeologi- enjoyment of the Lake. This Plan presents cal artifacts. The first edition of Opportunities strategies to achieve these reductions. for Action (1996) called for a comprehensive action strategy to protect ecologically valuable Toxic substances, such as polychlori- habitats and to control the spread of these

LCBP nated biphenyls (PCBs) and mercury, nuisance species. An Aquatic Nuisance Species have resulted in health advisories Management Plan was approved by New York about consuming certain fish from and Vermont in 1999 and accepted by the Lake Champlain. There are also three National Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force areas in Lake Champlain (Cumber- in 2000. Implementation of this management land Bay, Inner Burlington Harbor, plan is in progress throughout the Basin and and Outer Malletts Bay) known to be results are being carefully monitored. contaminated with toxic substances at levels that cause problems for aquat- Other resource issues face the Lake Champlain ic biota or human health. Over the last Basin as well, including continued wetland five years, hazardous waste cleanup loss and habitat fragmentation, inadequate and containment projects have been public access to the Lake, recreational user undertaken on the Burlington water- conflicts, and loss of cultural resources. Vermont Governor Jim Douglas and New York Governor front at the Pine Street Barge Canal, Opportunities for Action also outlines strat- George Pataki signing Lake Champlain documents on and in Cumberland Bay near the City of egies to address these issues. Earth Day, April 2003. Plattsburgh. Additional research and monitoring efforts are also being undertaken to better Quality of life provided by abundant and understand the extent and causes of mercury diverse natural resources is a major reason contamination in the Basin environment. This why many Basin residents choose to live here. Plan presents ways to reduce toxic contami- Research shows there is a clear connection nants like mercury and PCBs and to identify between the economy and the health of the

Page 4 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Introduction

Lake's resources. If investments in plan imple- resource of national significance. The goal mentation are not continually made, the LAKE CHAMPLAIN SPECIAL of the Special Designation Act was to bring cleanup costs will be far greater in the future. together people with diverse interests in the Continuing to work to protect and improve DESIGNATION ACT Lake to create a comprehensive pollution Lake Champlain and its natural resources prevention, control, and restoration plan for sustains past investments, expands the On November 5, 1990, the Lake Champlain protecting the future of Lake Champlain and Basin's economic potential, and improves Special Designation Act was signed into law its surrounding watershed. The act specifically the quality of life for all Basin residents. (See Appendix A). Sponsored by Senators required examination of water quality, fisheries, Leahy and Jeffords from Vermont and Senators wetlands, wildlife, recreational, and cultural Moynihan and D'Amato from New York, this resource issues. The challenge has been both legislation designated Lake Champlain as a to identify particular problems requiring

LAKE CHAMPLAIN BASIN PROGRAM The Lake Champlain Basin Program (LCBP) is a partnership among the States of New York and Vermont, the Province of Québec, the USEPA, other federal and local government agencies, and many local groups, both public and private. Created by Congress through the Lake Champlain Special Designation Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-596), the LCBP works cooperatively with many partners to protect and enhance the environmental integrity and the social and economic benefits of the Lake Champlain Basin.The program is guided by the Lake Champlain

Steering Committee, a board comprised of a broad spectrum of representatives of government LCBP agencies, the chairs of advisory groups representing citizen lake users, scientists, and educators.These advisory groups include: a Technical Advisory Committee, composed of resource managers, physical and social scientists, and business and economic experts; Citizens Advisory Committees from New York,Vermont, and Québec; an Education and Outreach Advisory Committee; and a Cultural Heritage and Recreation Advisory Committee.

The LCBP is jointly administered by the USEPA, the States of Vermont and New York, and the New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission. Other cooperating agencies include the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the US Department of Agriculture, the US Geological Survey, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Park Service. Formal involvement of Québec occurs through the Lake Champlain Steering Committee, which meets four times a year to coordinate Lake-related management activities.

The actions of the LCBP and Lake Champlain Steering Committee are guided by the comprehensive long-term management plan Opportunities for Action: An Evolving Plan for the Future of the Lake Champlain Basin. Successful implementation of the plan is achieved by developing many The LCBP’s main office is based in the historic joint partnerships among natural resource agencies, citizens, and other lake and watershed stakeholders Gordon Center House in Grand Isle,Vermont. throughout the Basin. Over the past five years, the LCBP has sponsored a variety of projects to educate and involve the public and gather information about Lake issues.The LCBP has also provided funding for education, planning, demonstration, research, and monitoring projects to help prepare Opportunities for Action.This Plan, now in its second edition, is scheduled for updates every five years so that it remains current and relevant to ongoing and emerging issues.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 5 Introduction management action and to chart an integrated Partnership Approach plan for the future of the Lake Champlain Basin. Opportunities for Action covers a broad Numerous agencies and organizations are range of issues and incorporates the views of currently involved in successful programs to citizens, economic advisors, scientists, and manage the resources of the Basin. Imple- lake users throughout the Basin. mentation of the Plan relies upon these groups to continue their successful efforts and expand their capabilities through the LCBP OVERALL THEMES OF formation of partnerships. Partnerships can increase communication and coordination THE PLAN among various levels of government, the private sector, and citizens. Partnerships also Opportunities for Action is an evolving reduce duplication of efforts; increase efficiency blueprint for coordinated action to and effectiveness in the use of human and restore and protect water quality and financial resources, evolve as needed, con- the diverse natural and cultural resources tribute to an informed and involved citizenry, of the Lake Champlain Basin. The first accomplish important goals without the use of edition of Opportunities for Action new regulations or new layers of government, (1996) was based largely on a five-year and ensure a sharing of responsibility for program of plan development reflect- implementing the Plan. ing the best available scientific and economic data and informed by an extensive program of public involvement. Ecosystem-Based Approach

In updating Opportunities for Action Opportunities for Action calls for an ecosys- in 2001, a program of public involve- tem-based approach to planning and management through public meetings, Citizen ment that considers the Lake and its entire Advisory Committee forums, and written drainage basin as a whole, interconnected, comments has continued to inform the complex system. Each component of the sys- In a successful partnership between TNC and the planning process. The ongoing work of tem, including humans, affects other parts of VTDEC, volunteers have hand-pulled hundreds of tons the system. For instance, increased phospho- of water chestnuts to prevent the plant’s spread.Water the Education and Outreach Committee, chestnut control efforts throughout the Basin have the Cultural Heritage and Recreation rus levels in the Lake cause algal blooms that received funding from the LCBP,USACOE, NYSDEC, Advisory Committee, and the Technical deplete oxygen levels, thereby affecting fish NYSCC, QC MENV, and nonprofit organizations. Advisory Committee brought the expe- populations and populations of other Basin rience of many community representa- species that depend on fish as a food source. tives and agencies throughout the Sound resource management must take into Basin to this process. consideration the ways in which various actions will affect other resources in the ecosystem.

Page 6 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Introduction Watershed Approach Finding the most cost-effective actions to protect and enhance the quality of the Lake while More than 95% of the water in Lake Champ- maintaining the economic health of the region lain passes through the 8,234 square miles of is an extremely important and difficult task in the Basin as surface and subsurface runoff implementing the Plan. before reaching the Lake. As a result, land use activities and pollution sources throughout Opportunities for Action includes recreational the Basin have a tremendous impact on the and cultural heritage interests in its basin- Lake and its ecosystems. Restoration or pro- wide approach to watershed protection. tection based on watershed boundaries rather Protecting and expanding opportuni- than political boundaries better address polluted ties for Basin residents to enjoy clean or threatened areas. In addition to applying the water and encouraging public appreci- watershed approach on a basin-wide level, ation of the rich cultural heritage asso- Opportunities for Action encourages the water- ciated with the Lake are integral ele- shed approach at a more local level. This ments of both watershed protection offers opportunities for citizens to improve and regional economic goals. water quality based on their knowledge of their local area and for neighboring communi- Pollution Prevention ties to develop innovative ways to solve pollution problems within their local watersheds. Pollution prevention focuses on reduc- Empowering local communities and their ing or eliminating the generation of organizations to collaborate gives any effort pollutants at their sources. Pollution a better chance of real, sustained success. prevention efforts often cut industrial Implementation of the Plan continues to use and public costs in the long run by a watershed approach that links the Lake with reducing the need for expensive waste activities in its watershed. treatment, hazardous waste disposal, and cleanup. Such efforts can also Integration of Environmental and reduce the need for regulatory compli- Economic Goals ance measures, which are costly and time consuming. Pollution prevention is The LCBP funded an innovative program by often more economically feasible than the National Wildlife Federation to inform dental A healthy Lake Champlain is crucial to a subsequent remediation of polluted sites offices about properly managing waste from strong regional economy, and a strong economy and is a prime method for deterring mercury and other toxic substances.The program is good for the Lake. This Plan recommends also collected 40 lbs. of mercury. future harm to ecosystems. actions to protect and restore the ecological and cultural resources of the Basin while ensuring economic benefits for long-term positive change in the Lake.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 7 Introduction Consensus-Based, Collaborative meetings and the recommendations of adviso- Goal: Minimize the risks to humans Approach to Decision-Making ry committees, four goals have been designat- from water-related health hazards ed as the highest priorities of the Plan: in the Lake Champlain Basin. Opportunities for Action is the result of numer- Goal: Reduce phosphorus inputs ous cooperating agencies, organizations, and (See Actions 1 through 6 of “Protecting individuals combining their efforts to protect to Lake Champlain to promote a Human Health,” pp. 34-36). These actions and enhance the resources of the Lake healthy and diverse ecosystem and address potential health threats associated with Champlain Basin while solving identified provide for sustainable human use poor water quality in Lake Champlain. They problems. Implementing the Plan continues and enjoyment of the Lake. are designed to reduce risks from drinking to involve a broad range of participants in a water, eating fish and wildlife, and swimming consensus-based approach to decision-making. in the Lake, and to support the protection of (See Actions 1 through 11 in “Reducing Encouraging numerous stakeholders to pro- drinking water sources throughout the Basin. vide input strengthens the outcomes of the Phosphorus Pollution,” pp. 17-22). Priority decision-making process and broadens the sub-basins have been identified through Goal: Control the introduction, base of citizens and organizations responsible extensive research on phosphorus loadings to for and active in Plan implementation. the Lake from major tributaries. These actions spread, and impact of nonnative suggest comprehensive ways to reduce point nuisance species in order to pre- Flexibility and nonpoint phosphorus loads from these serve the integrity of the Lake tributaries and their watersheds to achieve the Opportunities for Action is an evolving plan in-lake phosphorus concentration standards Champlain ecosystem. to restore and protect water quality and the established in 1996. remarkable natural and cultural resources of (See Actions 1 through 12 of “Managing the Lake Champlain Basin. Building flexibility Goal: Reduce toxic contamination Nonnative Aquatic Nuisance Plants and into programs and organizations ensures that to protect public health and the Animals,” pp. 55-60). These actions are this evolution continues to be responsive to designed to restrict the spread and reduce public needs throughout the Basin. Successful Lake Champlain ecosystem. the populations of invasive species through program implementation relies on feedback a cooperative effort among agencies, organiza- loops among policy development, implementa- (See Actions 1 through 8 of “Preventing tions, and individuals. tion, existing legal requirements and available Pollution from Toxic Substances,” pp. 26-30). funding, and requires adaptable organizations These actions will offer a comprehensive The Lake Champlain Steering Committee con- that can change their programs accordingly. strategy to restore areas of the Basin where siders these four goals to be the most impor- pollution from toxic contaminants, such as tant for addressing the long-term health of the mercury and PCBs, is a problem and to pre- Lake Champlain Basin and recommends that PRIORITIES FOR ACTION vent future pollution from these contami- agencies and organizations strive to make nants. these their top priorities for action in manag- Opportunities for Action identifies specific ing and enhancing the resources of the Basin. goals and recommended actions to protect and restore the ecological and cultural In addition to these highest priorities, the Lake resources of the Basin while maintaining a Champlain Steering Committee has selected vital regional economy. Based on comments several high priority actions in each of the from citizens and other stakeholders at public

Page 8 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Introduction issue areas. The Committee finds that these plan formulation process has been reinforced Over the last ten years, the public has played actions are needed to accomplish the goals of through public comments during the first five an integral role in the development and imple- each issue area and should be implemented as years of implementation, According to this mentation of Opportunities for Action. Readers soon as possible. Priority actions have also guidance, the following core elements should should find most of their concerns and sug- been designated for each issue area. These be maintained in the Plan: gestions incorporated into this revision, and priority actions are considered important to a feel welcome to continue to provide input management program that addresses the issues • The Plan should be written so that it is into the planning process. Please contact the facing the Lake Champlain Basin. Comple- understandable by the general public who LCBP at 1-800-468-5227 or (802) 372-3213, or will help implement it. Actions presented menting the priority actions are other actions in the Plan should be prioritized. visit www.lcbp.org, for more information on for consideration. The Lake Champlain public meetings and other informational ses- Steering Committee feels that these actions • Summary economic information sions, and to receive copies of LCBP materials. contribute to the comprehensive nature of should be presented with the Plan. the Plan but are less crucial to the present Chapter 6 focuses specifically on this issue and provides addition- health of the Lake and its Basin. al economic information. A supplemental economic analysis of

As time progresses and the Plan is updated as “Opportunities for Action” (1996) Gary Randorf new issues emerge, the priority status of these is also available. actions will be re-evaluated. • The Plan should oppose any inclusion of unfunded mandates. In each of the issue areas, the actions have The Plan does not establish any been listed according to their designated regulations or unfunded man- priority status: Highest Priority, High Priority, dates. Priority, and Other Actions for Consideration. • The Plan should emphasize Implementation of all actions, regardless of education rather than expand- priority status, is contingent upon the avail- ed regulation. The Steering ability of funds. Refer to Chapter 5 for infor- Committee holds that education mation on funding strategies for the Plan. is preferable to regulation and has emphasized that educational programs be incorporated into the implementation of all parts Fort Ticonderoga AN EVOLVING PLAN of the Plan.

Since 1991, the LCBP has been working hard • The Plan should promote and foster the to involve the public and respond to current vitality of existing organizations. The research in developing and implementing this Steering Committee intends that actions Plan. Numerous public input meetings, citizen taken at the local level be an important perception surveys, focus group discussions, means for implementing the Plan. Nearly 500 local implementation grants awarded technical workshops, research, monitoring and by the LCBP in the first decade of opera- demonstration projects have been conducted. tions underscore this commitment to sup- All of these actions have helped identify the port existing organizational and civic issues and priority actions presented in this infrastructure (see Chapter 5). Plan. Guidance from the public in the initial

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 9 Introduction WHAT IS IN THE PLAN? Opportunities for Action is divided into six chapters. This chapter presents the overall themes and priorities of the Plan. Chapter 2 Carolyn Bates presents actions to protect and enhance water quality in Lake Champlain. Chapter 3 concerns living natural resources, and Chapter 4 focuses on recreation and cultural resources of the Basin. Chapter 5 identifies strategies for Plan implementation, including recommendations for an institutional framework for the future. Chapter 5 also includes sections concerning local-level involvement in Plan implementation, informing and involving the public, measuring and monitoring success, and securing funding. These sections identify the primary means through which Plan recommendations A cyclist enjoys a Lake Champlain sunset. will be implemented. Chapter 6 describes the economic conditions in the Basin and the importance of economic considerations in the course of plan implementation. A list of references, glossary, acronyms, and appendices are presented at the end of the document.

Page 10 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 CHAPTER TWO WATER QUALITY AND THE HEALTH OF THE LAKE

n the last 25 years, water quality has improved THIS CHAPTER INCLUDES: largely due to state, federal, provincial, municipal, Reducing Phosphorus Pollution and private efforts to improve wastewater treatment facilities. Additional cleanup must further Preventing Pollution from Toxic Substances I address pollutants from urban and agricultural Protecting Human Health areas, including nutrients, low levels of toxins, and pathogens. Lake Champlain serves as a catch basin for pollutants REDUCING PHOSPHORUS POLLUTION entering directly into it and those washed from the land or air into nearby rivers by stormwater or snow- melt. Indicators of the health of the Lake show nutrient enrichment,which leads to overaccumulation of aquatic Reduce phosphorus inputs to Lake Champlain to promote a healthy plant and algae growth; PCB and mercury contamina- and diverse ecosystem and provide for sustainable human use and tion, which leads to fish consumption advisories; and bacterial contamination, which leads to beach closings.

GOAL enjoyment of the Lake. La qualité de l'eau Au cours des 25 dernières années, la qualité de l'eau s'est améliorée, principalement grâce aux efforts con- Although phosphorus, nitrogen, and other nutrients are needed by the plants that form the base jugués de tous (New York,Vermont, Québec, fédéral of the food chain in the Lake, nutrients are fertilizers that can promote the rapid growth of algae américain, municipalités, le privé) avec la construction and plants. Human activities can greatly increase nutrient inputs to the Lake. These nutrient de stations de traitement des eaux usées. Les efforts sources accelerate eutrophication, the natural aging process of lakes, and pose the greatest threat d'amélioration doivent maintenant être axés sur la to water quality, living organisms, and human use and enjoyment of Lake Champlain. When the réduction de la pollution d'origine urbaine et agricole, amount of nutrients, particularly phosphorus, entering Lake Champlain increases and remains incluant les substances nutritives, les faibles taux de toxines et les pathogènes. high over time, the Lake becomes over-fertilized and produces excessive amounts of algae and other aquatic plants. Algal blooms turn water green, reduce water transparency, and create odor Le lac Champlain sert de bassin récepteur aux pollu- problems. When the algae die and decompose, the oxygen in the water that sustains fish and ants qui y entrent directement ou, par le biais de ses other organisms is depleted. Ultimately, these blooms alter fish and wildlife habitat, impair scenic affluents, lors du lessivage de son bassin versant à la views, reduce recreational appeal, impair water supplies, and lower property values. suite de pluies ou de la fonte des neiges. Celui-ci a d'ailleurs tendance à accumuler les polluants, si l'on se fie aux indicateurs d'intégrité du lac: croissance accrue Phosphorus levels continue to be at unacceptable levels in many parts of Lake Champlain. In des plantes aquatiques et des algues en raison de l'ap- some areas levels are comparable to those found in the most polluted parts of the Great Lakes port de nutriments; avertissements de non-consom- (Saginaw Bay and the western end of Lake Erie) during the 1970s. Missisquoi Bay, St. Albans Bay, mation de poissons dont la chair contient des BPC et and the South Lake are the segments of Lake Champlain with the highest phosphorus levels (see du mercure; avis de fermeture de plages résultant Figure 2). Nuisance algal conditions exist nearly half of the time in these areas. d'une contamination bactérienne.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 11 Reducing Phosphorus Pollution Sources of Phosphorus Significant Reductions and Phosphorus Management Wastewater treatment and industrial discharges are the main point sources of phosphorus, While phosphorus loads to Lake Champlain and now contribute about 20% of the total were not well monitored in the 1970s and phosphorus entering Lake Champlain. 1980s, Vermont point source loads have been Gary Randorf Nonpoint sources, which account for about reduced by an estimated 40% between the 80% of the phosphorus loading, include lawn 1970s and 1991 as a result of banning phos- and garden fertilizers, dairy manure and other phate detergents and regulating wastewater agricultural wastes, pet wastes, and exposed treatment plants and industrial discharges or disturbed soil, including construction areas (Vermont Department of Water Resources and and eroding streambanks. At the local scale, Environmental Engineering 1981). Additional nonpoint sources of phosphorus may include reductions are presumed to have resulted malfunctioning septic systems. from New York's phosphate detergent ban, although amounts were not documented. The The major categories of land use within the 1992 Vermont phosphorus reduction statute Lake Champlain Basin are agricultural land (requiring improved phosphorus treatment at (15% of Basin area), forested land (75% of larger municipal treatment plants), along with Basin area), and urban and other developed decreased phosphorus discharges from several land (6% of Basin area). Agricultural activities New York communities, resulted in an addi- contribute approximately 55% of the annual tional 43% (107 metric tons per year) reduc- nonpoint phosphorus load to the Lake. Forests tion between 1991 and 1995. USDA Natural cover a majority of the Basin's surface area Resource Conservation Service models esti- but contribute only an estimated 8% of the mate that phosphorus loads from nonpoint average annual nonpoint source phosphorus sources have been reduced by more than 65 load. Urban land covers only a small portion metric tons per year (approximately 10%) of the Basin, yet it produces approximately Algae blooms, a result of excess nutrients in the since the 1970s through voluntary pollution 37% of the average annual nonpoint source Lake, impede recreation. control efforts on farms supported by USDA phosphorus load to the Lake—much more cost-share funds. The agricultural community phosphorus per unit area than either agricul- strongly supports these cooperative conservation tural or forested land (Hegman et al. 1999). programs. Many of the recommended actions in Earlier estimates indicate that natural back- this section build on these past successes. ground sources of phosphorus account for only 24% of the present day total load, indi- In 1993, New York, Vermont, and Québec cating that human activities in the Basin have increased phosphorus loading to Lake Champ- signed a Water Quality Agreement committing lain fourfold over the original predevelopment the three entities to using a consistent levels (VTDEC and NYSDEC 1994). approach to phosphorus management. The agreement defined in-lake phosphorus concentration criteria (goals) for thirteen lake segments (see Figure 2). The states of Vermont

Page 12 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Reducing Phosphorus Pollution

and New York subsequently completed a study QUÉBEC Following careful analysis of several reduction to measure point and nonpoint source phosphorus Isle La Motte Missisquoi Bay scenarios, representatives from the states of µ loads to the Lake, developed a whole-lake phos- 1996-2000 Mean - 12 (µg/l) 1996-2000 Mean - 50 ( g/l) Vermont, New York, and the USEPA used the µ In-Lake Criterion - 25 (µg/l) phorus budget, and developed a load reduction In-Lake Criterion - 14 ( g/l) phosphorus criteria, model, and optimization strategy to attain the in-lake criteria (Vermont procedure to develop load reduction targets St. Albans Bay Department of Environmental Conservation and 1996-2000 Mean - 27 (µg/l) considered both fair and cost-effective. The New York State Department of Environmental In-Lake Criterion - 17 (µg/l) agreed upon process distributes the responsi- Cumberland Bay Northeast Arm Conservation 1997). The results of this study 1996-2000 Mean - 12 (µg/l) 1996-2000 Mean - 16 (µg/l) bility for phosphorus reductions among 12 of (called the Lake Champlain Diagnostic-Feasibility In-Lake Criterion - 14 (µg/l) In-Lake Criterion - 14 (µg/l) the 19 watersheds shown in Figure 2 and was Malletts Bay Study) and subsequent analyses indicate that 1996-2000 Mean - 10 (µg/l) endorsed by the Lake Champlain Management the annual phosphorus load to the Lake must In-Lake Criterion - 10 (µg/l) Conference when the original Opportunities be reduced by another 77 metric tons (relative Main Lake Burlington Bay for Action was completed in 1996. 1996-2000 Mean - 11 (µg/l) 1996-2000 Mean - 12 (µg/l) to the 1995 load) to attain the in-lake criteria. In-Lake Criterion- 10 (µg/l) In-Lake Criterion - 14 (µg/l) This represents about 15 percent of the estimated Shelburne Bay Table 1 presents the point and nonpoint source 1996-2000 Mean - NA* 1995 total of 496 metric tons introduced each In-Lake Criterion - 14 (µg/l) phosphorus loading targets for lake segment year. The challenge is to continue to reduce watersheds. Vermont and New York have com- Otter Creek phosphorus loads from both point and nonpoint 1996-2000 Mean - NA* mitted to reducing the difference between the sources and to allocate load reductions through- In-Lake Criterion - 14 (µg/l) 1995 loads and the target loads in each lake Port Henry Lake out the Basin in a fair, efficient, and cost-effec- 1996-2000 Mean - 14 (µg/l) segment watershed by at least 25% for each In-Lake Criterion - 14 (µg/l) Champlain tive manner. five-year period during the next twenty years, pending available federal and/or state funds to Micrograms/liter (µg/l) of In 1995, Holmes and Artuso developed an opti- Total Phosphorus support implementation. The states also have South Lake A mization procedure to determine the cost-effec- 1996-2000 Mean - 33 (µg/l) Oligotrophic committed to identifying specific nonpoint In-Lake Criterion - 25 (µg/l) 0-10 low algae & tiveness of various strategies for attaining the in- high water clarity source control actions or specific point source lake phosphorus criteria (Holmes and Artuso Mesotrophic permit modifications that would result in meet- 11-20 moderate algae & 1995). Designed for use with the Diagnostic- moderate water clarity ing the initial five-year interim goal. Eutrophic Feasibility Study, the optimization procedure South Lake B 21 + potential algae blooms & 1996-2000 Mean - 46 (µg/l) low water clarity takes into account the costs of potential phos- In-Lake Criterion - 25 (µg/l) Table 1 also shows the 1995 phosphorus loads, phorus reductions achievable from point and along with phosphorus loading targets, gener- NEW YORK VERMONT nonpoint sources, as well as the manner in ated by the targeting procedure, as well as the which changes to phosphorus levels in each lake * 1996-2000 mean data not available because monitoring reductions required (relative to 1995 loads) to segment are expected to affect phosphorus levels stations were added in 2001. DATA SOURCE: VTDEC attain the target loads for each lake segment. in all other lake segments. The procedure enables Figure 2. Lake segment boundaries with current phosphorus While Table 1 shows that most watersheds are sorting through the multitude of possible combi- concentrations and in-lake criteria. targeted for some level of phosphorus reduc- nations of point and nonpoint source reductions tion, the majority of the reduction is targeted NOTE: The South Lake B in-lake criterion in the 1993 Water Quality that are predicted to attain the in-lake criteria. Agreement is 25 ug/l, as reflected in this figure.The modeling used to Missisquoi Bay (52 mt/yr). The State of to generate phosphorus loading targets for the Lake are based on Vermont and the Province of Québec have the Vermont Water Quality Standards, which is 54 ug/l.The in-lake developed an agreement dividing responsibility concentration achieved by the phosphorus reduction strategy will for phosphorus reductions in this segment. fall somewhere between the two values. Other watersheds targeted for substantial

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 13 Reducing Phosphorus Pollution reductions include South Lake B (Vermont VERMONT portion), Otter Creek (Vermont portion), and Lake Segment 1991 1995 Target Required Changes the Main Lake (both New York and Vermont Watershed Loads (mt/yr) Loads Loads Relative to 1995 portions). The locations of all watersheds tar- Point NPS Total Total Total geted for some level of reduction are shown S2outh Lake B 38. 204. 268. 287. 280. -6. in Figure 3. No change is required for some South Lake A 0.1 2.4 2.4 1.2 0.6 -0.6 watersheds, reflecting excess capacity at several P0ort Henry 04. 04. 02. 01. 01. -0. wastewater treatment plants. For a more com- Otter Creek 62.8 58.9 121.7 61.2 56.1 -5.1 plete explanation of how point source load M7ain Lake 237. 600. 878. 860. 716. -4. targets were calculated, refer to Appendix C. Shelburne Bay 5.3 11.1 16.4 11.8 12.0 none B2urlington Bay 131. 05. 151. 28. 5. 1 none Malletts Bay 3.1 29.8 32.9 29.7 28.6 -1.1 In 2000, the LCBP released a Preliminary N0ortheast Arm 02. 32. 34. 12. 12. -0. Evaluation of Progress toward Lake Champlain St. Albans Bay 0.8 7.2 8.0 8.9 9.5 none Basin Program Phosphorus Reduction Goals. M9issisquoi Bay 62. 914. 1501. 89. 2 58.32 -31.2 The report, which was prepared by a team of Isle LaMotte 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.3 none scientists and managers working on phospho- T1OTAL 1221. 2293. 4514. 391 2)69. -49.2 (net rus issues in the Lake Champlain Basin, evaluated progress toward the twenty-year phos- QUÉBEC phorus reduction goal and investigated the Lake Segment 1991 1995 Target Required Changes feasibility of accelerating phosphorus reduc- Watershed Loads (mt/yr) Loads Loads Relative to 1995 tion efforts to achieve that goal sooner. The Point NPS Total Total Total 3 3 report predicts that Vermont, New York, and M5issisquoi Bay 87. 527. 666. 59. 38.9 -20.7 Québec will have reduced the phosphorus inputs to Lake Champlain by about 38.8 mt/yr NEW YORK Lake Segment 1991 1995 Target Required Changes by 2001, far exceeding the five-year interim Watershed Loads (mt/yr) Loads Loads Relative to 1995 reduction goal. For individual lake segment Point NPS Total Total Total watersheds, Missisquoi Bay is the only lake S9outh Lake B 33. 224. 208. 227. 286. -0. segment that may fall slightly below a 25% South Lake A 9.6 3.5 13.1 10.1 9.4 -0.7 Source:The 1991 base year loads were measured by the Lake P8ort Henry 16. 23. 45. 45. 20. -2. reduction in the first five years. Champlain Diagnostic-Feasibility Otter Creek 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 -0.1 Study (VTDEC and NYSDEC The report also concluded, however, that not M1ain Lake 78. 391. 358. 307. 355. -2. 1997). The 1995 loads were Cumberland Bay 29.2 8.8 38.0 20.2 25.5 none adjusted to reflect expected all lake segments can be brought to the load- reductions resulting from point I4sle LaMotte 79. 230. 208. 252. 251. -0. ing targets needed to meet the in-lake phos- and nonpoint source controls TOTAL 59.0 92.0 150.9 121.4 120.1 -6.6 (net) phorus criteria by relying solely on existing implemented through 1995. 1 Rnevised from first Opportunities for Actio (October 1996) with currently permitted point source reduction programs. By 2002, most of the ltoads in the Lake Champlain Phosphorus TMDL Draf (June 2001), VT DEC. planned reductions from wastewater treatment 2 Rneflects 60% of the Opportunities for Actio 1995 loads and target loads for Missisquoi Bay. Source: Missisquoi Bay Phosphorus Reduction Task Force Report (June 2000). plant upgrades have been funded, leaving the 3 Rneflects 40% of the Opportunities for Actio 1995 loads and target loads for Missisquoi Bay. Source: remaining phosphorus reductions to come Missisquoi Bay Phosphorus Reduction Task Force Report (June 2000). 1995 loads for comparison only. from nonpoint source reductions, especially Table 1. Phosphorus loading targets in metric tons per year (mt/yr), shown in compari- from agricultural lands. The report estimated son with the 1991 and 1995 (estimated) phosphorus loads for contributing watersheds.

Page 14 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Reducing Phosphorus Pollution that after implementation of agricultural Best Management Practices (BMPs) on all of the remaining farms in the Vermont and Québec portions of the Basin needing treatment, the loads would still exceed the twenty year nonpoint source target for the Vermont and Québec QUÉBEC parts of the Basin, not accounting for any 19 other changes within the Basin. Accelerating 15 17

15 the timeframe for meeting the reduction tar- 18 gets will require new techniques and higher 15 annual funding commitments than in the past. 15 16

15 15 CONSIDERATIONS FOR 14 IMPLEMENTATION

12 13 Land Use Change Impacts on

9 11 Phosphorus Loads 10 10 1 South Lake B, NY 7 Based on the 2000 LCBP report of the Phos- 2 South Lake B,VT phorus Reduction Team, it appears that phos- 3 South Lake A, NY phorus loads generated by land use changes 8 4 South Lake A,VT 5 6 in the Basin are offsetting some of the gains 5 Port Henry, NY achieved by point and nonpoint source 6 Port Henry,VT reduction efforts. As the population within 3 7 Otter Creek, NY the Basin increases, more land is becoming 8 Otter Creek,VT developed. Because developed land generates 4 9 Main Lake, NY more phosphorus than other land uses, non- 10 Main Lake,VT point source phosphorus loads may be 11 Shelbune Bay increasing in parts of the Basin where the 2 12 Burlington Bay land use is changing. Potential options for 13 Cumberland Bay achieving the additional phosphorus reductions 14 Malletts Bay necessary to account for these increases Watershed 15 Northeast Arm 1 include both additional point and nonpoint Boundaries 16 St. Albans Bay source treatments. Emerging technologies may Targeted 17 Missisquoi Bay be applied to further reduce point source Watersheds 18 Isle La Motte, NY phosphorus loads and additional nonpoint NEW YORK VERMONT 19 Isle La Motte,VT source reductions may be achieved through Figure 3. Drainage by lake segment and targeted watersheds for phosphorus reduction.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 15 Reducing Phosphorus Pollution actions such as implementing innovative Preventing Increases in Phosphorus OBJECTIVES BMPs and site designs, building conservation Loads to the Lake buffers, and supporting a whole-farm (not listed in priority order) approach to agricultural nutrient planning. For watersheds where no additional reduction 1) Attain phosphorus loading targets for lake Phosphorus Total Maximum is targeted, management efforts should focus segment watersheds that are consistent with on preventing increases in phosphorus levels. the 1996 New York,Vermont, and USEPA phos- Daily Load (TMDL) For targeted watersheds, management efforts phorus reduction agreement. should focus on both the reduction from exist- The Federal Clean Water Act requires Vermont ing sources and the prevention of increases 2) Attain the in-lake phosphorus criteria specified and New York to develop Total Maximum from new sources. One way to minimize loading in the 1993 New York, Québec, and Vermont Daily Loads (TMDLs) for lakes and rivers that increases is to ensure that new development Water Quality Agreement. are not meeting water quality goals. A TMDL complies with appropriate management practices is an estimate of the amount of pollution that to control phosphorus export. Preventing a body of water can receive without impairing phosphorus discharges at the initial stage of vital uses, such as drinking water supply or development is much less expensive than aquatic life support. Because phosphorus is reducing phosphorus runoff after project com-

QC MENV impairing water quality in many parts of Lake pletion. Both New York and Vermont have Champlain, Vermont and New York are programs in place to control erosion, sedimen- required to prepare a phosphorus TMDL for tation, and stormwater runoff from new devel- the Lake. The bistate TMDL is based on the opment. There are opportunities for strength- loading and in-lake concentration targets ening these programs and for much more described in this section. Implementation of local government involvement in stormwater the TMDL will be consistent with the actions management. described in this Plan. Improving Nutrient Management Focusing Phosphorus Reduction on Farms Resources on Targeted Watersheds The Québec Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food is While it is important to continue with effective working with farmers in the Québec portion of the Miss- Twelve lake segment watersheds have been structural improvements to farms (such as the isquoi Bay watershed on many best management practice targeted for phosphorus load reductions (see construction of manure pits and barnyard runoff (BMP) initiatives to reduce nonpoint source pollution. Table 1). While basic statewide phosphorus systems), all farms can benefit from comprehen- reduction activities—such as implementation sive nutrient management planning (CNMP). of Vermont's mandatory Accepted Agricultural CNMP is an integrated approach to maximizing Practices—should continue, phosphorus the efficient use of plant nutrients. The agricul- reduction actions should be targeted to these tural community is becoming more aware of the watersheds to the extent possible. Many of economic benefits of improved nutrient man- the recommended actions in this section are agement, and is demanding more nutrient man- directed to targeted watersheds. agement assistance than can be provided by existing trained consultants.

Page 16 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Reducing Phosphorus Pollution

• Work aggressively to secure the necessary b) Because additional point source reductions HIGHEST PRIORITY federal, state, provincial, and other funds may be an outcome of the TMDL process, inves- as appropriate. tigate the feasibility of additional reductions at ACTION selected treatment plants. e) By October 1, 2003, New York, Vermont and Québec will identify and commit to the specific 1) Develop and Assess Options to c) In New York, continue to provide state fund- actions necessary to achieve the remaining ing for wastewater treatment plant upgrades Achieve the Remaining Targeted load reductions necessary to achieve the in- necessary to obtain the load reductions req- Phosphorus Loading Reductions lake phosphorus criteria. These commitments uired by the TMDL. Needed to AchievetheIn-Lake will reflect the results of the investigation described in "d" above, and will make clear Phosphorus Standards d) The Québec government, in partnership the most timely schedule of reductions with local municipalities, will continue to sup- deemed possible. a) Implement the Lake Champlain Phosphorus port extending wastewater treatment through Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for New Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC, NYSSWCC, its CleanUp Wastewater program. Treatment York and Vermont. VTDEC, NYDAM, VTDAFM, QC MENV, QC MAPAQ, USEPA facilities have been constructed in several Cost estimate: $100,000, in-kind services towns; several others have been connected to b) Implement the Québec-Vermont Agreement Potential funding sources: LCBP,NYSDEC,VTDEC, the new or existing facilities. Additional facili- on Phosphorus Reduction in Missisquoi Bay, USEPA, QC MENV ties are being built or planned for all remain- establishing a division of responsibility for Timeframe: 2001-2006 ing point source discharges. In the Missisquoi reducing phosphorus loads to Missisquoi Bay Benchmark: Identification of specific actions Bay watershed, all current and planned waste- during 2002. water treatment facilities use an aerated HIGH PRIORITY ACTIONS lagoon treatment process with a target effluent c) By October 1, 2002, New York, Vermont and (not listed in priority order) concentration of 1.0 mg/l or lower. Québec will commit to a specific set of actions that will accomplish at least the second 25% of 2) Provide Funding for Point Source e) Investigate the feasibility of updating the the total necessary lakewide phosphorus load Phosphorus Reductions Phosphorus Detergent Ban to include products, reductions by October 1, 2006. such as dishwashing detergents, that are now being used in quantities similar to laundry d) Determine the additional actions necessary Provide sufficient funding to make the detergents. to achieve the load reductions on an expedited improvements to wastewater treatment plants schedule—by 2009, the 400th anniversary of necessary to attain the point source reduction Potential key LCBP partners: VTDEC, NYSDEC, QC Samuel de Champlain's arrival on the Lake, targets agreed upon through the TMDL MENV municipalities instead of 2016. process and the Québec-Vermont Agreement Cost estimate: $30 million or more on Phosphorus Reduction in Missisquoi Bay. Potential funding sources: State, provincial, and federal • Identify technical challenges to achieving appropriations the phosphorus reductions necessary and a) In Vermont, continue to provide state fund- Timeframe: 2002-2015 outline plans to overcome them. ing for implementation of the state phosphorus Benchmark: Point source phosphorus reductions, which reduction statute, which currently requires in combination with nonpoint source reductions, achieve • Estimate the costs of implementing the all treatment plants discharging more than at least 25% of the total targeted reduction for each water- reductions needed and the options for 200,000 gallons per day (except aerated shed (see Table 2) per five-year period for the next twenty securing those funds. lagoon facilities) to lower effluent phosphorus years concentrations to 0.8 mg/l or lower.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 17 Reducing Phosphorus Pollution 3) Estimate the Nonpoint Source d) Implement retrofitted stormwater manage- ACCOMPLISHMENTS Phosphorus Load That Is Being ment systems and other measures to reduce phosphorus loads from existing urban and Generated by Developed Land Uses EXCEEDING FIRST REDUCTION TARGET suburban areas. (Urban and Suburban Land, Roads, A June 2000 LCBP analysis estimated that etc.) in the Basin and Work e) Work with the state, provincial, and local Vermont, New York, and Québec have Aggressively to Reduce This Load. stormwater management programs to mini- reduced phosphorus inputs to Lake mize the phosphorus load generated by new Champlain by 38.8 metric tons per year, development and reduce the phosphorus load far exceeding the 2001 reduction target Based on an LCBP analysis in 2000, it appears from existing areas undergoing redevelopment, of 15.8 metric tons per year. that increased phosphorus loads generated by including providing assistance for local com- land use changes in the Basin are offsetting pliance with USEPA Phase II stormwater rules. some of the gains achieved by point and agri- REDUCING POINT SOURCES cultural nonpoint source reduction efforts. f) Increase training opportunities for local Other studies have shown that developed land An estimated 22.7 metric tons per year road supervisors and crews to encourage typically contributes more phosphorus per unit reduction in phosphorus loads from implementation of BMPs for road construction, area of land than other land use types. As the point sources was achieved between repair, and maintenance, according to the population within the Basin increases, there is 1995 and 2001. Upgrading and construct- standards in state backroads, stormwater ing wastewater treatment plants in the opportunity to encourage growth away management, and erosion and sediment Vermont, New York, and Québec with $25 from the land-intensive suburban sprawl-type control handbooks. million in state, federal, and provincial development and to better manage the result- funds accomplished these reductions. ing polluted urban stormwater to minimize g) Encourage implementation of erosion and increases in phosphorus loads to the Lake. sedimentation control practices for construc- • In Vermont, state and federal funds tion activities. have provided 100% of the costs of a) Collect and analyze land use information upgrading phosphorus removal to estimate the increase in phosphorus load h) Encourage nutrient management on processes at wastewater treatment that occurs with new development and to help commercial and residential properties. plants in 14 municipalities. target improved stormwater management to those areas experiencing the most rapid growth. Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC, NYS SWCDs, • In New York, funds for wastewater NYSDOT,VTDEC, municipalities, NY counties, professional treatment improvements in 12 b) Develop new options to offset the phosphorus organizations Cost estimate: $100,000 to $500,000 per year municipalities were provided load generated by new development. Potential funding sources: USEPA, state appropriations through the Clean Air/Clean Water Time frame: 2001-2006 Bond Act. c) Increase efforts to reduce phosphorus load- Benchmark: Revisions to state stormwater control ings from new development by assisting local programs that improve their scope and/or effectiveness • In Québec, wastewater treatment efforts to promote land use planning and inno- plants with phosphorus removal vative subdivision practices that discourage now serve 7 municipalities. urban and suburban sprawl.

continued on page 19

Page 18 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Reducing Phosphorus Pollution 4) Expand and Accelerate Imple- and funding and technical support to encour- mentation of Existing Federal, State, age sustainable agriculture practices, includ- ACCOMPLISHMENTS ing nutrient and manure management, and Provincial Agricultural Nonpoint agroenvironmental advisory services, erosion continued from page 18 Source Pollution Programs control, and infrastructure facilities. • Several promising new technologies Provide sufficient funding to accelerate imple- c) Seek other sources of funding for for point source phosphorus removal mentation of federal, state, provincial, and local agricultural cost-share projects basinwide. were tested in the Basin with LCBP programs that provide technical and cost-share funding.The city of Lake Placid con- assistance for best management practices on Potential key LCBP partners: NYSSWCC,VTDAFM, NYS- structed a tertiary water treatment farms, emphasizing animal waste and nutrient DAM, NYSDEC,VTDEC, QC MENV, QC MAPAQ, USDA-NRCS & process at a golf course.The Town of management and pollution prevention. Ensure FSA, USEPA, NYSERDA, USFWS, US Army Corps Willsboro, NY and researchers from that allocation of funds is consistent with sub- Cost estimate: $500,000 to $1,000,000 per year Cornell University piloted a new basin strategies, where applicable. Continue Potential funding sources: State and provincial appro- technology that uses wollastonite, development, coordination, and implementa- priations, USDA-NRCS & FSA, USEPA, NY Environmental a local mineral, in constructed wet- tion of state agricultural nonpoint source pro- Protection Fund lands to remove phosphorus from grams. Specifically: Timeframe: 1995-2015 wastewater. Benchmark: Acceleration of on-farm implementation of a) Continue state cost-share funds provided phosphorus reduction measures. Improved implementa- through Vermont's voluntary Agricultural Best tion of recommended management practices and the pro- REDUCING NONPOINT SOURCES Management Practices (BMP) program and vision of funds to increase participation in federal cost- New York's Environmental Protection Fund. share programs within targeted watersheds An estimated 16.1 metric ton reduction in These funds should be used, where appropriate, annual phosphorus inputs was achieved to supplement federal cost-share programs to 5) Expand Programs for Streambank through implementation of Agricultural reduce the farmers' share of project costs and Restoration and the Installation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) in the increase participation rates. Vegetated Buffer Areas Along Basin 1995 to 2001. Eroding Streams and Rivers • In New York, the Clean Air/Clean Water b) Continue implementation of recommended Bond Act funds supported 75 agricul- state management practices. In New York, ture BMP projects from 1995 to 2000, encourage implementation of appropriate Studies have shown that vegetated areas along for an estimated phosphorus reduc- practices through the Agricultural Environ- streams and rivers can effectively filter sedi- tion of over 9 metric tons per year. mental Management program (AEM). In ment and phosphorus from runoff and reduce streambank erosion while creating habitat for Vermont, encourage voluntary implementation • With about $7 million from federal, of the Natural Resource Conservation District’s wildlife. Use stream geomorphology to determine where and how to address problems with state, and landowner sources, nearly (NRCS) recommended management practices in 600 BMP cost-share projects were targeted watersheds. These practices, which are erosion so that the entire stream system remains more stable over time. implemented in Vermont between referenced in Vermont's Agricultural BMP rules, 1995 and 2000, for an estimated go beyond the state's mandatory Acceptable a) Use geomorphic assessment and other tech- phosphorus reduction of over 8 Agricultural Practices. In Québec, continue to metric tons per year. provide funds for efficient manure storage niques to target reaches where significant phosphorus loading may be occurring as a required by regulation through the Agroen- continued on page 20 vironmental Investment Assistance Program result of erosion.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 19 Reducing Phosphorus Pollution

b) Develop or expand programs that cost-share Cost estimate: $500,000 per year ACCOMPLISHMENTS or offer tax incentives for voluntary restoration Potential funding sources: State, federal, and provincial or protection of buffer strips on perennial appropriations, USDA, NY Environmental Protection Fund, continued from page 19 streams, rivers, and lakes in the Basin. the Québec Agroenvironmental Investment Assistance Program, Soil and Water Conservation Program of MAPAQ Timeframe: 1995-2015 • Québec has provided over $2.9 million c) Develop a GIS database of streams needing in cost-share funds to farmers for 120 Benchmark: Miles of continuous streambank stabilized buffer areas for use by programs such as the and acres of riparian buffer zones established manure storage structures, resulting NY and VT Conservation Reserve Enhancement in an estimated phosphorus reduction Programs (CREP) and the USDA Environmental of more than one metric ton per year. Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). PRIORITY ACTIONS About 75% of Québec agricultural (not listed in priority order) operations in the Missisquoi Bay d) Continue to support Coopérative de Basin now have adequate manure Solidarité du bassin versant de la rivière aux 6) Enhance and Refine the Current storage facilities. Brochets in Québec, a group of volunteers with System for Documenting Non- the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food point Source Phosphorus Control DEVELOPING ALTERNATIVE MANURE of Québec (MAPAQ) working to restore stream- MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES banks of the Pike River Watershed. Practices and Estimating the Resulting Load Reductions The Winooski Natural Resources Cons- e) Continue to implement Québec's Protection ervation District and the University of Policy for Lakeshores, Riverbanks, Littoral Reductions in phosphorus loadings to Lake Vermont are beginning a cold-climate Zones, and Floodplains, in cooperation with Champlain resulting from nonpoint source test of a new manure management tech- local and regional governments and the phosphorus control practices have been esti- nique that uses electrical currents to Ministry of Natural Resources for lands in the mated by tracking the implementation of these accelerate composting.This process kills public domain. The Ministry of Environment practices and then assuming each practice will pathogens more quickly and reduces implements and coordinates the application result in a particular amount of phosphorus odors.The resulting product is less pollut- of this policy. load reduction. These reduction “credits” for ing to surface waters than raw manure practices are also used to predict which and can be more easily transported to f) Increase programs aimed at informing pro- actions are needed to achieve the in-lake goals. areas in need of added nutrients. fessionals working on streams (e.g., municipal officials, landscape architects, etc.) about a) Document and credit nonpoint source phos- IMPLEMENTING LOCAL PROJECTS the value and importance of buffers and phorus reduction practices in a comprehensive stable streams. manner across the Basin, including those imple- The LCBP has funded a number of local mented by all federal, state, and local programs. projects that contribute to reducing g) Identify additional funding sources for phosphorus.These projects involve citi- streambank restoration. b) Refine the credits currently being applied zen volunteers, willing landowners, and to agricultural nonpoint source phosphorus state and federal agency staff. Examples Potential key LCBP partners: USDA-NRCS & FSA, control practices to estimate more accurately the include: USFWS, NYSSWCC,VTDAFM, NYSDAM, NYSDEC,VTDEC, QC true reductions in loadings likely to be achieved. MENV, QC MAPAQ, Québec municipalities, and professional continued on page 21 organizations

Page 20 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Reducing Phosphorus Pollution c) Develop a technically sound and equitable d) Provide training to promote implementation method of crediting the phosphorus reductions and maintenance of buffer strips between ACCOMPLISHMENTS achieved by urban stormwater and other non- croplands and surface water conveyances point source control practices. (see Action 6 above). continued from page 20

Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC,VTDEC, NYS- e) Encourage farmers to keep livestock out of • The Missisquoi River Basin Association DAM,VTDAFM, QC MENV, QC MAPAQ, USDA-NRCS, USEPA surface water by providing additional techni- has ongoing streambank stabilization Cost estimate: $100,000 to $150,000 cal and financial assistance for streamside projects. Activities include planting Potential funding sources: LCBP,NYSDEC,VTDEC, fencing and alternative watering systems. trees and other streamside vegetation, USEPA, QC MENV installing fencing to restrict animals to Timeframe: 2001-2002 streams, and stemming erosion at Benchmark: Implementation of a refined tracking system f) Support demonstration and evaluation of existing and new alternative manure man- recreational access sites. agement technologies (e.g., composting and 7) Promote the Implementation • The City of Plattsburgh and the Saranac of Comprehensive Nutrient methane generation), including identification Lake River Corridor Committee have of funding, to assist producers in addressing worked on bank stabilization along Management Planning (CNMP) surplus nutrient issues on their farms. the Saranac River.

Effective ongoing nutrient management on g) Support grassland agriculture and rotation- • The Friends of the Winooski River the farm is essential to phosphorus reduction al grazing as a means of reducing the demand fenced livestock out of the Huntington efforts. This action is to provide additional for more intensively managed row crops and River and added streambank revet- education and technical assistance on compre- to reduce the reliance on phosphorus imports ments and plantings along Mill hensive nutrient management, a complete sys- to the farm. Brook. tem of animal waste management practices, and to promote sustained implementation of h) Explore ways to reduce the amount of phos- • The Boquet River Association wrote nutrient management plans that should accom- phorus imported to the farm, such as the phos- How to Hold Up Banks, a guide for plish the following: phorus contained in animal feed supplements nonprofit groups on controlling and other products that ultimately enter the stream erosion. a) Implement nutrient management plans farm waste stream. on farms with phosphorus limits by 2004, as • The Lamoille County Regional required by law in Québec. i) Promote the development and implementa- Planning Commission, the Boquet River Association, and the Lewis Creek tion of CNMPs on all animal feeding opera- Association are cooperating with the b) Promote the use of combined soil testing tions, including those covered by state regula- VTDEC to conduct stream geomor- with manure analysis and risk assessment tory programs. phological assessments which help tools, such as the Phosphorus Index, to mini- prioritize stabilization projects and mize the impacts of phosphorus loadings j) Encourage farmers to reduce soil erosion to ensure their success. from agricultural areas on water quality. tolerable soil loss levels to the extent possible on fields that receive nutrients. • The Vermont Youth Conservation c) Broaden the support (educational, finan- Corps has completed projects along cial, and technical) for integrated crop man- 29 rivers and streams, including agement services and promote accurate planting, mulching, and seeding. record-keeping.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 21 Reducing Phosphorus Pollution

Potential key LCBP partners: Farmers, university a) Increase cost-share funding for forest extensions, SWCDs, NRCDs, CMAs/private consultants, USFWS, OTHER ACTIONS FOR management planning. USDA-NRCS and FSA, NYSDAM,VTDAFM, fertilizer dealers, QC MENV, QC MAPAQ, agroenvironmental clubs CONSIDERATION b) Seek additional funds from the USDA Cost estimate: For a) $5 per acre; for b) and d) $100,000 (not listed in priority order) each beyond what is provided for in Action 5; for others, Forestry Incentives Program (FIP) for practices $25,000 per year such as timber stand improvement, tree plant- Potential funding sources: NYSDAM,VTDAFM, 9) Develop and Implement an ing, and site preparation for natural regenera- University Extension & Sea Grant Programs, USDA-NRCS and Awards Program for Basin Farmers tion, all of which enhance the sustainability of FSA, USEPA, federal appropriations, QC MENV, and forest lands. QC MAPAQ Timeframe: Ongoing Support existing and consider new awards Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC,VTDFPR, Benchmark: Increased implementation of practices programs to recognize farmers in the Basin landowners, loggers,VT Forest Products Association described above who are voluntarily implementing management practices designed to improve water Cost estimate: In-kind participation of agency quality. representatives 8) Research and Demonstrate the Potential funding sources: Same as key partners Timeframe: 1996 and Ongoing Effectiveness of Nonpoint Source Potential key LCBP partners: NYSSWCC,VNRC, NYS- Benchmark: Improved implementation of manage- Pollution Control Practices DAM,VTDAFM, NYSDEC,VTDEC, farmers ment practices Cost estimate: $1,500 per year per state, and limited Research on nonpoint source pollution control in-kind participation of agency staff Potential funding sources: USDA-NRCS & FSA, USEPA, 11) Demonstrate the Use of practices has led to increased understanding and private sponsors Constructed Wetlands for Treating of their effectiveness as implemented in the Timeframe: Ongoing Lake Champlain Basin (Meals 1990; Vermont Benchmark: Development of criteria, application, and Domestic Wastewater,Agricultural Rural Clean Water Program Coordinating evaluation procedures, and initial distribution of awards Wastes, and Urban Runoff Committee 1991; Meals 2001). Two ongoing, to at least one farmer in each state long-term studies will further document the One alternative to treating wastewater is the effectiveness of BMPs, one in an urban water- 10) Encourage Continued Implement- creation of a “constructed” wetland that simu- shed and the other in an agricultural water- ation of State Management Practices lates the water quality functions of a natural shed. These projects should be continued until wetland. The technology for constructing wet- completed and additional projects should be for Forestry Activities lands is currently in the experimental stage considered as the results become available. In Vermont, continue implementation of of development, yet still can be applied to Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC,VTDEC, NYS- Acceptable Management Practices for forest enhance the treatment of domestic wastewater, DAM,VTDAFM, USDA-NRCS, USEPA, USGS, LCRC, universities harvesting activities developed by the agricultural wastes, and urban runoff. Cost estimate: For the monitoring component, $50,000 per Commissioner of the Vermont Department demonstration site per year; costs for implementing the of Forests, Parks, and Recreation (VTDFPR). Potential key LCBP partners: USEPA, NBS, state and practices will vary depending on the site In New York, encourage implementation of local agencies, NY SWCDs, LCRC,Vermont NRCDs, Potential funding sources: Federal and state the Silviculture Management Practices in the universities appropriations Cost estimate: $25,000-$50,000 per year New York Silvicultural Management Practices Timeframe: 1995-2007 Potential funding sources: Federal appropriations Benchmark: Completion of the research and demonstra- Catalogue (1993). Timeframe: Ongoing tion projects listed above Benchmark: Completion of one or more demonstration projects

Page 22 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 PREVENTING POLLUTION FROM TOXIC SUBSTANCES

Reduce toxic contamination to protect public health and the Lake Champlain ecosystem. GOAL

Toxic substances are elements, chemicals, or chemical compounds that can poison plants and animals, including humans. Recent efforts to improve our understanding of toxic pollution in Lake Champlain suggest that while levels are low compared to more industrialized areas, such as the Great Lakes, there is still cause for concern. Certain toxic substances may come from natural sources. However, the increasing use and release of chemicals in our daily lives may threaten the high quality of our Lake environment. Lake Champlain Committee Health advisories have been issued in both New York and Vermont regarding the consumption of fish species with elevated levels of mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). An extensive survey of lake-bottom sediments has revealed elevated levels of mercury in many parts of the Lake and several other toxic substances in specific locations. The presence of toxic substances raises concern about their impacts on the Lake ecosystem, as well as on drinking water and the Lake's other uses.

Bay, Inner Burlington Harbor, and Outer Storm drain stenciling helps inform Basin residents ISSUES Malletts Bay—had elevated levels of some about properly disposing toxic materials. toxic contaminants. Toxic reduction and pre- Focusing Efforts on Sites of Concern vention actions have been targeted to these and Substances of Concern areas, including completion of a $35 million cleanup of sediments in Cumberland Bay and Contaminants that are released and transport- a follow-up ecological study in Burlington ed to the lake can accumulate in lake-bottom Harbor (Figure 4, page 26). sediments. The levels of contaminants in these sediments at different depths provide a picture The LCBP has reviewed the substances found of the history of pollution at particular site. to date in Lake Champlain and has ranked Initial research and sampling of lake sedi- them based on the extent and levels at which ments has demonstrated that sediments at they are found and the risk that they may three sites in Lake Champlain—Cumberland pose to human health and the ecosystem.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 23 Preventing Pollution from Toxic Substances Groups 1 and 2 include toxic substances of have been banned from discharges and mercury Limitations of Current Information concern (See Table 2) that merit highest prior- limited to very low levels. Remaining questions on Fate and Effects of Toxic ity for management action because they are include: 1) how much of these substances found in Lake Champlain sediment, water, or comes from outside the Basin, and 2) what Substances biota at levels above appropriate standards or role do historical sources and contaminated guidelines, indicating potential risks to human sediments play. These information gaps on Even if all sources of toxic substances were health or the ecosystem. The rankings must be sources and transport of toxic substances pose eliminated tomorrow, it would take a very periodically evaluated in light of new data. significant questions with respect to future long time to rid the ecosystem of these pollu- management options. Recent monitoring sug- tants. Toxic substances accumulate in lake-bot- Identifying Sources and gests that urban stormwater and atmospheric tom sediments, where they remain for long Quantifying Loads of Toxic sources may be more significant than previous- periods if undisturbed. They may be resus- ly thought. Additional investigation should pended, consumed, or absorbed directly into Substances focus on further characterizing and quantifying organisms and enter the food web. Since sci- these sources. Post-cleanup monitoring entists do not know much about these interac- Although researchers have begun to identify planned for Cumberland Bay should provide tions, additional research is needed. sources of toxic substances within the Basin, critical information on the role of this formerly they have identified few active sources. Major contaminated site as a source of PCBs to the Questions also remain about human and questions remain concerning the sources, rest of the Lake. ecosystem health effects from toxic substances routes of transport, and delivery of toxic sub- in the Basin environment. While some toxicity stances within and outside the Basin. Current to aquatic animals has been observed in areas information suggests that regulated point with elevated contaminant levels, the ecosys- source wastewater discharges are not the pri- tem effects of persistent, low-level exposure mary sources of PCBs and mercury—PCBs to toxic substances are not well understood. These unknowns, including the risk to humans from eating contaminated fish, complicate Psriority Tnoxic Substance Criteria for Selectio decisions regarding the appropriate public Group 1 PCBs, mercury1 Persistent contaminants found Lake-wide (in either sediment, water, or fish) at levels above standards, indicating potential risk to human health, policy response. Public awareness and under- wildlife, or aquatic biota. These are highest priority for management standing of fish consumption advisories must action. be improved, along with coordination of state G,roup 2 Arsenic, cadmium, chromium Persistent contaminants found in localized areas (in either sediment, dioxins/furans, lead, nickel, PAHs, silver, water, or fish) at levels above standards or guidelines, indicating and federal fish tissue monitoring programs. zinc, copper, persistent chlorinated potential risk to human health, wildlife, or aquatic biota. These are next The impacts of toxic substances on sites of 2 pesticides highest priority for management action. concern and on the Lake's ecosystem also Group 3 Ammonia, phthalates, chlorinated Contaminants found above background levels in localized areas of the phenols, chlorine, atrazine, alachlor, and Lake, but below appropriate standards or guidelines. need to be evaluated. Important information pharmaceuticals can be gained from other ecosystems, includ- G,roup 4 VOCs, such as benzene, acetone Contaminants known to be used or known to occur in the Lake pesticides, strong acids and bases, and Champlain Basin environment. ing the Great Lakes and the Chesapeake Bay, other potential pollutants, such as that have benefited from long-term monitoring fluoride and research. 1 Based on US FDA standards 2 Based on a variety of guidelines (NOAA, Ontario, USEPA) regarding toxics in sediments Table 2.Toxic substances of concern found in the Lake’s biota, sediment, and water.

Page 24 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Preventing Pollution from Toxic Substances Setting Appropriate Goals and Adopting a Strategy to Prevent Standards Pollution Rather than Manage It

Despite the success of current programs to Faced with the increasing costs and liabilities reduce toxic substances in the environment, associated with end-of-pipe waste management some problems, such as PCBs and mercury practices, agencies and waste generators are in fish, continue to defy easy solutions. These turning to pollution prevention as a cleaner, and other contaminants that are persistent and safer, and more cost-effective strategy. tend to bioaccumulate challenge the existing Pollution prevention means altering methods regulatory structure because: 1) existing pro- and processes so a pollutant is never generat- grams were designed to deal primarily with ed, rather than treating or controlling the con- fewer contaminants; 2) certain sources of tamination after generation and disposal. It these contaminants are unregulated; and 3) includes such techniques as reducing the use significant quantities of these substances have of toxic substances, substituting non-toxic raw built up in the environment (in sediment, materials, if available, and modifying manufac- biota, etc.) and continue to cycle through turing processes. the ecosystem. Managers charged with solving pollution prob- OBJECTIVES lems in the Great Lakes and Chesapeake Bay regions have adopted a general, long-term (not listed in priority order) goal to “virtually eliminate” sources of certain high priority toxic substances with the partici- 1) Prevent pollution from toxic substances in the Lake Champlain Basin. pation and support of business and industry. Confronting the challenges posed by persistent 2) Focus management efforts on reducing those toxic substances (such as PCBs and mercury) found at or and bioaccumulating contaminants in the Lake above levels known to exceed human health standards or adversely affect aquatic life. Champlain Basin requires establishing firm and defensible toxic reduction goals, identify- 3) Identify and target sites of concern for toxic contamination, and make these areas or watersheds high ing priorities to minimize or prevent contami- priorities for management activities. nation, and implementing actions capable of attaining these goals. 4) Reduce all types of toxic substances from point sources.

5) Reduce nonpoint sources of toxic substances to the Lake.

6) Meet all existing human health standards for drinking water and guidelines for fish consumption.

7) Protect living resources from the effects of toxic substances by meeting all existing standards for aquatic life.

8) Improve public understanding of the impacts of toxic substances in Lake Champlain and the research and management programs related to toxics substances.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 25 Preventing Pollution from Toxic Substances

e) A continued program of research to exam- HIGHEST PRIORITY ine the impacts of new generation pesticides, endocrine disrupting chemicals, pharmaceuti- ACTION cals, and other chemicals in widespread use.

QUÉBEC 1) Develop and Implement a f) Coordination of ongoing pollution preven- Comprehensive Toxic Substance tion programs. Management Strategy Emphasizing g) Continued coordination of spill response Pollution Prevention while activities between jurisdictions in the Basin, Continuing to Mitigate Pollution such as emergency response trials and training. Cumberland Bay Outer Malletts Bay Problems throughout the Lake Cleanup completed, Ongoing pollution fall 2000 and ongoing prevention h) Coordination with regional programs to pollution prevention Substances Arsenic This action represents the commitment of and monitoring of Nickel the Steering Committee to 1) restoring areas reduce atmospheric sources of contaminants, Concern Manganese PCBs including mercury and acid rain. Substances where pollution is a problem, and 2) prevent- PAHs of Copper ing future problems by reducing the use Concern Potential key LCBP partners: Partnership of federal, Zinc Inner Burlington of toxic substances at their source. This Comprehensive Strategy will be developed state, and local agencies, QC MENV, research institutions, Harbor LCRC, private and nonprofit entities Ecological studies completed through a stakeholder process facilitated by Lake Cost estimate: $90,000 per year for coordinator, with in- in 1999 and ongoing the LCBP and will include many of the specific Champlain pollution prevention kind participation of agency and research representatives Lead actions and initiatives listed in this section. Potential funding source: Federal appropriations Substances Mercury The comprehensive strategy will address: Timeframe: Ongoing of Silver Concern Zinc Benchmark: Adoption of toxic substances reduction PAHs a) An iterative process for revising the list of strategy by key partners Toxic Substances of Concern based on new data (using risk-based criteria). HIGH PRIORITY ACTION b) An aggressive pollution prevention strategy that works to implement common-sense, “low 2) Continue Monitoring and cost/low tech” pollution prevention measures Restoration Efforts in Sites of immediately. Concern c) Incentive programs for business and citizen participation in pollution prevention. For sites of concern identified by ongoing research and monitoring (Inner Burlington DATA SOURCE: LCBP NEW YORK VERMONT d) A focus on mercury, PCB’s and other toxic Harbor, Outer Malletts Bay, Cumberland Bay,* Figure 4. Sites of concern and cleanup actions as of 2001. substances of Basin-wide significance. and other sites as appropriate), characterize the extent of contamination, evaluate alternative remedial actions, and make recommenda-

Page 26 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Preventing Pollution from Toxic Substances tions to the states of New York and Vermont and the USEPA based upon findings. PRIORITY ACTIONS ACCOMPLISHMENTS (not listed in priority order) Recommendations should: 3) Facilitate the Redevelopment of CLEANING CUMBERLAND BAY a) Identify sites based on new research or Contaminated Sites (Brownfields) in High levels of polychlorinated biphenyls monitoring data. the Lake Champlain Basin (PCBs) were discovered near Wilcox Dock in Cumberland Bay, NY, during LCBP spon- b) Characterize the extent and severity of con- Former industrial sites that are either contami- sored monitoring. In 2000, NYSDEC com- tamination and effects. nated or suspected of being so are often not pleted a three-year, $35 million restora- redeveloped because of liability or other con- tion project that removed contaminated c) Consider restoration alternatives that may cerns. Many of these sites are located in areas sediment and restored affected shoreline be applicable to each site, including no action, of importance to local communities, such as and wetland areas. A temporary sediment source identification, pollution prevention, town centers, and their redevelopment could dewatering and wastewater treatment remediation, dredging, containment, in situ turn an eyesore into a community asset. facility was constructed onsite during treatment and other alternatives. Towns, local organizations, and businesses hydraulic dredging operations, which should be encouraged and offered assistance removed more than 140,000 tons of PCB- d) Recommend the best management alterna- in seeking federal programs to assist with the contaminated sludge from the bottom of tive to local governments, states, USEPA, and cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields. the bay. Also, 37,000 cubic yards of con- US Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE). taminated soil, 34,700 tons of PCB Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC,VTDEC, USEPA, hazardous waste, and 80,200 tons * The remediation project in Cumberland Bay interested local parties of non-hazardous waste were disposed is complete. See the Accomplishments sidebar Cost estimate: $60,000 per year and $500,000 per year for offsite. Follow-up monitoring will charac- in this section for more information. site assessments terize the continued site influence on Potential funding sources: USEPA water quality lake-wide. Potential key LCBP partners: For a-b) LCRC with Timeframe: Ongoing NYSDEC and VTDEC, USEPA, USFWS, and other federal agen- Benchmark: Successful redevelopment of sites ASSESSING BURLINGTON HARBOR cies; for c-d) a partnership of interested parties Cost estimate: For a-b) $200,000 or more per site; for c-d) 4) Further Characterize and LCBP monitoring found potentially harm- cost of supporting coordinating committee and studies. ful levels of contaminants in Burlington Potential funding sources: USEPA,VTANR, NYSDEC, and Manage Toxic Substances In Harbor. A follow-up study, completed in federal appropriations Urban Stormwater Timeframe: 3-5 years per site, with ongoing process for 1999, measured sediment contaminant site identification levels and tested whether or not the con- Urban stormwater is a significant source of Benchmark: Report documenting above elements a-d taminants are harmful to aquatic animals. metals, combustion product contaminants, Study results indicate that long-term oil and grease, pesticides, and other toxic sub- exposure to toxic substances in sedi- stances. Following on previous LCBP studies, ments may be affecting aquatic organ- the occurrence of these contaminants in urban isms living there, especially in the south- stormwater should be better documented and their loads to the Lake estimated where continued on page 28 appropriate. Sources of specific contaminants

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 27 Preventing Pollution from Toxic Substances

found at high levels should be identified. For d) To reduce water and air pollution from ACCOMPLISHMENTS example, sources of PCBs in tributaries to inefficient 2-cycle motors, promote the general Cumberland Bay and sources of pesticides and use of 4-cycle motors and fuel injected 2-cycle continued from page 27 metals in tributaries to Burlington Harbor need motors for boats and personal watercraft. All to be identified. motors should comply with new federal regula- ern harbor.The chemicals of concern are tions on or before the 2006 deadline. primarily hydrocarbons and metals, whose Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC,VTDEC, USEPA,LCRC sources may include historic activities, Cost estimate: $200,000 per year Recycling measures include: stormwater runoff, and sewage treatment Potential funding source: USEPA plant discharges. Cleaner, more recent Timeframe: Ongoing a) Recycling mercury from light switches and sediments may be covering older, more Benchmark: Completion of characterization and source fluorescent light bulbs. contaminated sediments. identification b) Initiating periodic collection programs for REMEDIATING TOXIC SITES 5) Support and Continue Programs mercury and PCB-bearing substances. to Encourage Homeowners, Plattsburgh Air Force Base, the Air Nat- Industries, Businesses, and Public Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC and VTDEC ional Guard site in Colchester, and the (including Pollution Prevention and Solid/Hazardous Waste Pine Street Barge Canal have toxic reme- Institutions to Implement Pollution Management Divisions), QC MENV, municipalities, industries, diation efforts underway.The Air Force Prevention and Recycling Measures nonprofit entities, USEPA Base and/or the Plattsburgh Airbase Cost estimate: $50,000 to $100,000 Redevelopment Corporation (PARC), for Potential funding sources: State, provincial, and federal Pollution prevention or source reduction example, have removed 139 underground appropriations. measures include: fuel tanks, installed a new 60,000-gallon Timeframe: Ongoing fuel system, and developed an environ- Benchmark: Commitment from municipalities, businesses, a) Switching to nontoxic or less toxic products and industries to prevent pollution mental management system that PARC and raw materials. and its tenants must follow. 6) Continue Research and Monitoring b) Promoting the development and implemen- IMPLEMENTING POLLUTION PREVENTION of the Distribution, Fate, and Effects tation of pollution prevention plans and activi- of Mercury, PCBs, and Other Toxic ties for direct and indirect dischargers of toxic • The nonprofit organization Lake Substances Champlain Committee (LCC), com- substances of concern. pleted several LCBP-funded projects in New York and Vermont to reduce c) Conducting public education programs on Major information gaps exist regarding the fate the amount of toxic substances source reduction, use of nontoxic alternatives, and effects of toxic substances in the Lake reaching Lake Champlain. Events and recycling measures for residential proper- Champlain ecosystem. Initial results of included toxic reduction demonstra- ties, municipalities, and businesses, such as research indicate that toxic substances, such as tion projects, community stream golf courses, marinas, homeowners, universi- PCBs in lake-bottom sediments, can enter the cleanups, and stormdrain stenciling ties, and schools. food web. However, researchers do not fully programs. understand the impacts of toxic substances on the Lake Champlain ecosystem. Specific stud- continued on page 29 ies include:

Page 28 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Preventing Pollution from Toxic Substances a) The assessment of mercury cycling in the b) Determination of how toxic substances, basin. USGS and its partners are conducting such as PCBs and mercury, cycle through the ACCOMPLISHMENTS the initial phase of this assessment. Funding Lake and investigation of their potential effects should be continued and additional funding on aquatic life, human health, and the continued from page 28 should be sought to support a comprehensive Lake's ecosystem. • The Northwest Vermont Solid Waste assessment. Management District teamed up c) Coordinated, cooperative data exchange with the VT Department of Agric- b) Additional monitoring of current-use chem- and analysis. ulture, Food, and Markets and others icals. A number of pesticides and other chemi- to collect 80 mercury-containing cals are in widespread use in the Basin, d) Continuation of sediment surveying and manometers used by dairy farmers although their fate and effects in the environ- biological monitoring programs. to monitor pressure in their milking ment are not monitored or studied regularly. systems. The manometers were e) Continuation of atmospheric monitoring replaced with non-mercury alterna- Other key research should include: program for mercury. tivesatnochargetotheparticipat- ing farmers. More than 40 pounds a) Assessment of the effects of chronic and low- f) Identification of and response to emerging of mercury were collected. level exposure on key food web components, issues. particularly during vulnerable life stages. • The National Wildlife Federation's Northeast Natural Resource Office has worked to inform Basin towns EC

D about effective stormwater manage- S Y

N ment. They have produced workshops for nearly a dozen towns explaining stormwater issues, providing resources, and examining town policies.The NWFalsoheldawork- shop for town officials and planners focusing on “smart growth” strategies for protecting water quality.

• The Town of North Elba and the Village of Lake Placid, NY, along with theMirrorLakeWatershed Association and NYSDEC, are inventorying stormwater facilities for Mirror Lake. Volunteers are collecting information about stormwater discharge points. An engineering consultant will then develop recommendations for actions, such as cleaning, repairing, The Cumberland Bay cleanup, led by the NYSDEC, removed 140,000 tons of PCB-contaminated sludge from the Bay. or replacing existing structures.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 29 Preventing Pollution from Toxic Substances

Potential key LCBP partners: Research institutions and 8) Continue to Review Discharge the LCRC, in coordination with NYSDEC and VTDEC, USGS Cost estimate: $250,000 per year (minimum) Data for Sources of Toxic Sub- Potential funding sources: Federal and state stances of Concern, Including appropriations Wastewater Treatment Plant Timeframe: Ongoing Benchmark: Completion of research elements a-b) and Discharges publication of results This action would include the following elements: OTHER ACTIONS FOR a) Screen all existing data for known or sus- CONSIDERATION pected sources of these substances. (not listed in priority order) b) Encourage enforcement of all existing pro- 7) Establish or Enhance Agricultural grams. and Household Hazardous Waste c) Evaluate the Toxic Substances Release Collection Programs Inventory data for the Lake Champlain Basin for additional sources. This action recommends that municipalities within the Basin collect and dispose of house- Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC and VTDEC, hold hazardous waste properly and regularly. USEPA, Province of Québec The action also recommends more effective Cost estimate: In-kind participation of state and federal disposal options for agricultural, lawn, and agencies garden pesticides, herbicides, and metals. Potential funding sources: NYSDEC and VTDEC, USEPA Timeframe: Ongoing Benchmark: Completion of report detailing the identifi- Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC and VTDEC, cation and remediation/control of sources of toxic sub- VTDAFM, NYDAM, USEPA, QC MENV, municipalities, solid stances of concern waste districts, nonprofit entities Cost estimate: $50,000 for seed money to New York communities, and $50,000 for disposal costs in Vermont; $50,000 for technical assistance, including staff support; in-kind participation of local, state, and federal agencies Potential funding sources: USEPA, federal, and state appropriations Timeframe: Ongoing Benchmark: Establishment of several community-based collection programs

Page 30 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH

Minimize the risks to humans from water-related health hazards in the Lake Champlain Basin. GOAL

Everyday we face a variety of voluntary risks (e.g., cigarette smoking or driving a car) and invol- LCBP untary risks (e.g., breathing air of poor quality or being struck by lightning). Determining what is an acceptable level of voluntary risk is an individual decision based on knowledge of the risks. Many environmental regulatory actions are directed towards reducing involuntary risk from exposure to substances in air, water, and food. Such actions involve determining what is an acceptable level of risk and limiting exposure to that level.

This section focuses on potential health threats associated with poor water quality in Lake Champlain and is limited to assessing risks from drinking water, eating fish and wildlife, and swimming in the Lake, as well as source water protection programs mandated under the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SWDA). It does not otherwise address ground water quality, other surface water bodies in the Basin, or air quality issues in the Basin. Controlling bacterial contamination of public waters is essential to protect human health in the Basin. Controlling Bacterial and Pathogen by recommendations included elsewhere in Contamination of Public Waters this Plan. For example, agricultural wastes, a significant source of bacterial pathogens, are also addressed in the phosphorus section. It Pathogens are disease-causing agents such as is important to address failed septic tanks as bacteria, viruses, and parasites. Water-related sources of potential pathogen contamination pathogens cause gastrointestinal illnesses and devise flexible solutions to the problems when ingested. Exposure to pathogens is pri- they pose. Combined sewer overflows and marily through ingestion, either accidentally sanitary sewer overflows are sources of path- while swimming, or when drinking water from ogens that degrade source water for drinking the Lake. Drinking water suppliers depend on water supplies. Urban stormwater runoff is also a high quality source water to produce the high- potential source of pathogens to surface waters. est quality drinking water as economically as possible. The presence of pathogens causes Waters near the shores of Lake Champlain and occasional beach closings around the Lake, many of its tributaries frequently exceed stan- most commonly in Chittenden County, VT. dards for coliform contamination. Although Many sources of pathogens are addressed some strains of coliform bacteria are harmless

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 31 Protecting Human Health and live in the digestive tract of humans, other great potential to strengthen management of Health, the University of Vermont, and strains produce powerful toxins that can cause strategies to control the problem, and should Syracuse University to monitor Lake Cham- severe illness in humans, damaging the kidneys be applied at selected problem areas through- plain for blue-green algae blooms and toxins, and intestinal tract. out the Basin. Actions to control bacterial especially near drinking water intakes and pathogens at the source include agricultural beaches. Remaining questions include: 1) Local health departments sample the water at and urban best management practices, and What is the frequency, distribution, and severi- public beaches to determine any potential improved stormwater management. ty of algae toxins in the lake? 2) What role do threats to human health from pathogens. microclimatic conditions and nutrient availabil- Elevated levels of fecal coliform present in the Contamination of Public Waters ity play in facilitating blue-green algae blooms water is a common indicator. When pathogens by Blue-Green Algae Toxins and the production of toxins? 3) How can are found in elevated levels, preventing poten- toxic conditions be monitored effectively to tial disease transmission requires beach clo- provide prompt public notification when haz- Blue-green algae, also known as cyanobacte- sures until sampling indicates that bacteria ards to human health develop? and 4) How ria, are normally harmless and widely scat- levels have been reduced to safer levels by can risks caused by contamination of drinking tered through the surface waters of Lake wind and wave action or cooler water tem- water and swimming areas be mitigated? Champlain. Under favorable conditions for peratures. A number of lakeshore communi- growth, however, thick blue-green algae ties has been required to close public beaches blooms develop, especially in calm and shal- Availability of Comprehensive, temporarily as a result of elevated bacteria lev- low waters. Some strains of common blue- Statistically Valid Fish Tissue Data els. Other beaches serving motels, camps, and green algae species can produce neurotoxins campgrounds can also be affected if they are that can damage the nervous systems; others Mercury and PCBs, found in both sediment and close to stormwater discharges, municipal produce hepatotoxins harmful to liver func- biota, are of particular concern because of their wastewater treatment plants, failing septic sys- tions. In both 2000 and 2001, both neurotox- tendency to bioaccumulate to high levels in tems, agricultural runoff, or other pollutant ins and hepatotoxins were detected in Lake some fish species, particularly the larger preda- sources. Because informal swimming areas Champlain. When the water surface tempera- tors. The Federal Drug Administration sets and other locations where people may use the ture is high and the required nutrients are “action levels” or tolerances for contaminants Lake for recreation are not tested for bacteria abundant, blue-green algae blooms may gen- found in fish species. If fish tissue analysis indi- levels, the public should avoid swimming in erate concentrations of toxins that pose a risk cates that levels of contamination exceed these areas immediately downstream from waste- to human health. action levels in a significant number of fish, a water treatment plant discharges or where ani- fish consumption advisory for that body of mal waste obviously drains from agricultural The risk to the health of swimmers and those water is established by the State Health areas. who ingest contaminated water is compound- Department. As a result of mercury and PCB ed by the locations of blue-green algae (polychlorinated biphenyls) contamination, Because some harmful strains of the bacterium blooms, which tend to be close to shore and health advisories exist for several species of E. coli thrive in domestic animals, animal near areas tapped for public water supplies. fish caught in Lake Champlain. There is also waste often is contaminated. Consequently, an advisory for all yellow perch caught in animal waste management is a vital compo- Although researchers have begun to identify Cumberland Bay and a ban on commercial nent of the plan to control the associated risk the conditions which cause some blue-green sale of perch caught in the Bay. More restric- to human health. Identifying the animal groups algae to produce toxins, important questions tive guidelines exist in both states for women at the source of E. coli contamination through remain. The LCBP and the Centers for Disease of childbearing age and children. Health a technique known as DNA tracking offers Control have funded the Vermont Department advisories also exist for waterfowl consump-

Page 32 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Protecting Human Health tion. The fish sampling programs for Vermont, advisories apply to children and women New York, and Québec are currently not well of childbearing age also varies between LCBP coordinated, and do not yet provide a compre- jurisdictions. hensive database. One reason the state programs are limited in scope is the high cost As other kinds of contamination are recog- associated with sampling fish for the types of nized, for example, those due to the toxins contaminants of concern. However, it is difficult sometimes produced by blue-green algae, to discover trends or provide statistically valid or high bacterial pathogen levels in public conclusions without a more extensive database. waters due to agricultural or urban runoff, Efforts to expand the available database and to there should be effective means to alert the improve coordination of management efforts public about the associated health risks. among partners should be coordinated with the Vermont, New York, and Québec are consi- Comprehensive Toxics Management Strategy dering how to best coordinate communication called for elsewhere in the Plan. on these issues.

Potential Human Health Risks to the Threats to Public Water Supplies Public, Including Those Related to Fish Consumption Advisories All Lake Champlain Basin Program partners and citizens throughout the watershed share the need to support federal, provincial, state, Communicating risks is an important part of and local efforts to protect public water sup- any effort to protect human health. New York plies from terrorist threats. Improved and Vermont have worked together to inform communications, risk management, spill each other of any press releases or health response agreements, and citizen involvement advisories before they are released and both will also help reduce accidental water supply states use similar methods of educating the At Burlington’s Blanchard’s Beach, near the outlet of contamination. Englesby Brook, a sign recommends not to swim public and communicating risks. For example, because of consistently high bacteria levels in the water. New York hands out information on all fish advisories with every fishing license issued; and Vermont has included information about the advisories in the Digest of Game Laws since 1994. However, some of the general advisories regarding the consumption of mercury—and PCB—contaminated fish flesh are not consistent and therefore pose a challenge when communicating health risks. For example, the New York health advisory for Lake Champlain includes general guidance for all fish species (no more than one meal per week) as opposed to six meals per month from all Vermont waters. The age at which

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 33 Protecting Human Health Protecting and Improving Public owner systems, education can help protect the Water Supplies health of users. Surface water should always be properly treated before it is consumed. Approximately 188,000 people, or 32% of the Basin population, depend on the Lake for HIGHEST PRIORITY their drinking water. Of the 99 water systems withdrawing supplies from the Lake, 64 are ACTION motels, trailer parks, businesses, restaurants, etc., and 35 are community 1) Improve Risk Communication supplies. Twenty-five of the by Making Appropriate Information OBJECTIVES community supplies serve less than one thousand people. Readily Available to the Public (not listed in priority order) The Federal Safe Drinking This action would coordinate information 1) Where a water quality related health risk is identified, com- Water Act (SDWA) presently about fish advisories, beach closings, and municate results to the public promptly and implement plans requires all public water sys- blue-green algae toxins, and include a public to reduce that risk. tems serving the same popula- education and outreach effort to communicate tion for more than six months with people in all three jurisdictions surround- 2) Control sources of pathogens found in the Lake and its to monitor for 84 contaminants ing the Lake. This effort would also include Basin to ensure drinkable and swimmable water and eliminate in drinking water. Public water an aggressive educational program regarding the need for closing beaches. systems serving a transient pop- what the risks are to particular groups of indi- ulation are required to monitor viduals, and what an individual can do to mini- 3) Improve public understanding of health issues related to for acute contaminants, includ- mize the risks from eating fish and wildlife or water recreation and drinking water. ing bacteria and nitrate. Of par- from contact with contaminated water. Care ticular concern is the “surface should be taken to ensure that risks are neither 4) Identify potential human health risks from eating fish treatment rule,” which requires overstated nor understated. caught in Lake Champlain—including toxic substances of filtration of all surface water concern, populations of concern, and fish species of concern a) New York, Vermont, and Québec should sources unless the water sup- — and communicate these risks effectively to the public. work together to develop common fish advisory plier can meet certain strict cri- standards. 5) Identify potential human health risks from drinking water teria related to the protection contamination caused by blue-green algae toxins. of the supply from sources of Potential key LCBP partners: VTDOH,VTDEC,VTDAFM, contamination. This burden NYSDAFM, NYSDOH, NYSDEC, QC MENV, QC RRSSS, local health units , private health organizations, municipalities 6) Ensure that public water systems, especially small pri- falls most heavily on small Cost estimate: $60,000 per year vately owned systems, are able to meet the technical and water systems, many of which Potential funding sources: state and federal financial requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act. are privately owned. Costs of treatment are difficult for small appropriations, USEPA Timeframe: Ongoing systems to bear, and technical Benchmark: Risk communication approach developed expertise is not as readily available to them. and implemented For drinking water systems not under the aus- pices of the SDWA, such as individual home-

Page 34 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Protecting Human Health d) Assist communities in finding technologies HIGH PRIORITY ACTIONS and resources to address pathogen contamina- ACCOMPLISHMENTS (not listed in priority order) tion problems that impact community water supplies, beaches, and shoreline areas. TRACKING BACTERIAL SOURCES 2) Investigate Areas of Potential Pathogen Contamination and e) Support the study of water movements in the areas near wastewater treatment dis- With the USEPA's help, Colchester and Devise Flexible Solutions to the charges and drinking water supply source Winooski are using E.coli monitoring and Problems areas to identify water flow patterns that DNA tracking to link bacteria samples affect water quality. from streams and beaches to species in In areas where faulty septic systems, waste- f) Determine the importance of failed septic the watershed (such as humans, dogs, water treatment discharges, or nonpoint systems as sources of pathogens and examine cows, or waterfowl). If results can success- source runoff cause problems with pathogens alternative sewage disposal technologies for fully identify sources, the USEPA will work in the water, or where there is reason to sus- existing sites. with other agencies and the LCBP to assist pect contamination, this action recommends municipalities with targeted measures to cooperating closely with municipalities to Potential key LCBP partners: VTDOH,VTDEC,VTDAFM, reduce bacteria levels. locate sources, devise solutions, and provide NYSDAFM, NYSDOH, NYSDEC, QC MENV , QC RRSSS, local technical assistance where possible. This health units, private health organizations, municipalities action focuses on human risks from path- Cost estimate: $60,000 per year for staffing and in-kind MONITORING BLUE-GREEN ALGAE ogens, and especially addresses water sup- participation plies, beaches, and shoreline areas. This rec- Potential funding sources: State and federal appropri- In 1999, the temporary presence of toxins ommendation encourages the consideration ations, USEPA Timeframe: Ongoing produced by blue-green algae, known as of alternative solutions to bacterial pathogen cyanobacteria, was confirmed on Lake problems. Municipalities should receive cost- Benchmark: Data sharing protocol, educational materials, technical assistance, and water movement research Champlain.Warm surface temperatures sharing funds from state or federal agencies augmented by calm winds and limited for any remediation or upgrades required. vertical mixing of the water column Elements of this action include: 3) Develop the Means to Quickly Identify Conditions Causing Toxic create favorable conditions for blue-green a) Insure adequate monitoring of source water Blue-Green Algae Blooms and blooms that sometimes produce toxins. used for drinking water supplies and water at Provide Timely Information to In response, the LCBP has provided finan- public recreation areas. cial support to a monitoring project being Public Water System Managers conducted by the University of Vermont, b) Improve monitoring data sharing, coordina- VT Department of Health, Syracuse tion, and communication. Isolated cases of toxic blue-green algae blooms in Lake Champlain have led to the death of University, and the Federal Centers for c) Develop a public education and outreach dogs which drank lake water in the vicinity of Disease Control.The Québec Ministry of program that focuses on individual citizen the blooms. the Environment has continued testing actions to reduce the risk of pathogen contami- for blue-green algae on Missisquoi Bay nation of public water supplies and recreation a) Support improved sampling, identifying, and areas, such as inserts in water bills and other since 1999.The data can be used to alert communication about blue-green algae bloom the public about the presence of blue- appropriate outreach techniques. locations, progressions, and durations, and inform the public about potential dangers. green algae blooms.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 35 Protecting Human Health b) Develop a Basin-wide training and outreach Timeframe: Immediate Potential key LCBP partners: VTDEC,VTDOH,VTFWD, program for water suppliers who draw Lake Benchmark: Letters to state and federal representatives NYSDEC, NYSDOH, QC MENV, QC RRSSS, USEPA contractor water to improve recognition of algae blooms, documenting the difficulties faced in implementing the support, private health organizations, universities provide contacts for algal identification and SDWA, followed up by phone calls, testimony, as appropriate Cost estimate: $50,000 to $100,000 analysis of samples for toxins, and suggest pro- Potential funding sources: State and federal appropriations tocols for responding to bloom conditions. Timeframe: 2001-2006 5) Undertake Further Focused Benchmark: Completion of reports characterizing the fish Potential key LCBP partners: VTDOH,VTDEC,VTDAFM, Research and Risk Assessment consumption patterns of local populations and the associ- NYSDAFM, NYSDOH, NYSDEC, QC MENV, QC RRSSS, Federal Related to Fish Consumption ated risks; report assessing the level of contaminants in fish Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, local health in Cumberland Bay units, academic institutions, private health organizations, municipalities Assess the need for further research on fish Cost estimate: $40,000 for additional testing and consumption patterns in the Basin, focusing ANOTHER ACTION FOR response capabilities, and in-kind participation on the following four issues: Potential funding sources: State and federal appropri- CONSIDERATION ations, CWA Section 319 Program a) Comprehensive review of existing programs. Timeframe: Ongoing 6) Provide Opportunities for Benchmark: Continued monitoring, established communi- b) Following removal of PCB contaminants in Technology/Information Transfer cation protocol Cumberland Bay, assess PCB levels in fish tis- Focusing on the Needs of Small sue to determine if this cleanup resulted in Water Supply Systems PRIORITY ACTIONS lower levels lakewide. (not listed in priority order) c) Because the first consumption survey This action would provide a forum for a trans- 4) Encourage the States and focused only on licensed anglers, assess con- fer of expertise from large water supply systems to smaller systems. This assumes that person- Federal Government to Provide sumption patterns of other fish consumers, particularly local populations, including nel at large systems may have had greater Funds to Implement the Safe Native Americans and Asians who may con- training and educational opportunities which Drinking Water Act sume larger amounts of fish from the Lake. would benefit individuals responsible for small systems. The VTANR provides mandatory free The SDWA provides the mechanisms to pro- d) Because of the particular sensitivity of chil- training to small system operators already, so tect human health; however, its requirements dren and women of childbearing age to con- this action may just expand the existing train- are expensive, particularly for small water sys- sumption of contaminated fish, assess their ing. New York water system operators are tems. This action recommends that funds con- consumption patterns. required to be trained, so this may be incor- tinue to be made available so that water sys- porated into the existing training. tems, especially small water systems presently e) If average fish consumption rates are higher regulated under the SDWA, can implement for Lake Champlain anglers than for the Potential key LCBP partners: VTDEC, NYSDOH, QC MENV, QC RRSSS, and water system operators source water assessments and protection. United States population as a whole, develop Cost estimate: In kind participation of agencies a risk assessment specific to the population Potential funding sources: Same as key partners Potential key LCBP partners: USEPA,VTDEC, NYSDOH, around Lake Champlain. Timeframe: Ongoing water system operators, citizens Benchmark: Expanded training programs for water system Cost estimate: In-kind participation operators which focus on the issues facing small systems Potential funding sources: Not applicable

Page 36 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 CHAPTER THREE LIVING NATURAL RESOURCES

he living natural resources of the Lake THIS CHAPTER INCLUDES: Champlain Basin are part of a complex Managing Fish and Wildlife ecosystem.Fish and wildlife, including non- Protecting and Restoring Wetlands, Streams, and Riparian Habitats native aquatic nuisance species, such as T sea lamprey, occupy a mosaic of intercon- Managing Nonnative Aquatic Nuisance Plants and Animals nected aquatic and terrestrial habitats.These habitats include the Lake's broad open waters, tributaries, wetlands, forests, agricultural lands, and other areas.The Basin's living natural resources can be divided into six MANAGING FISH AND WILDLIFE major groups: fish, invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles, birds, mammals, and plants. Humans are also part of the ecosystem, and in many places, human activities and development have adversely impacted Restore and maintain a healthy and diverse community of fish and local ecosystems. wildlife for the people of the Lake Champlain Basin.

Les ressources naturelles vivantes GOAL Les ressources naturelles vivantes du bassin du lac Champlain font partie d'un écosystème complexe. La faune, incluant les espèces aquatiques nuisibles comme la lamproie marine, occupe une mosaïque Fish and wildlife provide tremendous social, economic, and environmental benefits to the Lake d'habitats aquatiques et terrestres étroitement liés. Champlain Basin. The structure and function of the food web affect water quality, bioaccumulation Ces habitats comprennent les eaux du lac, les affluents, of toxins, and habitat suitability for fish and wildlife. Abundant fish and wildlife attract recreational les milieux humides, les forêts, les terres agricoles et les hunters, bird watchers, and anglers, resulting in significant economic benefit to local communities. autres zones. Les ressources naturelles vivantes du In 1997, people spent more than $204 million on activities related to fishing on Lake Champlain bassin sont divisées en six grands groupes: les pois- (Gilbert, 2000). Bird and other wildlife viewing activities contribute to the Basin's economy, sons, les invertébrés, les amphibiens et les reptiles, too, generating more than $50 million a year in Vermont (Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, les oiseaux, les mammifères et les plantes.Les êtres humains font également partie de l'écosystème et, en 1996). The complex array of plants and animals also provides other important benefits to humans, de nombreux endroits, les activités humaines ont eu such as pollution filtration through wetlands and other vegetated areas, scenic beauty, and recre- des effets négatifs sur les écosystèmes locaux. ational opportunities. Natural species diversity is a highly valued part of the region's natural heritage and a critical component of the ecosystem that we, as humans, share.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 37 Managing Fish and Wildlife ISSUES A number of ongoing and proposed manage- Conserving, Enhancing, and ment actions for Lake Champlain may have Restoring Habitat significant effects on other natural communi- Adaptive Resource Management ties. For example, stocking by the Fish and Although the Lake Champlain Basin provides Wildlife Management Cooperative increases a rich and varied habitat for aquatic and ter- Adaptive resource management is an important the numbers of predators, such as lake trout restrial species and natural communities, much process of adjusting management policies and and walleye, feeding on forage fish in the habitat has been lost as a result of residential, actions in light of new information about the Lake. Also, Basin-wide efforts to reduce phos- agricultural, and commercial development, ecosystem, both social and scientific, and phorus inputs into the Lake, will alter the phy- and because of the impacts of nonnative progress towards management goals. For toplankton food base available to zooplankton invasive species. Because of this, strategies example, there is a public concern that wall- and smaller fish. It is important to predict and to conserve, enhance, and restore habitat eye populations have declined significantly monitor how the Lake Champlain aquatic and steadily in Lake Champlain over the past community responds to these changes (see 40 years. Restrictive harvest regulations and Figure 5). other management actions, including a fry and OBJECTIVES fingerling stocking, have been initiated to cur- Managing Threatened and (not listed in priority order) tail this perceived decline. While recent surveys indicate that the fishery has begun to show Endangered Species 1) Manage fish and wildlife resources using a improvements in some areas of the lake, in Populations of some rare, threatened, and comprehensive ecosystem approach and Missisquoi Bay the walleye fishery has contin- adaptive management strategy. ued to decline. Additional information, such as endangered plant and animal species and rare natural communities in the Lake Champlain assessing effectiveness of stocking and iden- 2) Restore, enhance, and maintain natural Basin are declining as a result of habitat tifying life stages where high mortality is communities and habitats necessary to sup- occurring, needs to be gathered to determine degradation, invasions of exotic species, col- port the fish and wildlife resources of the the future management actions for restoring lection, and other factors. Of the approximate- Lake Champlain Basin. the walleye fishery lakewide. ly 487 vertebrate species of fish and wildlife thought to be in the Basin, 30 species are offi- 3) Restore, enhance, and maintain imperiled Enhancing Application of an cially listed by federal and state agencies as fish and wildlife populations (e.g., native endangered and threatened. More information Ecosystem Approach to Fish and mussels and lake sturgeon) when found to on the status of and threats to these species be biologically feasible and socially desirable. Wildlife Management and natural communities, in addition to more public education, is necessary for their protec- 4) Ensure efficient, coordinated fish and Lake Champlain supports an abundance of tion and restoration. A comprehensive inven- wildlife resource management among the fish and wildlife species, and current manage- tory of these species and their habitats for the institutions responsible for living resources ment efforts have achieved a measure of suc- entire Lake Champlain Basin is critical, as is conservation in the Lake Champlain Basin. cess. The Plan calls for management activities close coordination by various agencies on all to be expanded and integrated to incorporate aspects of protection and restoration. 5) Manage nuisance native species to reduce additional components of the Lake Champlain human/wildlife conflicts and adverse affects on ecosystem. Recreational use and enjoyment of fish and wildlife resources, unique ecosystems, fish and wildlife resources will continue to be and preserve human use and enjoyment of important features that need to be maintained. the Basin.

Page 38 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Managing Fish and Wildlife

human

largemouth bass & northern pike cormorant

lamprey

walleye, lake trout & Atlantic salmon pumpkin seed & yellow perch rainbow smelt

(macro- insects, invertebrates) worms & snails zebra mussels zooplankton frog

Food (energy) native mussels moves in the direction of algae protozoans & bacteria the arrows. lake sturgeon

Figure 5. Lake Champlain aquatic food web.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 39 Managing Fish and Wildlife should be implemented. Further study is need- corridors. For example, the removal of dams • Parcels that link critical habitats in the ed to document land use practices that can could restore the connection between lake Lake Champlain Basin. cause adverse direct and indirect impacts and riverine spawning habitats for nonnui- c) Initiate an outreach program designed to to important habitats. The many agencies sance migratory fish. Another straightforward assist and recruit landowners interested in involved should share data and coordinate approach to habitat conservation is to acquire habitat restoration and conservation. Priority management efforts, especially with willing fee-title or long-term easements from willing projects include the development of a brochure landowners who wish to conserve, enhance, landowners for important parcels of fish and outlining habitat conservation and restoration or restore fish and wildlife habitat. wildlife habitat, and manage these lands pri- programs available through government agen- marily for the conservation of fish and wild- cies and conservation organizations. life resources they support. Elements of this HIGH PRIORITY ACTIONS action include: (not listed in priority order) d) Coordinate acquisition or other long-term protection decisions with existing “open space” a) Identify rare and environmentally sensitive and federal, state, and local habitat protection 1) Identify, Restore, Enhance, and habitats. Priority projects include: Maintain Critical Habitats and programs. • Develop a list of high-priority terrestrial Habitat Connections throughout and aquatic communities in need of e) Work with willing landowners to conserve the Lake Champlain Basin protection and conservation in the and protect habitats for high-priority terrestrial Lake Champlain Basin; and aquatic communities through acquisition, easements, or other long-term protection meas- This action favors nonregulatory measures • Develop an aquatic natural community with willing landowners and managers of classification for Lake Champlain; and, ures. Develop other strategies when these meth- public lands to prevent habitat loss, fragmen- ods are not desirable or practical. tation, or degradation that may adversely • Complete an aquatic natural community inventory for Lake Champlain. affect threatened and endangered species, rare f) Restore degraded habitats for high-priority natural communities, and vulnerable habitat b) Work with agencies and other key stakehold- terrestrial and aquatic communities by work- ers to identify criteria and an approach (e.g., ing with willing landowners and managers priority watersheds) for targeting high-priority of public lands to promote natural community habitat areas for conservation. Criteria should restoration with native plants from local seed sources.

Mark LaBarr include, but not be limited to identification of:

• Present and former habitats of state and g) Design and construct fish passage facilities federally listed threatened and endangered and stream flow management regimes at exist- species in the Lake Champlain Basin; ing dams to provide access and connectivity between lake and riverine habitats for nonnui- • Habitats critical to imperiled species whose decline may be halted or reversed through sance migratory fish. habitat restoration and conservation; h) Remove dams to provide access and connec- • Habitats vulnerable to destruction; tivity between lake and riverine habitats for nonnuisance migratory fish, if found to be • Habitats supporting high biological The spiny softshell turtle is listed as a threatened species in diversity; and, biologically feasible and socially acceptable. Vermont and Québec.

Page 40 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Managing Fish and Wildlife i) Encourage residential and commercial them. These factors have allowed cormorant 3) Use Biological Indicators to landscaping practices that benefit living populations to increase to levels that may be Monitor Ecosystem Change resources and their habitats. in conflict with other ecosystem management objectives and human activities. This action Monitoring biological indicators helps detect j) Explore opportunities to provide tax incentives supports minimizing human/wildlife conflicts ecosystem change and enables adaptive to landowners in exchange for beneficial land while ensuring the sustainability, natural diversi- resource management. It can also guide future management practices, including affording ty, and productivity of the ecosystem. Elements management decisions leading to the goals access for bird watching, hunting, fishing, and would include: and objectives in this plan. For example, data trapping by the general public. demonstrating declines or increases in indicator a) Work cooperatively with the public, non- species or communities could provide infor- Potential key LCBP partners: USDA-NRCS, USDA-FSA, government organizations, and government mation about the expected trends of associated USFWS, NYSDEC,VTANR, QC MENV, QC MAPAQ, QC SFP, agencies to identify fish and wildlife conflicts. LCFWMC,VTDAFM,TNC, Sea Grant, other academic and pri- species and provide early notice of the need for management action. Specific elements of vate sector cooperators b) Assess the impacts of native nuisance popula- Cost estimate: $500,000 per year and additional funds this effort include: for large projects tions through rigorous scientific investigation. Potential funding sources: Federal, state, and a) Identify and link biological and ecological c) Develop and implement techniques to con- provincial appropriations indicators to management goals and objectives Timeframe: Ongoing trol and mitigate nuisance fish and wildlife identified in Opportunities for Action, includ- Benchmark: Identify habitat needs of listed species and damage and conflicts. recommend specific conservation measures; develop protec- ing quantifiable benchmarks. tion and recovery plans for select species and community d) Assess public satisfaction with management types within the Basin b) Develop a long-term monitoring program of nuisance native species and determine mech- that incorporates a complete set of biological anisms for enhancing this satisfaction. 2) Develop Management Strategies and ecological indicators for the Basin. for Native Species that Become e) Develop and disseminate scientifically valid Nuisances information about nuisance native species.

Fish and wildlife populations in most natural f) Implement appropriate rules and regulations USFWS situations occur in a healthy balance within to facilitate the resolution of problems associat- their ecosystem. Certain conditions can alter ed with native fish and wildlife species that this balance, causing native species to become become nuisances. nuisances, overabundant, or problematic. Potential key LCBP partners: USFWS, NYSDEC,VTANR, Double-crested cormorant populations in the LCFWMC, QC MENV, QC MAPAQ, QC SFP, USDA Animal Lake Champlain Basin, for example, are at his- Damage Control toric highs. Pollution control has lowered con- Cost estimate: Staff biologist/coordinator, $50,000 per year, centrations of toxic contaminants in their food and continued in-kind services of participating agencies supply; food is ample throughout their winter Potential funding sources: USFWS (e.g., federal aid and summer ranges; construction of reservoirs funds), state, and federal appropriations Rising double-crested cormorant populations, as pictured and impoundments have created favorable Timeframe: Ongoing Benchmark: Approve species management plans and here on Young Island, may be in conflict with habitats; and federal and state laws protect plan implementation other fish and wildlife management objectives and human enjoyment of the Lake.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 41 Managing Fish and Wildlife

c) Present the indicators in an understandable Elements of this action include: ACCOMPLISHMENTS manner, allowing them to be used to track and report progress toward management goals to a) Continue adaptive resource management RESTORING HABITAT both the management community and the public. in collaboration with the LCFWMC to ensure laws, policies, and management practices Partners of the US Fish and Wildlife d) Use this information, along with public are responsive to changes in social values, Service (USFWS) have completed more input, to guide future management decisions. environmental conditions, public interest, than 100 habitat restoration projects in available data, and knowledge. This process recent years. These projects involve Potential key LCBP partners: USFWS, NYSDEC,VTANR, should include the following elements: installing fencing to keep livestock out of LCFWMC, LCRC, NBS, USEPA, QC MENV, QC MAPAQ, QC SFP, streams, stabilizing streambanks using universities • Facilitate a dialogue among scientists, managers, and the public to identify prob- natural materials and plantings, and cre- Cost estimate: $150,000 per year for a, c, and d (for staff and operating expenses); $300,000 to $400,000 per year in lems, define sustainable goals and objec- ating in-stream habitat. Public-private subsequent years for b tives, and develop appropriate manage- partnerships have been key to habitat Potential funding sources: State and federal ment policies and actions; restoration. Partners include the Natural appropriations Resources Conservation Service,Vermont • Implement management actions to achieve Timeframe: Ongoing socially desirable conditions and long-term Agency of Natural Resources, New York Benchmark: Selection of appropriate indicators, develop- sustainable ecological functions (e.g., wall- Department of Environmental Conser- ment of indicator presentation, implementation of long- eye access to critical spawning habitat); vation,The Nature Conservancy, Natural term biological indicator monitoring Resource Conservation Districts, local • Develop and implement a monitoring pro- watershed groups, and private landowners. gram to support understanding resources, PRIORITY ACTIONS refining management goals and objectives, (not listed in priority order) revising management actions, and setting MANAGING DOUBLE-CRESTED additional monitoring priorities; CORMORANTS 4) Refine Current Management of • Refine the management approach based on the information obtained. Double-crested cormorants are migratory Lake Champlain's Fish and Wildlife birds that nest in many locations Resources to Enhance the Application b) Investigate the feasibility for a fishing license throughout North America, including of an Ecosystem Approach agreement between the states of New York and Lake Champlain.The USFWS is preparing Vermont that would not reduce revenues for a national management plan to address Recreational hunting and fishing and the either state. impacts caused by population and range species they affect have been managed and expansion of these birds. In the mean- regulated effectively by the states of Vermont c) Review FERC hydropower relicensing propos- time, the USFWS has issued permits to and New York and the US Fish and Wildlife als to ensure that management objectives for Service (USFWS) under the Lake Champlain Vermont to control Lake Champlain's cor- upstream and downstream fish passage, fish Fish and Wildlife Management Cooperative morant population on state-owned and wildlife habitat, and habitat connectivity Young Island. Lake Champlain Sea Grant (LCFWMC). To ensure the ongoing success of interjurisdictional fish and wildlife manage- above and below hydropower dams are con- is also supporting a study of the diet and sidered. feeding range of cormorants. ment programs that mutually benefit both game and nongame species, coordination among resource agencies needs to continue.

Page 42 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Managing Fish and Wildlife d) Review current fish and wildlife manage- 5) Integrate Aquatic Food Web Potential key LCBP partners: USFWS, NYSDEC,VTANR, ment plans and reports for consideration Models into Fisheries Management QC MENV, QC FAPAQ, QC SFP,LCFWMC, LCRC, USGS , of the long-term sustainability of fish and universities wildlife resources. Decisions Cost estimate: $100,000 per year Potential funding sources: State and federal e) Assess the broader ecological effects of fish Food web or “bioenergetic” models allow appropriations stocking programs in the Basin. managers to predict how changes in popula- Timeframe: 3 to 5 years tions of one species or community of species Benchmark: Food web models completed and used in f) Examine the relationships among manage- affect other components of the ecosystem. management programs ment programs, salmonids, bass, walleye, pike, Ideally these models support and enhance and other important recreational species. management decisions, such as adjusting 6) Improve Protection Strategies salmonid stocking rates to meet both forage for Managing Threatened and g) Ensure that management approaches sus- base and angler needs. The LCBP has funded Endangered Species and Rare tain healthy populations of both game and two initial food web model studies, focusing nongame species. on the top predators and the base of the food Natural Communities web. These and other models could be used h) Incorporate appropriate additional key to study the impacts of fish stocking, zebra To ensure that threatened and endangered species—such as white perch, yellow perch, mussels, and efforts to reduce nutrient levels species and rare natural communities in the and cormorant—into the management of among other factors. Food web models may Lake Champlain Basin are protected adequate- Lake Champlain fisheries. be used to assist with the following specific ly, coordinate the implementation of recovery activities: strategies. This effort would be carried out by, Potential key LCBP partners: USFWS, NYSDEC,VTANR, and in coordination with, appropriate state LCFWMC, USDA Animal Damage Control, QC MENV, a) Fill informational gaps between top-down and federal agencies and regulatory commit- QC MAPAQ, QC SFP and bottom-up bioenergetic models by model- tees. Elements of this effort would include the Cost estimate: Staff and coordinating, $75,000 per year; ing food web linkages between zooplankton following activities: continued in-kind services of participating agencies and small fish. Potential funding sources: USFWS (e.g., federal aid a) Compile a list of all species and natural funds), state, and federal appropriations b) Link the management of point and nonpoint communities occurring in the Lake Champlain Timeframe: Ongoing sources of nutrients entering Lake Champlain Basin and their status (threatened, endangered, Benchmark: Ecosystem-based management decisions with food web management activities. rare, native, nonnative, nuisance, etc.). for key species in the Lake Champlain watershed c) Determine the effects of human activities on b) Compile a summary of federal, state, and the food web. provincial laws protecting threatened and endangered species. d) Determine the effects of zebra mussels on both higher and lower trophic-level fish and c) Seek consensus on endangered and threat- wildlife species. ened species, listing criteria for Lake-related species.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 43 Managing Fish and Wildlife d) Identify new cooperative efforts to ensure 7) Evaluate Whether the Broad enforcement of applicable threatened and Priorities Outlined in Opportunities endangered species protection laws. Mark LaBarr for Action Are Consistent With e) Identify new cooperative efforts to promote Ecosystem Objectives for Managing projects that identify, restore, enhance, and Fish and Wildlife Resources create habitats for selected threatened and endangered species. Fish and wildlife resources do not exist in biologically distinct units, but are interconnected f) Identify new cooperative efforts to resolve the through complex relationships and processes. status of potentially threatened or endangered Sound resource management must consider species. how various actions within Opportunities for Action could affect fish and wildlife populations and other resources in the ecosystem. Osprey have recently made a comeback g) Establish a mechanism to identify threats in the Lake Champlain Basin. and set priorities for species and natural com- Elements of this action include: munity protection and restoration efforts. a) Examine the appropriateness of in-lake phosphorus concentration criteria for ecosys- h) Include threatened or endangered species tem health and sustainability of fish and as key species in the management of Lake wildlife populations. Champlain fisheries. b) Evaluate the ecological benefits and biologi- Potential key LCBP partners: USFWS, NYSDEC,VTANR, cal consequences of dam removal (e.g., zebra QC MAPAQ, QC SFP,LCFWMC, natural heritage programs, mussel and lamprey expansion into areas TNC, other academic and private sector cooperators where they were previously excluded). Cost estimate: $150,000 per year and staff implementation Potential funding sources: State and federal c) Examine whether nonnative invasive species appropriations Timeframe: Ongoing control strategies are conducive to sustainable fish and wildlife populations and ecological Benchmark: Completion of Basin-wide species list; develop a task force under the LCFWMC on endangered functions. species management. Potential key LCBP partners: USFWS, NYSDEC,VTANR, LCFWMC, QC MAPAQ, QC SFP Cost estimate: $50,000 per year; in-kind services of participating agencies Potential funding source: LCBP,state, and federal agencies Time frame: Ongoing Benchmark: Completed assessments

Page 44 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 PROTECTING AND RESTORING WETLANDS, STREAMS, AND RIPARIAN HABITATS

Protect, conserve, and restore Lake Champlain Basin wetlands, streams, and riparian habitats and the functions and values they provide. GOAL

Wetlands are a vital part of Lake Champlain's ecosystem. In addition to providing critical habitat and nourishment for fish and wildlife, the more than 300,000 acres of wetlands in the Lake NYSDEC Champlain Basin improve water quality by filtering sediments, pollutants, and nutrients. Wetlands also help control flooding, protect groundwater and drinking water supplies, stabilize shorelines, prevent erosion, and provide recreational opportunities. Lake Champlain wetlands support extensive wildlife and fisheries resources. For example, Lake Champlain is part of the Atlantic Flyway, a migratory corridor for waterfowl and other wetland birds. Between 20,000 and 40,000 ducks and geese that depend on the Lake for critical resting and feeding sites have been counted during October flights. The Lake Champlain Basin includes some of the highest quality wetlands in the northeastern United States, including exceptional and extensive lakeside wetland complexes and the red maple-northern white cedar swamps along Otter Creek in Vermont. The Basin also includes many rare or declining natural wetland communities, including riverine and lakeside floodplain forests, wet valley clayplain forests, fens, and buttonbush swamps. Despite federal, state, and local wetlands protection regulations, threats to wetlands in the Lake Champlain Basin persist. Many people remain unaware of the function and benefits of wetlands; as a result, wet- A viewing platform at the NYSDEC’s AuSable Marsh lands are often drained or filled for agricultural, residential, or commercial purposes. Wildlife Management Area was developed with a LCBP Local Implementation grant and Pittman- Human impacts on stream and riparian habitats have also been severe and wide ranging. The Robertson funds. view many people have of local streams is sometimes a distorted one because they often see unstable conditions altered by a history of continuous human impacts. For the last three cen- turies, people have altered the landscape and the flow of streams and rivers for flood control, bridges and roads, power generation, agriculture, development, and even erosion control or bank stabilization. Adverse impacts include loss of historic floodplain, increased river channel instability, degradation of water quality, decreased water storage and conveyance capacity, loss of habitat for fish and wildlife, and decreased recreational and aesthetic value. Unfortunately, most past stream manipulation did not take into consideration the natural dynamic processes at work in the stream channel, riparian habitat, and floodplain, or the need for streams and rivers to transport both flow and sediment. Stream and riparian habitat restoration is a complex effort that requires

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 45 Protecting and Restoring Wetlands, Streams, and Riparian Habitats

an understanding of the structure and functions including different fish species. Tree removal of the natural stream system, recognition of results in loss of root systems that stabilize the human induced disturbances preventing the streambank. This can increase sedimenta- recovery to a sustainable condition, and effec- tion, which then degrades fish spawning habitat tive implementation of a broad range of and limits growth and reproduction rates. actions designed to enable streams to recover as much of their natural functions as possible. Important considerations in this process ISSUES include watershed and sub-watershed level assessment, identification of reference sites, Wetland Restoration and developing clear and achievable Permanent Protection goals, eliminating or remediating MRBA indirect impacts, establishing pre- Because wetlands provide critical functions and post-project monitoring, and which range from improving water quality in minimizing the need for ongoing the Lake Champlain Basin to providing impor- site maintenance. tant habitat for wildlife, existing wetland acreage needs protection. Nationally, more Adequate riparian buffers are one than 50% of the wetlands resource base has of the most effective tools for lim- been lost. Approximately 35% of Vermont's iting nonpoint sources of pollution wetlands have been lost since European settle- and promoting the long-term sta- ment, and an estimated 40 acres continue to bility of streambanks and chan- be lost each year. Estimates of wetland loss in nels. The pollution prevention the New York portion of the Basin are similar capacity of buffers is enhanced to national trends except within the Adiron- through land grading, planting of dack Park, where less than 10% of the wet- additional vegetation, and protect- lands have been lost. However, in some ing and maintaining a river's areas of New York significant wetlands loss Projects such as this streambank planting by volunteers from the Missisquoi River Basin Association are vital to restoring riparian access to its floodplain. Planting has been documented. A study of Lake George habitats and reducing erosion. and maintaining riparian buffer shoreline wetlands for the period of 1950-1978 strips help protect wildlife corri- indicated that more than half the wetlands had dors by providing food, cover, and thermal been lost. The acquisition and restoration pro- protection to the stream. Well-vegetated ripari- grams currently underway in the Basin are an an areas trap and filter sediments, nutrients, important nonregulatory approach to wetlands and chemicals and help maintain the hydro- protection and conservation. logic and ecological integrity of the stream channel and streambank. The amount of light striking the stream surface also greatly affects the type and amount of algal production in a stream. Streams in deforested areas contain a different community of plants and animals,

Page 46 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Protecting and Restoring Wetlands, Streams, and Riparian Habitats Implementation of Effective Restoration and Maintenance Stream Restoration Projects OBJECTIVES of Riparian Habitat (not listed in priority order) Flooding, channel straightening, agricul- Riparian corridors are an important com- ture, and transportation have long impact- 1) Achieve no net loss of the remaining Lake Champlain Basin ponent of lake, stream, and river ecosys- ed the streams and rivers of the Basin. A wetlands and increase the quantity and quality of the wetlands tems. They help maintain stable rivers coordinated Basin-wide stream restoration resource base over the long-term. and streams, provide important functions program is needed to ensure that projects for wildlife and aquatic organisms, and are completed using the best science 2) Complete an up-to-date and standardized inventory and clas- enhance the aesthetics of the rural land- available and that the highest priority sification of wetlands in the Lake Champlain Basin. scape. These corridors have been projects are undertaken first. Restoration degraded over time by agriculture, and stabilization of streams requires an 3) Develop a coordinated approach to protecting and managing forestry, and development. Sufficient understanding of physical stream dynam- wetlands, streams, and riparian habitats in the Lake Champlain financial and technical incentives need ics, as well as the needs and requirements Basin. to be established to encourage private of people living in the Basin. landowners throughout the Basin to 4) Expand wetlands acquisition, riparian habitat protection, and restore these ecosystems. A coordinated Successful stream channel and riparian stream restoration programs in cooperation with willing effort is needed to identify and set prior- management efforts can benefit from a landowners in the Lake Champlain Basin. ities for stream and river reaches in need four-stage approach: 1) protection of sta- of restored riparian buffers. ble stream sections where the river chan- 5) Restore rivers, streams, and surrounding floodplains using nel is relatively undisturbed and the ripar- approaches that work with natural stream processes and dynamics Stream channel stability and ecological and emphasize natural community restoration by using native ian vegetation relatively intact; 2) identifi- function depend on the condition of the species from local sources. cation and management of strategic sites adjacent riparian habitat. Streams with that could, if disturbed, result in wide- wide and mature riparian vegetation (like- 6) Promote the development of regional or local watershed ly forested) exhibit greater levels of river spread instability or erosion within a plans that build upon advanced identification and protection channel stability, lower rates of bank ero- watershed; 3) restoration of stream sec- of wetland and riparian habitats. tions that have a high potential for recov- sion, and are often narrower and deeper. These characteristics provide optimal ery; and 4) education of the public and 7) Understand the role of wetlands, floodplains, and riparian enhanced habitat for aquatic organisms. agencies on river processes. Stream and habitat in improving water quality, stream stability, fish and Restoration of moderate or severely riparian restoration projects should be wildlife habitat, erosion control, and other functions; the impacts degraded sites involves changes to chan- based on local data that describe stream of land use on the ability of wetlands, streams, and riparian habi- nel and floodplain structure and function drainage area, channel geometry, stream tats to provide important functions; and the cumulative impacts to achieve stream stability. Incentive- velocity and discharge, and background of habitat loss and alteration in the Lake Champlain Basin. based initiatives, working in conjunction data on stable local stream systems that with private landowners, municipalities, can be used for reference in the design 8) Improve public understanding of the importance of wetlands regional planning commissions, and oth- of restoration projects. and riparian habitats, natural communities, and the programs designed to protect these resources. ers are ideal for protecting and restoring riparian habitat. 9) Improve understanding of state and federal wetland regulations and their impact on landowner activities.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 47 Protecting and Restoring Wetlands, Streams, and Riparian Habitats

Adopting Local Watershed Potential key LCBP partners: TNC, NYSDEC,VTANR, Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC, APA,VTANR, QC MENV, USFWS USFWS, LCRC Approaches to Protecting Wetlands, Cost estimate: $1.1 million has been spent to date on this Cost estimate: $50,000 per year Restoring Streams, and Creating effort; an additional $1.1 million is needed for completion of Potential funding source: Federal appropriations the acquisition strategy Timeframe: Ongoing Riparian Buffers Potential funding sources: USFWS (North American Benchmark: An updated wetland inventory map Wetlands Conservation Act funding), various state and pri- showing, where possible, changes in wetland distribution vate funding sources, such as the Migratory Bird Stamp Because wetland loss, stream degradation, and over time loss of riparian habitat are often incremental, Fund and EQBA/EPF (NY) Timeframe: Ongoing involving a series of changes to natural systems 3) Expand Wetland Restoration which add up to a significant loss over time, Benchmark: Protection of 9,000 acres of wetlands municipalities need to be fully aware of the Efforts in the Basin locations, functions, and values of wetlands, 2) Update Wetland Inventory Maps streams, and riparian corridors within their Using Current Land Cover Data The Lake Champlain Basin Program began communities. Local watershed approaches sponsoring a Basin wetland restoration project should increase public awareness of the values Because the National Wetlands Inventory in 1993. The project is modeled after the of wetland and stream habitat, improve their (NWI) maps for many areas of the Lake USFWS Partners for Fish & Wildlife program, protection, and provide more certainty and Champlain Basin are almost 20 years out of and is being implemented with funding from local expertise to communities in local plan- date, an ongoing program to update these the USEPA and technical assistance from the ning and permitting processes. maps to reflect changes in the distribution of USFWS, NYSDEC, and VTANR (see Figures 6 wetlands needs to be established over time. and 7). Under this action, an expanded wet- There is also a need to inventory, map, and land restoration program should be carried out HIGH PRIORITY ACTIONS classify unique wetland habitats which fall through cooperative efforts among govern- (not listed in priority order) below the NWI threshold throughout the Basin. ment agencies and private partnerships. The Substantial progress has been made on wet- expanded program should focus on the con- 1) Continue to Secure Funding and lands inventory mapping in New York. The servation of biological diversity through care- Implement the Lake Champlain LCBP has funded updates of maps to NWI ful selection, design, and implementation of Wetlands Acquisition Strategy standards for wetlands in New York outside of wetland restoration projects. Future efforts will the Adirondack Park. Completion of digitized require securing adequate funds and continu- wetlands maps within the Park remains a high ing to identify willing landowners. The pro- Additional funds should be sought through the priority. In Vermont, outstanding issues regard- gram should also include development of North American Wetlands Conservation Act for ing the consistency of updated NWI maps and maps that identify potential candidate sites the Lake Champlain Wetlands Acquisition older regulatory maps—should be addressed for restoration projects. The US Department Strategy. Funding applications should be sub- through map updates. This program should be of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Resource mitted to implement the strategy fully. Wetland implemented using up-to-date remote sensing Conservation Service (NRCS) has been imple- acquisitions resulting from this action will be imagery and related technologies, assisted by menting the Wetland Reserve Program in both consistent with the New York State Open field verification. Vermont and New York since 1996. Similar Space Conservation Plan in the New York por- projects are slated to be developed in Québec tion of the Basin and the Vermont Wetlands through cooperative efforts among govern- Conservation Strategy in Vermont. Public agen- ment agencies, local associations, private cies, private nonprofit organizations, and will- partnerships, and municipalities. ing landowners have a role in implementation.

Page 48 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Protecting and Restoring Wetlands, Streams, and Riparian Habitats

Potential key LCBP partners: USFWS, NYSDEC,VTANR, Potential key LCBP partners: USDA-NRCS, USDA-FSA, USDA-NRCS, USACOE, QC MAPAQ, QC MENV, QC SFP,TNC, USFWS, USACOE, NYSDEC,VTDEC,VTDAFM, NYSAM, QC '00 Ducks Unlimited, watershed associations, landowners MENV, QC SFP,QC MAPAQ, municipalities, conservation dis- '99 Cost estimate: $80,000 to $100,000 per year for projects; tricts, watershed associations $50,000 per year for project oversight and technical assis- Cost estimate: $500,000 to $1 million per year '98

tance by a staff biologist Federal appropriations, Year Potential funding sources: '97 Potential funding sources: USFWS (Partners for Fish community development grants, land trusts, EQBA/EPF (NY) & Wildlife Program), USDA (Wetlands Reserve Program Timeframe: Ongoing '96 and Conservation Reserve Program) Benchmark: Identification and provision of funding for '95 Timeframe: Ongoing streambank restoration and the installation of buffer strips Benchmark: Restoration of 100 to 500 acres of 5101520 wetlands annually 5) Develop and Provide Training Miles in Field Assessment Protocols for Figure 7. Miles of stream banks restored in the Lake 4) Expand NRCS/FSA, USFWS, and Champlain Basin through the USFWS Partners for Fish Other Agency Cost-Sharing Managers and Local Watershed and Wildlife Program, 1995-2000. Source US Fish & Wildlife. Programs for Stream Restoration, Organizations 6) Promote Local Watershed Riparian Habitat Protection, and Effective geomorphic assessment requires con- Planning throughout the Basin Installation of Riparian/ Wetland sistent protocols that can be used by managers and citizen groups with minimal technical Buffer Strips Local approaches at the watershed level can assistance and training. These protocols be used to identify and protect wetlands, should provide instructions for: a) identifying Develop or expand programs that cost-share stream, and riparian habitats in advance of stable stream reference sites; b) locating unsta- or offer tax rebates for the voluntary restora- permit applications. This approach should ble stream channels in need of restoration; tion or protection of buffer strips on perennial include: and c) setting priorities for stream corridors streams, rivers, and lakes. and floodplains in need of protection. a) Assess wetland and stream functions 200 Potential key LCBP partners: USDA-NRCS, USDA-FSA, and values, current conditions, and sensitivity Upland (land-based) USFWS, USFS, NYSDEC,VTDEC,VTFWD, QC MAPAQ, QC to change. 150 MENV, LCRC, municipalities, NY counties, conservation dis- Wetland tricts, watershed associations b) Use results of natural heritage and biological Cost estimate: $50,000 for training program; $100,000 to surveys of the Basin to determine important 100 Acres develop regional database and unique wetlands, stream segments, and Potential funding sources: Federal and state riparian habitats, including those that provide 50 appropriations vital habitats for rare, threatened, and endan- Timeframe: Ongoing gered species; birds, reptiles, amphibians, and Benchmark: Development of a stream geomorphic hand- invertebrate species (such as mussels); and '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 book, based on regional hydrologic geomorphic data; Basin- Year wide shared database for river restoration practitioners; reg- significant natural communities. Complete ularly scheduled training on stream morphology assessment surveys as necessary. Figure 6. Upland and wetland habitat restoration in the Lake techniques to agency personnel, watershed organizations, Champlain Basin through the USFWS Partners for Fish and and other parties Wildlife Program, 1991-2000. Source US Fish & Wildlife.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 49 Protecting and Restoring Wetlands, Streams, and Riparian Habitats

c) Assess the impacts of cumulative wetland, Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC and VTANR ACCOMPLISHMENTS stream, and riparian habitat gains/losses in Cost estimate: In-kind services of state agencies the watershed. Potential funding sources: Federal and state ACQUIRING WETLANDS appropriations d) Assist communities with local planning, Timeframe: Ongoing The LCBP sponsored a wetland acquisi- model wetland protection ordinances, and Benchmark: A task force report identifying draft state tion strategy that laid the groundwork local zoning regulations for protecting wet- legislation to alleviate tax burden for landowners for a four-phase, multiyear program to lands and other critical habitats. permanently protect almost 9,000 acres 8) Increase Funds and Technical of wetlands in the Champlain Valley. e) Provide funding for implementation projects Resources for Local Governments The Nature Conservancy is the lead by watershed organizations. to Implement BMPs for New agency for the project.To date, the North Development Which Will Protect American Waterfowl Conservation Act, Potential key LCBP partners: Federal, state, provincial, administered by the US Fish and Wildlife and local agencies, as well as nonprofit watershed Wetlands, Stream Corridors, and Service, has provided $1.4 million to the organizations Riparian Habitat project, which has conserved 4,000 acres Cost estimate: $50,000 to $100,000 per year Potential funding sources: USEPA,VTDEC, NYSDEC, of wetlands and surrounding areas in Encourage local governments to: close cooperation with local communities federal appropriations, in-kind services in New York and Vermont. Timeframe: 3 to 5 year demonstration projects Benchmark: Development of watershed level geomorphic a) Improve stormwater management through assessment handbook (see Action #5 above); completion of local zoning and subdivision regulation, and ESTABLISHING ECOLOGICAL PRESERVES one local watershed plan per year appropriate use of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and In Québec, volunteers have worked with State Pollution Discharge Elimination System the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and PRIORITY ACTIONS (SPDES) including EPA Phase II stormwater Food to restore streambanks along the (not listed in priority order) regulations. Pike River. The first phase of the Pike River Ecological Preserve was also initiated, 7) Develop Incentives for Local b) Emphasize erosion hazards, floodplain and included working with local land- functions, sedimentation controls, habitat owners to protect more than 311 acres Municipalities and Private protection, and use of natural vegetation as (126 hectares) of wetlands in the delta Landowners to Restore, Enhance, requirements in local zoning and subdivision of the Pike River in Missisquoi Bay. and Maintain Wetlands and regulations. c) Apply infiltration and other BMPs in new RESTORING STREAM HABITAT Stream Corridors developments. Tax incentives are another way to encourage In New York, a major stream restoration d) Apply surface water setbacks and buffer effort is being conducted on the AuSable private wetlands and stream protection and strips in new developments. River under funding through the State restoration efforts. Under this option, a task Clean Water/Clean Air Bond Act. force would be established to develop legisla- e) Employ appropriate growth management tion to alleviate part of the tax burden for options. continued on page 51 landowners who practice habitat conservation.

Page 50 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Protecting and Restoring Wetlands, Streams, and Riparian Habitats f) Assess cumulative impacts of new development. Elements could include: ACCOMPLISHMENTS g) Promote innovative site design that reduces a) Convene various groups with expertise to creation of impervious surfaces. summarize the best management practices continued from page 50 and shoreland protection and restoration h) Promote road maintenance standards for tools available. Under the Bond Act, $15 million has sediment control and initiate training programs been dedicated to implementation of for town highway departments to minimize b) Publicize and distribute guidelines for the Lake Champlain management plan, impacts of road maintenance activities on communities, organizations, and individual with a portion of the funding allocated water quality, streambank stability, and landowners on how, when, and where to use to habitat restoration efforts. A segment native wetland species. different methods and techniques. of the AuSable River in Keene was selected for habitat restoration funds.The project Potential key LCBP partners: Municipal governments, c) Make available model shoreland manage- is in the planning phase with assessment NYSDEC,VTDEC, regional planning commissions, county ment plans that can be used by private of stream morphology and design of planning offices, private developers landowners, municipalities, and state agencies restoration techniques. Cost estimate: In-kind participation of agency for individual properties. representatives ASSESSING STREAM STABILITY Potential funding sources: Federal and state appropriations, in-kind services from state and local government d) Encourage the formation of watershed Timeframe: Ongoing associations. With multiple federal, state, and local Benchmark: Improved implementation of BMPs at the partners, the LCBP supported a stream local level e) Support the development of volunteer programs stability assessment and demonstration for shoreland restoration. project on the Trout River, an area severely 9) Encourage Cooperative affected by a 500-year flood in 1997.The f) In Québec, continue to support Coopérative project and subsequent follow-up work Development of Local Shoreland used natural channel design techniques Restoration and Protection Tools de Solidarité du bassin versant de la rivière aux Brochets, a group of volunteers with the to reduce future habitat loss, erosion, and Ministère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de flooding downstream. Similar projects have also begun in other parts of the Encourage continued coordination among l'Alimentation du Québec (MAPAQ) to restore Basin, including portions of Lewis Creek government, academic, and private institutions streambanks of the Pike River Watershed. to develop and publicize shoreland restoration and the Boquet River. and protection methods that can be adapted Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC,VTDEC, LCRC, to the local level. A number of the activities Soil & Water Conservation Districts, USACOE, QC MAPAQ, listed here are currently underway (e.g., with- Coopérative de Solidarité du Bassin Versant de la Rivière in the VT Department of Environmental aux Brochets, LCRC, local governments and planning Conservation Water Quality Division). This boards, universities action is to support the continuation and Cost estimate: $120,000 per year for staff support and printing manuals expansion of these activities in both Vermont Potential funding sources: USEPA, USACOE, and New York. state appropriations Timeframe: 2001-03 Benchmark: Provision of technical assistance to shoreland communities, watershed associations, and landowners in shoreland protection Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 51 Protecting and Restoring Wetlands, Streams, and Riparian Habitats 10) Assess the Contribution of 11) Develop Sediment and Temp- Potential key LCBP partners: VTDEC, NYSDEC, USEPA, NRCS, watershed organizations Sediment Transport from Stream- erature TMDL Implementation Cost estimate: $100,000 each for demonstration projects bank Erosion and Shoreline Strategies for Rivers That Contribute in New York and Vermont Potential funding source: Federal and state Construction Activities to the Major Sediment Loading to Lake appropriations Phosphorus Loads Entering Champlain or Which Have Been Time frame: Ongoing Lake Champlain Identified on the States’ Lists of Benchmark: Completion of temperature and sediment Impaired Waters Due to Water TMDLs where required in the Lake Champlain Basin Shoreline erosion and sediment transport add Temperature Problems phosphorus to Lake Champlain. However, cur- 12) Assess Potential Impacts of Dam rent research is inconclusive regarding how Operation and Removal on Stream A number of tributaries entering Lake Cham- much of this phosphorus contribution effects plain are impaired due to sediment and/or and Wetland Structure and Functions water quality. Much of the nutrient load reach- temperature levels. The VTDEC has initiated ing the Lake may be bound to sediment parti- identification of a Total Maximum Daily Load Operation of hydropower and other dams can cles and may not be available within the food (TMDL) to reduce water temperature in the have major impacts on habitat and fish survival chain. Additional research will help us better Poultney River. The VTDEC and NYSDEC need and migration to upstream habitats if they do understand how sediment adds to phosphorus to collect data, assess alternatives, and initiate not adequately take into account how water loads to the Lake, how much of this phosphorus mitigation strategies for other tributaries withdrawal and release impacts stream condi- contributes to algae growth, and how nutrients impaired by sedimentation or other negative tions. Removal of old dams can also create are dispersed by wave and water movement impacts. Elements of this action include: negative impacts by releasing large amounts within and between lake segments. of sediments that have collected behind the a) Develop an improved means of measuring dam over many years. These sediments may Potential key LCBP partners: VTDEC, NYSDEC, USEPA, contain contaminants. Carefully assessing how QC MENV, research community and predicting bank erosion and related sedi- human-made impoundments impact the natural Cost estimate: $80,000 to $150,000 for initial research on ment loading of streams in the Basin. sediment transport processes and functions of streams and rivers Potential funding sources: Federal and state b) Develop a strategy for protection of riparian and ensuring that the natural system is res- appropriations habitat integrity that considers current stream tored as soon as impoundments are removed Timeframe: Ongoing conditions, and that recognizes likely future are important. Benchmark: Improved phosphorus modeling capabilities responses to modifications of the character of and targeting of priority streambank stabilization and the floodplain or stream channel. Potential key LCBP partners: VTDEC, NYSDEC, USFWS, shoreline erosion control projects USACOE Cost estimate: $50,000 per year in each state c) Complete the development of TMDL documents Potential funding sources: Federal and state concerning sediment loads and/or temperature appropriations problems in the Basin. Timeframe: Ongoing Benchmark: Completion of Basin-wide assessment of d) Support the implementation of sediment and power generation and dam removal, and removal of dams temperature TMDLs with demonstration proj- where feasible ects where appropriate.

Page 52 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 MANAGING NONNATIVE AQUATIC NUISANCE PLANTS AND ANIMALS

Control the introduction, spread, and impact of nonnative aquatic nuisance species in order to preserve the integrity of the Lake

GOAL Champlain ecosystem.

At least 22 nonnative aquatic nuisance species are known to have been introduced and dispersed into waters of the Lake Champlain Basin. Nonnative aquatic nuisance species that become estab-

Sea Grant lished in the Basin can pose serious threats to indigenous fish and wildlife populations and impede recreational activities. In some cases, they have substantial ecological and economic impacts. These “nuisance” species typically enter Lake Champlain through interconnected waterways, such as the Champlain Canal and Richelieu River, and overland through human activities, such as boating and bait transport. The interconnected waterways involved transcend the authority of any single state or jurisdiction, necessitating coordination among the different management agencies. Examples of nonnative aquatic nuisance species include zebra mussels, Eurasian watermilfoil, water chestnut, alewives, and sea lamprey. Gizzard shad and white perch are also examples of recent nonnative fish introductions to the Basin that could become nuisances.

plan is an important companion document to ISSUES Opportunities for Action, as priority actions in Since they were first discovered in Lake Champlain in both documents are closely aligned. 1993, zebra mussels have spread throughout nearly Implementing a Comprehensive all of the Lake. Management Program The Aquatic Nuisance Species Management Plan calls for technical and financial assistance to local groups working in partnership with The Lake Champlain Basin Aquatic Nuisance regional, state, provincial, and federal resource Species Management Plan was approved by management agencies, as well as strong public the Aquatic Nuisance Species National Task involvement. Elements of this program include Force in May, 2000. The plan identifies priority selecting target nonnative aquatic nuisance actions to be implemented within its first two species in the Basin or with the potential to years. Ongoing implementation of the nonna- enter it, filling information gaps, evaluating tive aquatic nuisance species plan should reduce management alternatives, and implementing and slow the introduction and spread of nonna- controls. tive aquatic nuisance species to the Basin. This

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 53 Managing Nonnative Aquatic Nuisance Plants and Animals Improving the Information Base sound basis for management decisions. Sea lamprey are primitive parasitic fish that feed Management of nonnative aquatic nuisance on the body fluids of other fish, resulting in species is complicated by limited knowledge reduced growth and even death of the host concerning the presence and extent of many fish. Although the status of the sea lamprey of these species within the Basin and the as a marine invader is the subject of some impact that introduced species have on indige- scientific debate, a substantial body of evidence nous species, habitats, and the food web. collected on Lake Champlain indicates sea Adequate information, based on surveys and lamprey have a profound negative impact monitoring programs, is essential to forming upon the fish populations. Their presence has effective management strategies for nonnative thwarted efforts to establish and restore new aquatic nuisance species. and historical sport fisheries. In 1990, the Evaluating technologies that USFWS, NYSDEC, and VTFWD—which together form the Lake Champlain Fish and Wildlife

USFWS exclude or eliminate these species and coordinating with research Management Cooperative (LCFWMC)—initiated and management efforts in areas an eight-year experimental sea lamprey con- outside the Basin are also impor- trol program. It included monitoring and tant in implementing the Aquatic assessing of the effects of sea lamprey reduc- Nuisance Species Management tion on certain fish populations, the sport fish- Plan. A central nonnative aquatic ery, and the regional economy. The LCFWMC nuisance species database is developed a long-term sea lamprey control essential to these pursuits. The program. The new program widens the scope LCBP maintains a current list of of sea lamprey management to include addi- known aquatic nuisance species tional infested tributaries and additional man- found in the Basin on its website. agement techniques to strengthen the biologi- This information has been com- cal and economic benefits of sea lamprey piled with input from the VTDEC, reduction. NYSDEC, and Québec Ministry of Sea lamprey attacks on the Lake’s sport fish have limited Environment. The Adirondack Zebra mussels obstruct residential, municipal, the fishery and impaired recreational and associated Park Agency’s Invasive Aquatic Plant and industrial intake pipes; foul boat hulls and economic opportunities. Monitoring Program, which includes plant engines; colonize recreational beaches and inventories and related data for the lake bottoms; obscure underwater and archeo- Adirondack Park, is one of several nuisance logical artifacts; and damage native mussel plant monitoring projects in the Basin. populations. Since their arrival in the Great Lakes in 1988, the combined impacts of zebra Evaluating and Demonstrating New mussels have resulted in millions of dollars of damage and lost revenues. Zebra mussels may and Existing Control Technologies also have long-term effects on the aquatic food web by disrupting the food base of fish, Understanding the effectiveness, cost, and sec- fish-eating birds, and mammals. Zebra mussel ondary impacts of control strategies provides a

Page 54 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Managing Nonnative Aquatic Nuisance Plants and Animals densities have increased dramatically since Like Eurasian watermilfoil, water chestnut dis- their discovery in Lake Champlain in 1993. places other aquatic plant species, is of little Zebra mussel studies have yet to yield effective food value to wildlife, and forms dense vege- strategies for controlling zebra mussel popula- tative mats that change habitat and interfere tions within waterbodies. Management actions with recreational activities. The VTDEC con- have focused on controlling the mussels' ducts regular surveys in Lake Champlain, and attachment to surfaces and water intake pipes established populations have been found as and on preventing further spread. Additional effort is needed in each of these areas, particularly in educating people about zebra mussel OBJECTIVES issues. The impacts of zebra mussel infestations on the ecosystem are also not well understood. (not listed in priority order)

Eurasian watermilfoil, first discovered in the 1) Document the extent of infesta- Basin in 1962, now occupies an extensive tion for nonnative aquatic nuisance NYSDEC range throughout the Lake and at least 40 species in the Lake Champlain other waterbodies in the Basin. Detailed Basin. watermilfoil surveys have been conducted for many Lake Champlain bays and other lakes, 2) Prevent the introduction and the but many areas have little or no study regard- spread of nonnative aquatic nui- ing the presence and extent of infestation. sance species and control, where New infestations of Eurasian watermilfoil are possible, nonnative aquatic nui- discovered nearly every year. Because sance species that currently or Eurasian watermilfoil is spread by plant frag- potentially may damage to the social or biological benefits of the ments transported by waves, wind, currents, Lake Champlain Basin. people, and to some extent, animals, its spread is not easily controlled. Water clarity 3) Manage nonnative aquatic nui- improvements resulting from the spread of sance species using current and zebra mussels may have improved growing new technologies. In 2000, a new mechanical water chestnut harvester, conditions for Eurasian watermilfoil, especially jointly funded by the NYSDEC and NYSCC, began operating in the South Lake. in the southern Lake, and may contribute to 4) Through education and signage, increase the plants’ rapid growth and spread. Controls public understanding of, and involvement in, include mechanical harvesting, diver-operated spread prevention and control of nonnative suction harvesting, hydro-raking, installation of aquatic nuisance species. bottom barriers, lake level drawdown, frag- ment barriers, biological controls, and handpulling. An experimental program to control far north in the Lake as Charlotte, Vermont; Eurasian watermilfoil with the chemical Sonar watermilfoil has also been found in a few was conducted in the Lake Champlain Basin other lakes in the Basin. The most extensive on Burr Pond and Lake Hortonia in 2000. infestations are limited to southern Lake Results are currently being evaluated.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 55 Managing Nonnative Aquatic Nuisance Plants and Animals

Champlain. In 1998, a population was dis- this species lakewide and to reduce existing pop- covered in the South River, a tributary of the HIGHEST PRIORITY ulations through mechanical controls and hand- Richelieu River in Québec. In 1999, small pulling in Lake Champlain and other waters of amounts of water chestnut were discovered ACTIONS the Basin (see Figure 8). Because water chestnut in the Richelieu River, and in 2001, in the populations pose challenges in New York and Pike River, which flows into Missisquoi Bay. Implement the Lake Champlain Basin Aquatic Québec as well as Vermont, effective manage- Despite a lakewide spread prevention and Nuisance Species Management Plan, including ment, coordination, and consistent funding are control program of surveying, mechanical the following: keys to long-term results. harvesting, and handpulling of water chestnut 1) Prevent the Spread and Control Potential key LCBP partners: VTDEC, NYSDEC, QC since 1982 on Lake Champlain, budget con- MENV,TNC, QC SFP,USFWS, LCRC, USACOE, academic institu- straints in the 1990s impaired the effective the Population of Water Chestnut tions, NYS Canal Corporation, volunteers management of the plant (see Figure 8). The Within Lake Champlain and Cost estimate: $700,000 per year South Lake infestation severely restricts boat Potential funding source: State and federal appropria- navigation and other recreational use. Water Elsewhere in the Basin tion, private foundations chestnut continues to spread in the Basin. Time frame: Ongoing Since 1991, the LCBP has allocated funds to sup- Benchmark: Decrease water chestnut in the Lake and Biological controls can provide a cost-effec- port the water chestnut management program reduce their spread from the south or the north, conduct tive, environmentally safe means of managing coordinated by VTDEC to prevent the spread of demonstration projects, and control water chestnut in some invasive species. However, use of bio- Québec before it spreads into northern Lake Champlain logical control agents requires a systematic review and understanding of the complexities 60 miles of this management tool, its reliability and $500,000 predictability, and any undesirable conse- water chestnut Fields Bay 50 miles seed (Ferrisburg, VT) quences. Use of biological controls creates the $400,000 potential to introduce nonnative aquatic Crown Point species that may become invasive or create 40 miles Bridge other problems. Once introduced, these agents $300,000 may not be easily removed or controlled. 30 miles While promising, widespread use of biological control agents poses unique challenges to the $200,000 ecosystem-based approach in place in the Lake 20 miles Larabees Pt. East Creek Champlain Basin. Each potential biological con- (Shoreham, VT) Benson, VT (Orwell, VT) trol agent should be thoroughly evaluated 10 miles $100,000 before a control program is implemented. The VTDEC has conducted experimental research $0 on Eurasian watermilfoil control in some '82 '84 '86 '88 '90 '92 '94 '96 '98 '00 Vermont lakes in the Basin using a native aquat- $ Spent Per Year Miles North from Whitehall, NY ic weevil. The LCBP is funding research cur- on Management rently underway to assess the effectiveness of Note: In 2000-2001, the NYSDEC and NYSCC spent an additional $219,126 to remove water chestnuts in the a native aquatic moth for watermilfoil control. Whitehall, NY vicinity to improve recreational access.

Figure 8. Lake Champlain water chestnut management: annual funding and northernmost mechanical harvesting site. Data source:VTDEC.

Page 56 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Managing Nonnative Aquatic Nuisance Plants and Animals

2) Support Implementation of Potential key LCBP partners: USFWS, NYSDEC,VTANR, a) Assess the potential control strategies identi- a Long-term Sea Lamprey SFP,LCFWMC, QC MENV, LCRC, academic institutions,TNC fied by the VTFWD and their applicability to Cost estimate: $633,000 per year Lake St. Catherine. Implement appropriate Control Program Potential funding sources: State and federal strategies in as timely manner as possible. appropriations This action supports aggressive implementa- Timeframe: Ongoing b) Evaluate the ecosystem impacts of a potential tion of a long-term control program that inte- Benchmark: Implementation of long-term control alewife infestation in Lake Champlain. grates adaptive management techniques and program beginning in 2002 encourages multiple control strategies, includ- c) Identify potential management strategies ing lampricides in appropriate locations. Sea 3) Prevent the Spread of Alewives that could be considered if alewives spread lamprey management is a tool to protect and throughout Lake Champlain. enhance the Lake Champlain ecosystem while Within and Beyond the Lake providing public benefit through the reestab- Champlain Basin d) Assess the potential economic impacts on lishment of native fish populations. Decreasing recreation of an alewife infestation in Lake the deleterious effects of sea lamprey is a criti- Alewives were discovered in 1997 in Lake Champlain. cally important part of the natural resources St. Catherine, which is connected to Lake conservation management effort to improve Champlain by 30 miles of outlet flow and e) Design and implement educational and out- the form, function, and structure of the Lake canal. This aquatic nuisance species poses reach activities to curtail the spread of alewives Champlain ecosystem. Successful efforts to a serious threat to other fish species in Lake within and beyond the Lake Champlain Basin. reduce sea lamprey populations in the Lake Champlain. The VT Fish and Wildlife were implemented in an eight-year experimen- Department has reviewed several potential Potential key LCBP partners: VTFWD, USFWS,VTDEC, tal control program initiated by the bistate Lake control strategies and is evaluating their appli- LCFWMC, LCRC, academic institutions, USACOE, Sea Grant, Champlain Fish and Wildlife Management cability to Lake St. Catherine. Educational out- USEPA, QC MAPAQ, QC FAPAQ, local groups (i.e. lake/fishing groups) and marinas Cooperative (LCFWMC) in 1990. In 2001, the reach is needed to prevent the accidental Cost estimate: To be determined LCFWMC released a Supplemental Environ- and/or intentional overland spread of alewives Potential funding sources: State and federal mental Impact Statement (SEIS) in accord with to other waterbodies in the Basin, including appropriations the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Lake Champlain. If alewife populations Timeframe: Immediate The NEPA Record of Decision supported the become established in Lake Champlain, it Benchmark: Curtail the spread of alewives to the preferred alternative of implementing an exten- will be important to assess their potential extent possible sive integrated long-term sea lamprey control impacts on ecosystem health and recreation. program. The SEIS evaluated the feasibility of Elements of this action include: 4) Prevent the Spread of Zebra lampricides, barrier dams, trapping, phere- Mussels to Other Basin Lakes mone attractants, and other control strategies. To date, the LCBP has funded the installation While research and technologies to control of two barrier dams on Lake Champlain tribu- and/or eradicate zebra mussels are continuously taries, and the implementation of state-of-the- under development, preventing their spread to art sea lamprey assessment methodology and other lakes in the Basin is also critically impor- analysis of control alternatives for the Poultney tant. Since their discovery in 1993, zebra mus- and Pike Rivers. Opportunities to evaluate sels have rapidly colonized the entire Lake Alewife and demonstrate new and existing control (Figure 9) and spread to other waterbodies. technologies will also be developed.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 57 Managing Nonnative Aquatic Nuisance Plants and Animals

Potential Key LCBP partners: VTFWD, USFWS,VTANR, to the Lake Champlain Basin, including emerg- ACCOMPLISHMENTS NYSDEC, LCRC, academic institutions, USACOE, Sea Grant, ing control strategies. Establish and maintain USEPA, local groups communication with experts and citizen groups Cost estimate: $50,000 per year in other locations. COMPLETING ANS MANAGEMENT PLAN Potential funding sources: State and federal appropriations Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC,VTANR, The highest priority for aquatic nuisance Timeframe: Immediate QC MENV, USFWS, LCRC, academic institutions, Sea Grant, USGS Benchmark: Reduce rate of spread of zebra mussels to species (ANS) prevention and control in $60,000 per year other waterbodies Cost estimate: 1996 was development of a Basin-wide Potential funding sources: State and federal aquatic nuisance species management 5) Update the Lake Champlain Basin appropriations plan for VT, NY,and Québec.With financial Aquatic Nuisance Species Manage - Timeframe: ongoing and technical support from LCBP,the Lake ment Plan Regularly Benchmark: Creation of an up-to-date database at a Champlain Basin Program ANS Manage- central location ment Plan was adopted in 2000.This plan This plan, cooperatively developed by part- has made Vermont eligible for USFWS ners from Vermont, New York, and Québec, PRIORITY ACTIONS funds to implement it. So far, $205,000 was approved by the Lake Champlain Steering (not listed in priority order) has been received. Committee in 2000. It needs to be periodically revised to remain current and to reflect chang- 7) Investigate the Ecological REDUCING WATER CHESTNUTS ing priorities. Implications of Nonnative Aquatic Nuisance Species in the Basin Five years of consistent funding from Potential Key LCBP partners: VTFWD, USFWS,VTANR, NYSDEC, LCRC, academic institutions, USACOE, Sea Grant, multiple sources have reduced the extent USEPA, local groups Conduct research regarding the ecological role of the Lake's dense water chestnut popu- Cost estimate: $60,000 per year of nonnative aquatic nuisance species, including lation by 40 miles from Fields Bay to Potential funding sources: State and federal sea lamprey and zebra mussels, to understand Benson,VT. Only handpulling controls are appropriations ecosystem links with a focus on developing Timeframe: Ongoing and employing effective control strategies. now needed north of Benson, instead of Benchmark: Biennial plan revisions mechanical harvesting. Average annual Assess the potential ecological consequences and impacts of nonnative aquatic nuisance funding of more than $475,000 came IGH RIORITY CTION species on native plants and animals, and recre- from the states of Vermont and New York, H P A ation and cultural heritage resources. Specifically Québec, LCBP,US Army Corps of assess the potential effects of the proliferation Engineers, and The Nature Conservancy. 6) Create a Central Database for of zebra mussels on the Lake Champlain food Nonnative Aquatic Nuisance Species web, nutrient levels, and water clarity. CONTROLLING SEA LAMPREY and Establish a Process for Potential key LCBP players: NYSDEC,VTANR, USFWS, Coordination and Data Sharing LCRC, academic institutions, Sea Grant In 2001, the Lake Champlain Fish and Cost estimate: $125,000 to $250,000 per year Wildlife Management Cooperative Potential funding sources: State and federal Create a central repository of information on appropriations continued on page 59 nonnative aquatic nuisance species of concern Timeframe: Ongoing

Page 58 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Managing Nonnative Aquatic Nuisance Plants and Animals

Benchmark: Increase knowledge of ecological role and innovative control techniques for aquatic nuisance species ACCOMPLISHMENTS

8) Evaluate and Demonstrate Zebra continued from page 58 Mussel Control Strategies completed an assessment of long-term sea lamprey control strategies.This pro- Investigate the economic and environmental costs and benefits of existing zebra mussel gram identifies a comprehensive, inte- anti-fouling and other population control grated approach to sea lamprey control strategies, and new technologies as they and provides for cooperative federal- become available. state management to reduce the impact of sea lamprey parasitism on fisheries. Potential key LCBP partners: USFWS, NYSDEC,VTANR, QC MENV, LCRC, academic institutions, Sea Grant, lake XPLORING IOLOGICAL OLUTIONS No Zebra Mussels groups, marinas, water supply and wastewater treatment E B S Reported facilities Cost estimate: $100,000 per year Veligers Present Since 1999, the LCBP has funded research (microscopic young) Potential funding sources: State and federal Lake appropriations on biological controls for nonnative Adults and/or Settled Champlain Timeframe: Ongoing aquatic nuisance species as an alternative Juveniles Present Benchmark: Implementation of control projects to chemical treatment. For three years, research has been conducted in NY on 9) Evaluate and Demonstrate a moth larva that eats watermilfoil. Eurasian Watermilfoil Control Strategies

Continue to implement Eurasian watermilfoil control techniques, such as use of the natural- Cornell University ized aquatic moth, Acentria ephemerella, and the native aquatic weevil, Euhrychiopsis Lake Bomoseen lecontei. Investigate new Eurasian watermilfoil population control technologies as they become available. Include Eurasian watermilfoil in lakewide surveys for nonnative aquatic Lake George nuisance species. (only found near village and removed in 2001) The Lincoln Pond watermilfoil project in DATA SOURCE: VTDEC Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC, USFWS,VTANR, Elizabethtown, NY evaluated the ability of moth LCRC, academic institutions, lake groups, Sea Grant larva to reduce watermilfoil biomass and enhance Figure 9. Zebra mussel distribution in the Lake Champlain Cost estimate: $175,000 per year native plant diversity. Basin. Potential funding sources: State and federal appropriations

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 59 Managing Nonnative Aquatic Nuisance Plants and Animals

Timeframe: Ongoing chase, cultivation, distribution, and introduc- Benchmark: Discovery of new feasible control methods tion of nonnative aquatic nuisance species.

10) Evaluate the Effectiveness of b) Review and improve consistency of existing nonnative aquatic nuisance species laws Biological Controls for Nonnative among the applicable jurisdictions in the Basin. Aquatic Nuisance Species c) Encourage voluntary boat and trailer wash- Investigate biological control agents, ing, and cleaning of vegetative debris by hand, auser

H such as leaf-eating insects, aquatic wee- to reduce transport of nonnative aquatic nui- vils, beetles, and moths. Because biologi- sance species to and from boat launch areas. Mike cal control agents may have unanticipat- ed negative effects on native species, d) Encourage enforcement of existing laws their use must be carefully evaluated regarding the transportation or spread of prior to introduction, and introductions nonnative aquatic nuisance species. should only be permitted following a Potential key LCBP partners: USFWS, NYSDEC,VTANR, clear determination of net benefit. SFP,local government, NYSDOT,VTrans,VTDAFM, NY State Police,VT State Police, lake groups, local law enforcement Potential key LCBP partners: USFWS, NYSDEC, officials, QC MENV, sporting groups VTANR, QC MENV, LCFWMC, LCRC, USEPA, academic Cost estimate: In-kind participation institutions Potential funding sources: Same as potential key partners Cost estimate: $50,000 per year Timeframe: Ongoing Potential funding sources: State and federal Zebra mussels compete with the native mussels in Lake appropriations Benchmark: Reduction in the number and spread of Champlain for food.They also encrust native mussel Timeframe: Ongoing nonnative aquatic nuisance species in the Basin shells, resulting in their demise. Benchmark: Completion of demonstration projects and slowing the spread of nonnative aquatic nuisance species 12) Evaluate and Demonstrate Exclusion Devices for Nonnative OTHER ACTIONS FOR Aquatic Nuisance Species

CONSIDERATION Investigate the broad applicability of electronic (not listed in priority order) and other control alternatives, such as exclusion devices, for nonnative aquatic nuisance 11) Encourage Voluntary Efforts species in the Lake Champlain Basin. and Enforcement of Existing Laws Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC, USFWS,VTANR, to Control the Transport of Non- LCRC, academic institutions, USACOE native Aquatic Nuisance Species Cost estimate: $150,000 per year Potential funding sources: State and federal appropriations a) Coordinate new legislation controlling the Timeframe: Ongoing propagation, sale, collection, importation, pur- Benchmark: Development and demonstration of the effectiveness of exclusion techniques

Page 60 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 CHAPTER FOUR RECREATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES

he history of humans in the Lake Champ- THIS CHAPTER INCLUDES: lain Basin spans more than 10,000 years. Managing Recreation Resources It includes Native American and early Euro- American settlements, French and British Protecting Cultural Heritage Resources T explorations and occupations, pivotal military conflicts,and a dynamic period of 19th century commerce. Many archaeological and historic sites provide a context and sense of place to people today. Although strong stewardship exists, public awareness MANAGING RECREATION RESOURCES and understanding of cultural heritage resources is often limited.The Basin also provides many recreational and tourism opportunities, such as swimming, boating, Manage Lake Champlain, its shorelines, and its tributaries for a diversity skiing, hiking, birding, and fishing. Unfortunately, in some areas recreational activity has created conges- of recreational uses while protecting its natural and cultural resources. tion, conflicts between different types of users, and

safety concerns. GOAL

Les ressources récréatives et culturelles L'histoire de la présence humaine au lac Champlain Lake Champlain is a popular resource for Basin residents and visitors alike. Swimming, fishing, remonte à plus de 10 000 ans. Elle s'étend de la venue scuba diving, and boating are just a few of the activities enjoyed on the Lake. Popular shoreline des Amérindiens puis des Européens, à l'exploration et activities include bicycling, hiking, sightseeing, and bird watching. Recreation also contributes to à l'occupation par les Français et les Britanniques, aux the local economy. Total tourism-related expenditures in the Basin were estimated at $3.8 billion nombreux conflits militaires, au commerce florissant du XIXe siècle. Les nombreux sites archéologiques et in 1998-99. Lake Champlain recreationists affect, and are affected by, the state of the natural, cul- historiques donnent à la population actuelle du tural, and historic resources in the Lake Champlain Basin. Protection and enhancement of the bassin un contexte stimulant son sentiment d'apparte- environment and cultural and historic resources is clearly important to recreationists—as these nance. Bien qu'il existe de nombreux organismes s'oc- resources are often the main focus of their experience. Fostering more opportunities to access cupant du patrimoine culturel, il reste encore des and enjoy the Lake will encourage more people to value it and support water quality protection, efforts à fournir afin d'aviser le public sur l'existence ultimately increasing the number of people engaged in Lake stewardship. de ces ressources culturelles et de toute la valeur que représente cet héritage.

Le bassin du lac Champlain rend également possible la pratique d'activités récréatives et touristiques comme la baignade, la voile, le ski, la marche, l'ornithologie et la pêche sportive. Malheureusement, les activités récréatives ont entraîné des conflits entre différents usages et, suscité par endroits, des craintes liées à la sécurité des usagers.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 61 Managing Recreation Resources

made notable progress in promoting low- ISSUES impact tourism in the Basin.

Promoting Economically and The Waterfront Revitalization Program in New Ecologically Sustainable Tourism York has focused on enhancing water-related tourism, improving lake access, and strength- The overall management issue in addressing ening community centers along Lake tourism in the Lake Champlain Basin is to Champlain and Lake George. Local plans for support initiatives that promote ecologically parks, improvements, preservation, and reuse sustainable economic activity utilizing natural, of historic buildings, public access enhance- cultural, and historical resources in the Basin. ments, museum development, and community In 1999, Lake Champlain Byways produced a revitalization have been developed as part of Corridor Management Plan and a Celebration this program. Champlain! proposal. Celebration Champlain! will celebrate the 400th anniversary of Samuel Continuing and expanding these and similar de Champlain's arrival and the initiatives in a more coordinated manner fos- cultural diversity that characterizes ters stewardship for the Lake and its sur- the Basin today. This multi-year rounding natural, cultural, recreational, and event (2003-2009) will focus on historic resources within the Basin. It also regional scenic byways as the presents tremendous opportunities to enhance means of travel between the vari- the economic vitality of the region. ous venues and events of the Celebration. The Celebration will Expanding or Enhancing Courtesy UVM Special Collections help identify the scenic byways as Public Access key elements of the regional tourism, and contribute to byway “Public access” is defined as those places sustainability. Also, in 1999, the where the general public may enjoy the Lake. National Park Service completed a Public access sites accommodate both water study of the Champlain Valley that and non-water recreational activities and assessed the potential of establish- include: boat launch areas, shoreline parks, ing a national heritage corridor in marinas, beaches, campgrounds, scenic over- Scene on Lake Champlain with the ruins of Fort the region. Currently, the LCBP is looks, fishing piers, and shoreline walking and Ticonderoga. Engraving by Welstood & Kirk from embarking on a follow-up project of this initial bicycling trails. The overall management issue an original drawing by J.Kirk, published in the Ladies study to develop a framework for heritage concerning public access on Lake Champlain Repository, 1851. tourism in the region that is compatible with is how to expand and enhance access oppor- local interests. Other initiatives—the Lake tunities in a manner that allows for a variety Champlain Birding Trail, the Lake Champlain of recreational activities while minimizing con- Paddlers' Trail, Lake Champlain Walkways, the gestion, user conflicts, and impacts to the nat- Lake Champlain Underwater Preserve System, ural environment. In providing better access, and Lake Champlain Bikeways—have also the challenge is to accommodate a diversity of

Page 62 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Managing Recreation Resources users. Many of the problems associated with Improving Safety and Enforcement public access are caused by conflicts between the various user types. Options for addressing Boating safety and related concerns can be such conflicts include designing and organizing addressed by increasing the number of sites to meet a variety of needs, or separating enforcement officers on the Lake. The US and different uses by establishing designated use Canadian Coast Guards, and state and provin- areas. Another challenge is to provide oppor- cial enforcement entities, need adequate tunities for people with low incomes and those resources to ensure public safety and law with disabilities to take advantage of public enforcement in view of increased recreational access facilities.

Alleviating Congestion and OBJECTIVES Conflicts of Use (not listed in priority order) Certain areas of Lake Champlain experience high levels of congestion and conflicts of use. 1) Support initiatives that promote These issues can be addressed through user sustainable recreational activity using natural, cultural, and historical cooperation, education, or a combined

resources in the Basin. Gary Randorf approach on a site-by-site basis, depending on the severity of the problems and the nature of 2) Increase and improve public the conflicts. Rather than attempting to estab- access opportunities to the Lake lish a carrying capacity for the Lake (which for a diversity of water and non- research has shown to be ineffective), commu- water activities. nities develop overall management objectives for areas of concern. In 1995, the LCBP fund- 3) Minimize congestion and conflicts ed a demonstration project that identified solu- of use in high-use areas by develop- tions to the boating congestion and other ing management strategies appropriate to the locale. problems in Malletts Bay. The Malletts Bay Recreation Resources Management Plan 4) Develop a public education and addresses ways to manage the public waters information program that empha- in Malletts Bay, the density of moorings and sizes recreational user ethics, boating marinas, and the allocation of recreational safety, and wise use of resources. Sunset on Lake Champlain. uses to reduce conflicts among the various boaters, swimmers, paddlers, etc., who fre- 5) Increase resources available to enforcement agencies; improve quent the bay area. This plan should serve as coordination among all enforcement entities. a model for addressing similar issues in other parts of the Lake. 6) Identify appropriate locations for shoreline recreational uses that do not adversely impact shoreline environments.

7) Secure funding to achieve recreation management objectives.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 63 Managing Recreation Resources

activity on the Lake. Another need is to b) Continue to encourage the Lake Champlain ACCOMPLISHMENTS increase boating safety education through Paddlers' Trail, Lake Champlain Birding Trail, schools and other means. Finally, improved Lake Champlain Walkways, Lake Champlain DEVELOPING A BIRDING TRAIL coordination among various enforcement Bikeways, and similar ecotourism around Lake entities on the Lake is key to addressing safety. Champlain and the Richelieu River. The Lake Champlain Birding Trail began in 1999 as a project of the George D. Aiken c) Seek development of a fishing license agree- HIGH PRIORITY ACTIONS ment between New York and Vermont. Resource Conservation and Development (not listed in priority order) Council. In 2001, the Birding Trail published d) Continue to develop the Lake Champlain a brochure highlighting 87 bird watching 1) Encourage New Opportunities for Underwater Historic Preserve System. sites in the Basin. Ecologically Sustainable Recreation in the Lake Champlain Basin e) Develop a comprehensive guide to all IMPLEMENTING LAKE CHAMPLAIN types of public access opportunities on Lake Champlain and its tributaries, including BIKEWAYS Recreational opportunities are essential in winter access sites. the development of tourism in the Lake Champlain Basin. Review regional tourist With LCBP support, Lake Champlain f) Use existing tourism information centers promotion efforts for consistency with other Bikeways (LCB) created the Champlain and marketing organizations to coordinate resource management goals of the Plan. Bikeway, a 350-mile loop encircling the and disseminate information on opportunities Promote the Basin as a total package, and Lake, and 27 shorter interpretive theme for year-round use of recreational, natural, improve coordination among tourism organi- cultural, and historic resources of the Lake loops, totaling 1,100 miles. LCB also pub- zations and initiatives in New York, Vermont, Champlain Basin. lished 8 guidebooks on the network of and Québec. Encourage collaboration between routes.Through an LCBP grants program, various organizations, and avoid duplication of g) In coordination with regional planning, LCB implemented 17 bicycle enhance- efforts by developing a specific framework development, and marketing organizations ment projects. In 1999, the Whitehouse from which project work may be accom- consider scenic byway designation for routes Millennium Trails Council designated plished in partnership. Develop and imple- possessing significant scenic, recreational, Lake Champlain Bikeways as Vermont's ment a tourism strategy that promotes tourist and/or historic resources in the region, subject activities that are sustainable over the long Millennium Legacy Trail. to local or county government approval, and term with minimal impact on natural, cultural, encourage actions of the Lake Champlain historic, and archeological resources. Tourism IMPLEMENTING PUBLIC ACCESS GRANTS Byways Corridor Management Plan. activities that are either underway or could be initiated include the following: Since 1997, the LCBP has funded 26 public h) Use existing tourism information centers and regional planning initiatives to expand access projects, totaling $97,500, to a) Develop natural and cultural heritage and create interpretive and educational pro- support local communities in improving interpretative trails, such as the existing Lake grams about natural, cultural, and historic and enhancing public access on Lake Champlain Historic Landings Heritage Trail, resources in the Basin to inform tourists and through wayside exhibits and other informa- Champlain. local users about wise use of these resources. continued on page 65 tive media.

Page 64 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Managing Recreation Resources i) Expand facilities and services along the Lake, 3) Develop New Public Access such as restaurants, lodging, and equipment Opportunities ACCOMPLISHMENTS rentals, in a manner that minimizes impacts on recreational, cultural, and historic resources. continued from page 64 At the state level, New York and Vermont will work cooperatively to develop and maintain Potential key LCBP partners: Tourism and business DEVELOPING LAKE CHAMPLAIN BYWAYS organizations, regional marketing organizations, chambers new public access opportunities along the of commerce, state and county tourism departments, state shores of Lake Champlain, particularly in agencies, local and regional planners, private businesses, underserved areas. This will include: locating Through a FHWA Scenic Byway planning municipalities, Lake Champlain Byways, Adirondack North potential sites (on a willing seller basis) for grant, New York and Vermont agencies Country Association future access (both boating and non-boating); Cost estimate: $150,000 per year per activity and communities developed a Corridor Potential funding sources: Local, state, and federal establishing priority for potential access sites Management Plan for Lake Champlain. appropriations based on results of recreation studies in Completed in 2000, the plan focuses on Ongoing progress and municipal priorities; exploring Time frame: activities to further establish a partner- Benchmark: Development of overall strategies to coordi- options for funding; and considering public- nate various tourism promotional activities private partnerships to secure new access ship approach to unify the Lake as a through cooperative agreements, conservation region. A major outcome of the planning 2) Determine, Monitor, and easements, and land trusts. project is the proposed Celebration Mitigate the Impact of Increased Champlain!, a quatracentennial celebra- Recreational Use in Ecologically Potential key LCBP partners: NYSOPRHP,VTDFPR, tion of the arrival of Samuel de Champ- VTANR Facilities Division, NYSDEC,VTFWD, nonprofit organi- lain in the basin. Planning for Celebration Sensitive Areas zations, municipalities, chambers of commerce, regional marketing organizations, regional planning commissions, Champlain! will serve as the catalyst in county planning departments, businesses implementing the Corridor Management Identify and monitor ecologically sensitive Cost estimate: $50,000 Plan. A component of the Byways effort areas potentially impacted by recreational use, Potential funding sources: Federal, state, and municipal is Lake Champlain Walkways, an initiative and establish a monitoring program and miti- appropriations gation strategy to help avoid these impacts. Timeframe: Ongoing to establish linked walking paths and trails Benchmark: Development of new access sites as recom- around the Lake. Potential key LCBP partners: LCRC,VTFWD,VTDEC, mended by the states of Vermont and New York VTDFPR, NYSDEC, NYSOPRHP,nonprofit organizations, PADDLING LAKE CHAMPLAIN universities Cost estimate: $5,000 to $30,000 per site depending on PRIORITY ACTIONS level of research (not listed in priority order) Managed by the nonprofit Lake Champ- Potential funding sources: Local, state, and federal lain Committee, the Paddlers' Trail began appropriations 4) Pursue Funding Alternatives for in 1993 as a water trail linking camping Timeframe: Ongoing Benchmark: Identification and initial evaluation of Public Access Site Enhancement and access sites for paddlers along the 2-4 sites shores of Lake Champlain.To date, the Improved public access to Lake Champlain Trail consists of 26 public and private would benefit from a dedicated fund to support sites ranging from primitive sites to new access locations and to enhance existing developed campgrounds. access sites. This should be a lakewide boat-

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 65 Managing Recreation Resources ing facilities program fund to be used exclu- 6) Evaluate the Need for Local sively for the enhancement of public access Recreation Management Plans boating sites. in High Use Areas of the Lake Potential key LCBP partners: NYSOPRHP,NYSDEC, VTDFPR,VTFWD, regional marketing organizations, regional In cooperation with local communities, deter- planning commissions, county planning departments mine whether the process used as part of the Cost estimate: In-kind participation of agency representa- Malletts Bay Recreation Management Plan is tives initially; $60,000 to $80,000 per year to administer program likely to be an effective process for alleviating Potential funding source: Dedicated funds to congestion and user conflicts occurring in administer program other high use areas of the Lake. Timeframe: Ongoing Benchmark: The securement of funding mechanisms Potential key LCBP partners: NYSOPRHP,NYSDEC, to maintain and improve existing public access sites VTDFPR,VTFWD, regional marketing organizations, regional planning commissions, county planning departments, municipalities 5) Continue a Grants Cost estimate: In-kind participation from local and state Program for Local agency representatives

Walt Lender Potential funding sources: Same as key partners Governments and Timeframe: Ongoing Nonprofits Organizations Benchmark: Evaluation of the Malletts Bay Recreation Management Plan and implementation and identification of to Develop New Public high-use areas likely to benefit from similar local plans and Access Sites appropriate implementation actions

Continue a grants program to pro- 7) Assist Communities That Wish vide funds to government entities to Develop Local Recreation and nonprofit organizations on a Management Plans competitive basis for the development of new boating and non- Provide assistance to communities or groups boating access opportunities. of communities identified through Action 6, above, that desire to develop management Potential key LCBP partners: NYS A dock installation in Ticonderoga was funded by a LCBP plans similar to that recently developed for Public Access grant. OPRHP,VTDFPR, NYSDEC,VTFWD, regional marketing organizations, regional planning commissions, Malletts Bay. county planning departments, nonprofit organizations, municipalities Potential key LCBP partners: NYSOPRHP,NYSDEC, Cost estimate: $5,000 per year to administer program; VTDFPR,VTFWD, regional marketing organizations, regional $20,000 to $75,000 per year for grants planning commissions, county planning departments, Potential funding sources: State appropriations or municipalities dedicated funds Cost estimate: $15,000 to $50,000 per site, depending on Timeframe: Ongoing the size of the area and complexity of issues to be resolved Benchmark: Ongoing annual grants Potential funding sources: NPS, state appropriations

Page 66 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Managing Recreation Resources Timeframe: Ongoing 9) Encourage Adopt-an-Access Benchmark: Development of local recreation management plans for communities needing and desiring assistance Programs

Encourage Adopt-an-Access programs to help OTHER ACTIONS FOR local citizens groups become directly involved in the enhancement of public access sites on CONSIDERATION Lake Champlain. Local groups would be (not listed in priority order) responsible for guiding access improvements for a given section of the Lake, with overall 8) Use Regional Partnerships to program coordination at the state level. Manage Public Access Improvements Potential key LCBP partners: NYSOPRHP,VTDFPR, NYSDEC,VTFWD, nonprofit organizations, municipalities, Encourage the establishment of regional part- regional marketing organizations, regional planning com- nerships of local, state, and federal govern- missions, county planning departments ments; nonprofit organizations; and private Cost estimate: $20,000 per year ($10,000 enterprises to manage boating and non-boat- per state) to administer program Potential funding sources: State

ing public access improvements. The partner- Kelly Dziekan appropriations, in-kind contributions from ships will establish priorities for improvements nonprofit organizations and volunteers and pursue federal, state, and local funding Timeframe: Ongoing options to accomplish them. Encourage the Benchmark: Establishment of Adopt-an- development of public-private cooperative Access program as described agreements that describe the responsibilities of various parties to improve and maintain 10) Evaluate and access opportunities. Improve Consistency of Regulations and Potential key LCBP partners: NYSOPRHP,VTDFPR, NYDEC,VTFWD, municipalities, land trusts, APA, USFWS, Enforcement VTDEC (Public Facilities Division), regional marketing organizations, regional planning commissions, county planning There are many differences in departments, sporting groups, businesses recreation-related regulations of Cost estimate: In-kind participation of key players; additional costs to be determined on a site by site basis New York, Vermont, and Québec. Marina in Rouses Point, New York. Potential funding sources: NPS, states of NY and VT Improving consistency does not predetermine (e.g.,VT Housing and Conservation Board), USFWS,TEA-21 that regulations and enforcement will be more Program or less stringent than they are presently. Timeframe: 2002-2003 Benchmark: Management agreements and funds to improve priority sites a) Evaluate existing boating and non-boating regulations and measures of enforcement. Establish a committee with broad representation (see potential key partners, below) to evaluate existing federal, state, provincial, and munici-

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 67 Managing Recreation Resources

pal boating and recreational use regulations b) Implement (a) with an emphasis on devising for their ability to impose and enforce safe ways to make regulation and enforcement boating and recreation on Lake Champlain. more consistent across political boundaries by Assess the status, limitations, and consistency establishing interstate/provincial agreements of federal, state, and provincial boating laws for recreation management and law enforcement. and enforcement, and recommend changes necessary to improve the safety and quality Potential key LCBP partners: NYSOPRH, NYSDEC, of recreation on Lake Champlain. VTANR, state, provincial, county and local police departments, US and Canadian Coast Guard, Canadian and US Power Squadrons, boating advisory boards, marine trade associations, state legislatures

LCBP Cost estimate: In-kind participation of agency partners Potential funding sources: Same as key players Timeframe: Ongoing Benchmark: Improved consistency of boating and non- boating regulations and law enforcement.

11) Continue to Evaluate Navigational Charts

In coordination with the US and Canadian Coast Guard and NOAA, encourage continued evaluation and updating of navigational aids and charts, identifying areas where safety has increasingly become an issue.

Potential key LCBP partners: US and Canadian Coast Guard, NOAA, state police, NYSOPRHP,NYSDEC Cost estimate: In-kind participation of agency representatives Potential funding sources: US Coast Guard, NOAA Timeframe: 2002-onward Benchmark: The development of updated navigational Sailboat moored off North Beach, Burlington,VT. aids and charts, as necessary

Page 68 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 PROTECTING CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES

To identify, preserve, enhance, and protect the irreplaceable cultural heritage resources of the Lake Champlain Basin for the public benefit,

GOA L now and for generations to come, and to promote an appreciation of their value as a vital aspect of the economic and community life of the Basin.

The many historic and archeological resources throughout the Lake Champlain Basin tell of a

LCMM human history spanning more than 10,000 years. These cultural heritage resources link us to our past, and include historic structures and settlements, sites of archeological interest on land and underwater, and traditional cultural properties.

The Basin's cultural heritage resources help us learn about our history and give us a sense of place to pass on to our children and communities. The Abenaki and Iroquois who live here today have long called the Basin home, and many Native American sites are of traditional sacred importance. Some Basin residents can trace their heritage to French and British explorers, or to farmers, industrialists, and merchants who settled here. Many military battles were fought on Lake Champ- lain, and the submerged historic shipwrecks comprise one of the largest, best-preserved collections in North America. These resources contribute spiritual, recreational, and educational value to our contemporary life. They help make our communities attractive and memorable places in which to live, work, and play, and they also draw thousands of visitors to the region.

ISSUES Protection of Privately Owned Heritage Resources Public Awareness and Appreciation Private property owners are the primary custo- Public awareness, appreciation, and under- dians of the cultural heritage resources in the In 1998, an anchor was recovered from Lake Champlain standing of the Basin's cultural heritage is Basin. There is sometimes a perception by that had been shot off the British ship Confiance during growing. There is, however, incomplete or landowners that recognition, including desig- the Battle of Plattsburgh, in the the War of 1812. Since cursory documentation as a result of partly nation of their property as a cultural heritage its restoration, it has been displayed at Plattsburgh varying perceptions of what constitutes cul- City Hall. resource, invariably means restriction on its tural heritage resources. Lack of recognition use. However, most federal and state laws and appreciation results in missed opportuni- pertaining to heritage resources have little or ties for stewardship, economic development, no impact on private landowners. It is critically recreation, and education. Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 69 Protecting Cultural Heritage Resources

important that the stewardship role and con- Vermont counties along the Lake. The cerns of private landowners be fully acknowl- Champlain Valley Heritage Corridor Project edged, and that stewardship programs support Report, produced by the National Park Service, the preservation efforts of willing landowners. lists national historic landmarks, buildings, sites, Programs such as Vermont’s Historic Barn and structures on the National Register of Grants, the Federal Investment Tax Credits Historic Places and National Historic Landmarks. Program, and the LCBP Cultural Heritage and Provincial and state historic preservation offices, Recreation Technical Assistance Program regional marketing organizations, and planning should be continued. commissions have maintained inventories of resources to differing degrees over the years. Current Management and Protection: Comprehensive and coordinated historic Government Issues resource inventories need to be developed.

Management of cultural heritage Improving Cultural Resource Data, resources within states, and also Regional Data Management, and across international, state, and Information Access provincial boundaries, lacks coordination. Protection of resources, Many existing cultural heritage resource inven- even on public lands and under tories do not take advantage of current comput- public waters, is far from compre- er technologies, such as geographic information

Courtesy UVM Special Collections hensive. With numerous players systems (GIS), and consequently are not well throughout the Basin, reaching a integrated into local and regional land use or consensus on a system of manage- economic development plans. Because the ment and protection and coordinat- actions in this Plan rely on sound, current data ing its application across all jurisdic- that can be interpreted across the entire Basin, tions and all levels of government immediate action is necessary to make cultural continues to be a challenge. heritage resource data comprehensive and Cultural heritage initiatives should accessible to communities throughout the Basin. be developed in a manner that also Websites on the Internet are a good resource Bird’s eye view of the Burlington waterfront in 1877. addresses environmental concerns. for readily available information. State, provincial, and regional data coordination efforts Coordination of Current Information underway also offer an opportunity for disseminating information better. Inventories of cultural heritage resources in the Basin have been assembled by numerous organizations, but there is need for further coordination of these inventories. The Lake Cham- plain Byways Corridor Management Plan includes a general inventory of cultural, natural, and recreational resources in New York and

Page 70 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Protecting Cultural Heritage Resources Expanding Economic Opportunities ing), and lake access in self-directed trails communities allow riders to enjoy the view of Cultural Heritage Resources through public and private land (with the per- while exploring the history of the area. The mission of willing landowners). These networks Walkways Project of the Lake Champlain can have themes, such as the Revolutionary Byways planning process links hamlets and In addition to enhancing our quality of life, War, the industrial past, or Native American villages by foot. Heritage tourism and public the cultural heritage resources in and around history. Specific components of such networks appreciation of resources are best served by Lake Champlain are integral, yet often unreal- should be developed through local planning locally organized and managed resource pro- ized, components of the regional economic initiatives. The LCBP fact sheets, Historic Sites grams. Ties to related efforts in the Richelieu base. Economic opportunities are linked to the on Lake Champlain and Boating to Lake Valley to the north and the Champlain Canal- continued commercial use of historic buildings, Champlain's State Parks and Historic Villages, Hudson River to the south of the Basin should revitalization of historic downtowns and describe the links among sites in New York, also be developed. village centers, history-based tourism, and Vermont, and Québec. Bicycle theme loops in recreation within historic districts, landscapes, historic sites, museums, and the Lake Champlain Underwater Historic Preserve System. Historic resources have contributed OBJECTIVES greatly to economic development of the Lake Champlain Basin. We should continue sup- (not listed in priority order) porting local efforts to improve and market these cultural heritage resources without com- 1) Increase recognition and appreciation of the cultural heritage resources in the Basin. promising long-term protection. 2) Support initiatives that promote the sustainable use of cultural heritage resources and develop strong economic support for cultural heritage preservation and associated economic initiatives by HIGH PRIORITY ACTIONS expanding awareness of economic opportunities and identifying new financial resources. (not listed in priority order) 3) Protect underwater archeological resources in the Basin, most specifically historic shipwrecks, and 1) Develop and Promote Networks expand public access through the Lake Champlain Underwater Historic Preserve System by providing and Linkages of Heritage Trails and reasonable access to appropriate sites. Programs around the Lake 4) Foster stewardship of cultural heritage resources by private landowners and communities and coordinate a more effective mix of protection strategies (public/private; federal/state/local; Heritage resources are often best understood regulatory/nonregulatory). by the public when viewed as a network of sites and places that provide direct, unobtru- 5) Increase historical and archeological research (where needed) and accelerate the identification, sive, and economical access to historic com- evaluation, and protection of cultural heritage resources, based upon Basin-specific priorities. munities and resources, whether for walkers, cyclists, motorists, or boaters. For example, 6) Better integrate cultural heritage programs with ongoing and future environmental and natural Heritage Trails can link publicly owned natu- resources protection programs being carried out by federal, state, regional, town, and nonprofit efforts. ral, historic, and/or scenic vistas, historic districts, prehistoric and historic sites, museums, 7) Develop coordinated preservation and management plans for cultural heritage resources in cooperation recreational areas, campgrounds, tourist attrac- with governments and organizations at all levels in Vermont, New York, and Québec. tions and services (shops, restaurants, lodg-

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 71 Protecting Cultural Heritage Resources

Potential key LCBP partners: Landowners, businesses, ACCOMPLISHMENTS nonprofits organizations, local and county governments, chambers of commerce, tourism offices, NPS, USEPA, NYS- DEC,VTANR, NYSOPRHP,VTDHP,corresponding agencies SURVEYING UNDERWATER CULTURAL in Québec RESOURCES Cost estimate: $250,000 per year Potential funding sources: Federal and state appropriations, NPS, USEPA, NY & VT capital construction budgets, Since 1996, the LCBP has provided fund- TEA-21, HPF (through states), private sector 2000 ing to the Lake Champlain Maritime Timeframe: 2002-ongoing Museum (LCMM) for the Lake Champlain Benchmark: Completion of planning for heritage network Underwater Survey, resulting in the survey and development of related maps and brochures of more than 240 square miles of lake 1996 bottom. In 1997, the LCMM found 2) Develop and Implement a Benedict Arnold's gunboat near Valcour Management Strategy for Island in New York. An anchor shot off Underwater Cultural Heritage 1997 the British warship Confiance during the Resources in Lake Champlain Lake Battle of Plattsburgh Bay in 1814 is now Champlain on display at City Hall in Plattsburgh. It Lake Champlain contains one of the best pre- 1998 was recovered from the Lake in 1998. served underwater cultural heritage collections in North America. Research and documenta- INCREASING UNDERWATER HISTORIC tion, public interpretation, heritage tourism, PRESERVES and recreation offer unique opportunities to preserve these historic artifacts and their 1999 In 1998, the Champlain II in New York and meanings for current and future generations. Advances in marine survey technologies allow the O. J. Walker in Vermont were added to many sites not previously located to be found. the Lake Champlain Bi-State Underwater This has added pressure to develop a manage- Historic Preserve System, increasing the ment regime around these extraordinary time system to seven sites. capsules. One response has been an ambitious Lake Champlain Maritime Museum (LCMM) INTERPRETING HISTORIC LANDINGS project to survey and inventory the entire Lake (see Figure 10). This project is an eight-year In 2001, the LCBP opened the Historic endeavor and is being funded in part by the Landings Heritage Trail with exhibits LCBP. However, there are new threats to the installed in Plattsburgh,Whitehall, and short-and-long-term stability of this collection, Port Kent, New York, and Vergennes, including the arrival of zebra mussels in the Vermont.The LCBP has identified more Lake in 1993. A new study, the Impacts of than 20 sites to be interpreted with out- Zebra Mussels on Shipwrecks and the Environment, was initiated in 1999 by the door exhibits. continued on page 73 Figure 10. Lake Champlain underwater mapping, 1996-2000. Source: Lake Champlain Maritime Museum

Page 72 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Protecting Cultural Heritage Resources University of Vermont and LCMM. In addition, e) Develop a bistate management approach to LCMM has produced management studies for the Lake Champlain Underwater Historic ACCOMPLISHMENTS the states of Vermont and New York focused Preserve program that includes reasonable on the Lake Champlain Underwater Preserve public access to appropriate sites as well as continued from page 72 System. These studies have looked at expand- enhanced protection. ing reasonable public access to appropriate DESIGNING WAYSIDE EXHIBITS underwater sites. Potential key LCBP partners: Diver groups, businesses, nonprofit organizations, local and county governments, In 2001, the LCBP designed a template for This action recognizes the potential of under- LCMM, Bateau Below, Lake George Commission, Lake Champlain Byways, NPS, USEPA, NYSDEC,VTANR, NYSOPRHP, a unified system of outdoor wayside water sites to enrich our understanding of the VTDHP,Sea Grant, corresponding agencies in Québec exhibits in the region.To date, the LCBP has past and provide extraordinary interpretive Cost estimate: To be determined opportunities to both divers and non-divers. Potential funding sources: NY and VT state capital con- provided technical and design assistance It supports the development of a bistate, struction budgets, NY and VT State Historic Sites budgets, on 62 exhibits that will be posted around lakewide approach to managing underwater HPF,NPS, USEPA, NOAA, Sea Grant, universities, local govern- the Basin, some of which are bilingual.The cultural heritage of Lake Champlain and Lake ments, user fees, federal and state appropriations LCBP also published the Lake Champlain Timeframe: 2002-ongoing George geology. It supports further survey, Wayside Exhibit Manual which provides Benchmark: Completion of management strategy, documentation, and analysis of the impacts of including above elements local communities guidelines for planning, zebra mussels, and ways in which to provide designing, and fabricating wayside exhibits. reasonable public access to appropriate sites. Protection of these sites and related law PRIORITY ACTIONS enforcement is an integral component of this (not listed in priority order) approach. This action also strongly recommends enhanced interpretation of underwater cultural heritage resources for the non-diving 3) Develop a Stewardship Program public at land-based venues. Developing this to Strengthen Nonregulatory strategy would include the following activities: Protection of Heritage Resources a) Continue to survey, document, and evaluate Because the majority of heritage resources in underwater cultural heritage resources. the Basin are privately owned, landowners are their most effective stewards. While regulatory b) Continue to study of the impacts of zebra mus- mechanisms protect a small percentage of cul- PROVIDING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE sels on shipwrecks. tural heritage resources, many organizations, groups, and individuals work to protect her- Since 1997, the LCBP has provided $48,000 c) Integrate the results of shipwreck work with itage resources in informal, voluntary ways. A for more than 70 projects through the other resource studies, such as collections of bathy good example of an effective, nonregulatory Technical Assistance Program.These funds -metric, hydrodynamic, and environmental data. stewardship program is the LCBP Archeology support conditions, archaeological, and on the Farm project, which provides a profes- engineering assessments; museum men- d) Make the results of these studies available to the sional archeologist to assist farmers in plan- toring; property interpretation; design; and public through a variety of land based exhibits, ning water quality improvement projects. A state and national register nominations. curriculum, and outdoor signage. stewardship program focusing on significant

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 73 Protecting Cultural Heritage Resources

heritage resources would enhance resource income from tourism) is lacking. This action protection through education and technical proposes a study to detail the contribution of assistance rather than increased regulation. heritage resources to the economic vitality This program would: of the Basin. Heritage resources include not only historic sites open to the public, but also a) Explore the creation of tax historic downtowns, villages and landscapes. incentives for cultural heritage This information could be used in future resource protection. regional economic development plans. Baseline data about cultural heritage tourism should be b) Increase landowner awareness collected, including: visitor demographics, of nonregulatory protection tools, how visitors heard about sites, what sites they such as sale of development rights, are going to, how much they are spending, tax benefits through donating ease- how long they are staying, what they want out ments, tax credits, barn grants, and of the experience, what else they are visiting

Vermont Division for Historic Preservation other incentive programs. in the area, and what characteristics of the Basin they value. Analysis of this data would c) Build the stewardship capabili- result in appropriate marketing and promotion ties of nonprofit groups. strategies (see Action 8) and provide objective information about the role of heritage Potential key LCBP partners: tourism in the economy of the Basin. The Landowners, businesses, nonprofit organiza- Lake Champlain Cultural Heritage Tourism Reenactments at Mount Independence State Historic tions, local and county governments, region- Survey and Marketing Plan, based on 2,565 Site in Orwell,Vermont. al commissions, chambers of commerce, housing and conservation boards, NPS, USEPA, NYSDEC, completed surveys, was completed in early VTANR, NYSOPRHP,VTDHP,corresponding agencies in 1997 and generated important data on the Québec users of historic sites. An economic analysis Cost estimate: $60,000 per year of potential income generated by heritage Potential funding sources: NPS, USEPA,VHCB, nonprofit tourism conducted by the National Park organizations, USDA-NRCS, HPF,HUD, National Trust for Service in 2000 indicated that future heritage Historic Preservation, USDA-FMHA resource-related tourism development offers Timeframe: 2002-ongoing tremendous economic potential in the Lake Benchmark: Creation of stewardship program Champlain Basin. Using this study and addition- 4) Demonstrate the Links between al information about local community interests, this action encourages a coordinated strat- Cultural Heritage Resources and egy to support heritage tourism development. Economic Development

While tourism at historic sites obviously benefits the area economy, hard data about demographics or economic impact (i.e., employment, sales tax income, purchase of supplies and services from the community, derivative

Page 74 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Protecting Cultural Heritage Resources

Potential key LCBP Partners: Landowners, businesses, diver groups, nonprofit organizations, local and county gov- OTHER ACTIONS FOR ernments, chambers of commerce, regional commissions, regional marketing organizations, tourism offices, NPS, CONSIDERATION USEPA, NYSDEC,VTANR,VTACCD, NYSOPRHP,VTDHP,corresponding agencies in Québec (not listed in priority order) Cost estimate: $60,000 per year Potential funding sources: Federal and state appropria- 6) Develop and Implement tions, NPS, EPA, NY and VT capital construction budgets, Cultural Heritage Resource Deb Sachs TEA-21, HPF (through states), private sector Timeframe: 2001-ongoing Management Plans Benchmark: Completion of strategy and use in future economic development planning Bistate management plans for each major category of cultural heritage 5) Link Cultural Heritage to Existing resources on the shores and in the Recreation/Tourism Marketing waters of Lake Champlain are Programs needed, and should focus first on those resources that are particularly A regional approach to marketing the rich her- threatened. These management itage resources in the Basin would promote its plans would include: attractions to a wider audience more efficient- ly. This would greatly enhance economic a) Criteria for selecting priority heritage resources. development while giving a measure of con- The public enjoys a wayside exhibit along the trol over the amount and type of access a site Burlington Heritage Trail in Burlington,Vermont. requires. Following the study proposed in b) Consistent policies for protecting them. Action 7, this action would: 1) establish goals and targets for marketing cultural heritage c) Guidelines for county and town resources; and 2) build them into existing protection efforts. tourism and recreation marketing plans. d) Recommendations for building staff capaci- Potential key LCBP partners: Landowners, businesses, ty at state, regional, and local levels and with- diver groups, nonprofit organizations, local and county gov- in nonprofit organizations devoted to land ernments, chambers of commerce, regional commissions, and resource protection. regional marketing organizations, tourism offices, NPS, USEPA, NYSDEC,VTANR, NYSOPRHP,VTDHP,corresponding agencies in Québec e) Mechanisms for providing technical assis- Cost estimate: In-kind participation of key partners tance to and building positive relationships Potential funding sources: Federal and state appropria- with landowners, communities, nonprofit tions, NPS, USEPA, NY and VT capital construction budgets, organizations, and other resource protection TEA-21, HPF (through states), private sector and economic development agencies. Timeframe: 2002-ongoing Benchmark: Development of regional marketing goals and their integration into recreation/tourism plans f) Improved levels of compliance with federal and state historic preservation laws.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 75 Protecting Cultural Heritage Resources

Potential key LCBP partners: Landowners, businesses, farmers, developers, and many others is impera- Benchmark: Technical and financial assistance to diver groups, nonprofit organizations, local and county gov- tive to accomplish resource protection. Also, communities for projects linking cultural heritage resource ernments, regional commissions, chambers of commerce, the improvement of regulatory processes is protection and economic development LCMM, Lake Champlain Byways, NPS, USEPA, NYSDOT, VTrans, NYSDEC,VT ANR, NYSOPRHP,VTDHP,corresponding necessary to make them clearer and more agencies in Québec effective. 9) Create a Basin-wide Cultural Cost estimate: $60,000 per year Heritage Resource Database Potential funding sources: NPS, USEPA,TEA-21, HPF, Potential key LCBP partners: Landowners, businesses, Community Block Grants (HUD), state coastal zone manage- diver groups, chambers of commerce, developers, LCMM, Compile cultural resource survey data from ment programs NPS, USEPA, NYSDEC,VTANR, NYSOPRHP,VTDHP,VTACCD, Timeframe: 2002-ongoing USFS, USDA-NRCS, other agencies, and corresponding agen- New York, Vermont, and Québec and create Benchmark: Completion of management plans, including ciesinQuébec a region-wide inventory on a GIS-linked com- above elements Cost estimate: In-kind participation of key partners puter database. This database should provide Potential funding sources: State and federal agency an up-to-date historic record and promote 7) Review and Revise Protective budgets, NPS, EPA, USFS, NRCS integration in broader planning applications. Time frame: 2002-ongoing To achieve this, Vermont, New York, and Legislation for Cultural Heritage Benchmark: Review of state legislation and recommenda- Québec need to cooperate in developing a Resources tion of revision, if needed; development of public outreach tools on existing laws and regulations uniform cultural resource inventory, evaluation process, and computerized system for all areas Protection of heritage resources on state- 8) Encourage Local Efforts to of study, analysis, evaluation, designation, pro- owned land requires governments to be both tection, interpretation, and promotion. The vigilant and swift in their response to potential Coordinate Heritage and Economic inventory process should reflect this integra- impacts within their jurisdiction. As budgetary Development Projects tion in both its planning and applications. shortfalls, staff reductions, physical distances, Because the need for a comprehensive inven- and general lack of capacity have combined While a region-wide plan and promotional strat- tory is immediate, planning this action within to reduce their effectiveness, new procedures egy would greatly contribute to economic devel- a fixed timetable at the outset of implementing and relationships need to be explored to opment in the Basin, it is crucial that local com- the overall Basin Plan, and listing survey areas strengthen existing legislation and ensure munities and organizations maintain autonomy according to priority is important. enforcement. Because underwater heritage in developing their own plans and initiatives. resources are all state-owned, laws and regula- Communities should be assisted in securing Potential key LCBP partners: Regional planning com- tions that affect these sites should be evaluat- funding for innovative projects that demonstrate missions,VCGI, NPS, NYSDEC,VTANR, NYSOPRHP,VTDHP, ed and revised first. Such laws should be con- economic development through heritage corresponding agencies in Québec sistent and enforceable on the entire Lake. resource protection. Cost estimate: $75,000 initial year; $20,000 per year Difficulties with the existing regulatory process maintenance Potential funding sources: NPS, USEPA,state and are compounded by the lack of public aware- Potential key LCBP partners: Businesses, nonprofit federal agencies organizations, local and county governments, chambers of ness of the importance, goals, and procedures Timeframe: 2002-ongoing of these laws and regulations. This lack of commerce, regional commissions, regional marketing organizations, NPS, EPA, NYS DEC,VTANR, NYSOPRHP,VTDHP, Benchmark: Completion of database, including public knowledge and outreach about these process- corresponding agencies in Québec access plan es leads to misunderstanding, loss of trust, Cost estimate: $120,000 per year possible delays, and, in some cases, loss of Potential funding sources: NPS, USEPA,TEA-21, HPF resources. Building stronger communication and (through states), HUD, Economic Development understanding among regulators, landowners, Administration Timeframe: 2002-ongoing

Page 76 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 CHAPTER FIVE ASTRATEGY FOR IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN

Numerous cooperating agencies, organizations, • the integration of environmental and lan implementation steps include coordi- and individuals have contributed their time economic goals in the decision-making nating state, federal, and provincial pro- and ideas toward producing a comprehensive process and in selecting the most cost- grams for Lake cleanup; assuring that the effective actions to protect and enhance public is involved in Lake issues; and build- pollution prevention, control, and restoration the resources of the Basin; P ing local support through nongovernmen- plan for Lake Champlain. The result of these tal organizations and municipalities. Long-term moni- efforts, Opportunities for Action, outlines these • pollution prevention as a cost-effective toring of the ecosystem’s health and measuring the strategies for protecting and enhancing the means to protect the environment by elimi- success or weaknesses of the Plan are also important. environmental, cultural, recreational, and eco- nating pollution before it is generated; Implementation must also link Lake issues to legisla- nomic activities of or relating to the Lake. The tive bodies and interest groups, and provide financial • a consensus-based, collaborative approach resources for specific projects and research. challenge now is to implement these strategies. that strengthens the outcomes of decisions by facilitating a dialogue among multiple L'implantation du plan Several themes have emerged from the plan- interested parties; L'implantation du plan comporte plusieurs étapes dont ning process, which should guide agencies, • flexibility within programs and organi- la coordination des programmes de dépollution du organizations, and individuals as they imple- zations that enables them to adapt to Vermont, de l'état de New York, du Québec et du gou- ment Opportunities for Action. These themes emerging issues, resources, and technology. vernement fédéral américain, l'engagement du pub- include: lic dans la défense du lac et l'obtention de l'appui local In developing the first edition of Opportunities par le biais des organismes non gouvernementaux et • a partnership approach that relies on des municipalités.La surveillance continue de l'écosys- for Action (1996), the Lake Champlain Manage- existing agencies, organizations, and indi- ment Conference analyzed the capabilities of tème et la mesure des réussites et des ratés du plan viduals to implement the Plan, while occupent une place tout aussi importante.Finalement, building capabilities through the forma- existing local, regional, state, and federal la mise en place du plan doit se faire en collaboration tion of innovative partnerships; organizations and determined that these avec les autorités gouvernementales et les groupes d'in- organizations should be responsible, as part térêt et prévoir des ressources suffisantes pour financer • an ecosystem approach in which manage- of an integrated effort, for implementing the des recherches et des projets particuliers. ment decisions are based on the complex Plan. Informing and involving the public at interrelationships among the physical, biological and chemical components of the local level is an important means through the Lake Champlain Basin; which recommended actions will be successfully carried out. The Management Conference • a watershed approach in which water also discussed new approaches to sustained quality protection and ecosystem restora- coordination and successful implementation tion efforts are focused along watershed rather than political boundaries; of Opportunities for Action. When the first edition of Opportunities for Action was approved, the planning task of the Management

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 77 A Strategy for Implementing the Plan

Conference was concluded and it ended its agement decisions and supporting public/ number of jurisdictions to coordinate efforts existence, passing the tasks of Plan implemen- private partnerships for action. The following that address issues of mutual concern. They tation to the Lake Champlain Steering Committee. section describes the general roles and will continue to be key partners in focusing responsibilities that fall to the various levels implementation efforts through a watershed The Lake Champlain Steering Committee has of government, the private sector, and the approach to planning and ensuring that the followed the guidance of the Management public in meeting the demands to protect the recommendations of the Plan are carried Conference through the first five years of Plan resources of the Lake Champlain Basin. out equitably. implementation (1996 through 2001). This chapter describes the framework that the Lake Local Government State and Provincial Agencies Champlain Steering Committee finds most effective for continued implementation of the Most of the solutions to problems affecting the State and provincial agencies in New York, Plan. The framework described below is based Basin, such as nonpoint source pollution from Vermont, and Québec have several key roles on the established patterns of operations and urban and agricultural land uses, failing septic in protecting the resources of the Basin. They relies extensively on the partnerships devel- systems, planning for future development, and administer a number of critically important oped in the first five years of implementation. recreation conflicts are best implemented at resource management programs, including the local level. The Plan identifies several water quality protection programs, wetlands actions that local governments can implement protection programs, fish and wildlife manage- KEY PARTNERS AND THEIR to address these matters. Key partners likely to ment programs, and recreation and cultural implement such actions are local boards and resource programs, among others. The states POTENTIAL ROLES IN commissions. Because local governments have and province also provide technical and finan- primary authority over planning and zoning cial assistance, such as training for wastewater PLAN IMPLEMENTATION (in all cases except agriculture in Vermont) treatment plant operators and funding for local and some public health issues, transferring nonpoint source pollution control projects, to The actions presented in Chapters 2, 3, and authority to other groups is not envisioned in ensure that the appropriate people have the 4 list a number of potential key partners who most situations. Local governments can also expertise to implement their programs. can play a pivotal role in carrying out steps incorporate a watershed planning focus into contained in the Plan to protect the Lake. local comprehensive plans. Although several state and provincial agencies Several of these organizations are government are listed in the Plan, the New York State agencies already involved in resource protec- Department of Environmental Conservation tion efforts at the federal, state, regional, and Regional Government Organizations (NYSDEC), the Vermont Agency of Natural local levels. Existing agencies and organiza- Resources (VTANR), and Québec's Minister of tions should continue their roles in managing Protecting Lake Champlain requires coopera- Environment (QC MENV) have major roles in resources in the Basin. The Plan does not tion among the communities within its water- implementation. As the leading environmental advocate replacing these agencies and organi- shed. Watersheds cross town boundaries, and agencies in each jurisdiction, NYSDEC, zations or usurping their authority. However, one town acting alone may not be sufficient VTANR, and QC MENV have critical responsi- in some cases, implementing the actions has to address all issues. Protecting the entire bilities in every major action area in the Plan. required that existing programs shift their pri- Basin demands a high level of attention from Other key state agencies are the Vermont orities or form intergovernmental partnerships all municipalities in the watershed. Regional Department of Agriculture, Food, and Markets to maximize scarce human and financial organizations—such as the Regional Planning (for agricultural land use, nonpoint source and resources. Many of the actions recommend Commissions in Vermont and the County pesticide issues) and the New York Department including additional partners in resource man- Planning Offices in New York work with a

Page 78 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 A Strategy for Implementing the Plan of Agriculture and Markets (for nonpoint pollution, and especially for preventing Business and Industry source issues); Vermont Agency of Commerce pollution from agricultural runoff. and Community Development and New York The activities of private businesses and cham- State Department of Economic Development • The US Department of the Interior supports the management plan through three serv- bers of commerce are a critical component of (for economic issues); New York and Vermont ices. The Fish and Wildlife Service cooper- protecting the resources that support the eco- Departments of Health (for health advisories); ates with the states in the management of nomic vitality of the Basin. Voluntary efforts to and Vermont Division for Historic Preservation, fish and wildlife resources, operates a recycle and prevent pollution are examples of National Wildlife Refuge and a National New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, how the private sector has been active in and Historic Preservation, and New York Fish Hatchery in the Basin, and helps ensure that the actions of other federal implementing elements of the Plan. Educa- Department of State (for recreation and cultural agencies are consistent with the needs tional partnerships with television and other resource issues). Other key ministries in for fish and wildlife conservation. The news media have tremendously increased Québec include the Ministry of Agriculture, National Park Service provides financial public awareness of the importance of Fisheries, and Food, and the Wildlife and and technical support for programs con- Parks Agency. cerning cultural heritage and recreational resources associated with the Champlain Valley. The

Federal Agencies US Geological Survey provides QC MENV financial and technical support through stream gauge monitoring Many of the activities necessary to implement and watershed research. the Plan need to occur at the local level and, to some degree, at the state level. However, • The US Army Corps of Engineers federal agencies have taken a vital role in pro- provides financial and technical viding support for Plan implementation in the support for management of invasive aquatic species, maintenance unique network of partnerships reflected of structures within waterways, below. Several federal agencies recently stream stabilization programs, signed a Memorandum of Understanding to and nonpoint source pollution facilitate their cooperation and coordination control. through the Lake Champlain Basin Program. • The US Department of Commerce, Representatives of these agencies are active through the National Sea Grant in many of LCBP activities. College programs, provides financial and technical support for A scientist from the Québec Ministry of Environment • The USEPA provides financial and techni- research, management of fisheries monitors the Missisquoi River. cal support to the states for implementing and other aquatic resources, and several federal environmental programs. related watershed programs. They ensure that all Americans are pro- individual citizen participation and community tected from significant risks to human • The US Department of Transportation, involvement in good lake stewardship prac- health and the environment where they through the National Scenic Byways tices. Chambers of commerce have been effec- live, learn, and work. Program provides financial and technical tive at drawing together business interests to support for recreational and economic • The US Department of Agriculture pro- programs related to the Lake Champlain assist in the planning process and will contin- vides financial support and technical Byways program. ue to contribute knowledge through the information on best management prac- course of Plan implementation. tices for controlling nonpoint source

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 79 A Strategy for Implementing the Plan Academic Institutions and Research Legislative Bodies Visitors are often involved in the implementa- Organizations tion of the Plan through their support of the Legislative bodies in the Basin are responsible economic and environmental integrity of the for passing laws and appropriating funds for Basin. The inherent beauty of the Basin is a Academic institutions, research organizations, many programs important to the Lake. Several key attraction for visitors, who often bring a and cooperative extension programs have actions in the Plan call for consistent policies heightened sense of appreciation of the quality served vital roles in studying Lake Champlain among New York, Vermont, and Québec. This of the natural environment. They spend and its Basin. They also have been highly requires extensive cooperation among their numerous dollars in the Basin and can effective in educating students, teachers, and legislative bodies. Successful Plan implementa- act in environmentally sound ways when other citizens about Lake Champlain issues. tion also requires that legislative bodies res- they are here. Many actions in the Plan call for research con- pond to the will of their constituents and act cerning lakewide problems and emerging decisively and creatively to protect and en- issues. Continued Plan implementation Coordinating Organizations hance the resources of the Basin in the face requires continued participation by academic of technical, political, and financial obstacles. institutions and research organizations, and The need for state and international communi- depends greatly on the soundness of data cation and cooperation regarding the manage- and information collected by them. Residents and Visitors ment of the Lake Champlain Basin has been apparent since the 1940s. There have been Nongovernmental Organizations The cumulative results of many individual numerous successful efforts to bring the two actions make perhaps the greatest difference states and countries together since that time, in the complex issues facing the Lake Champ- including the International Joint Commission, Many actions in the Plan list nonprofit and cit- lain Basin. Nearly 600,000 people live, work, the Lake Champlain Fish and Wildlife izen-based organizations as potential key part- and play in the Lake Champlain Basin, which Management Cooperative, the Lake Champlain ners. Watershed associations and environmen- they share with over six million visitors annu- Research Consortium, and Citizens Advisory tal groups have long been active in organizing ally. Underlying all of the actions in the Plan Committees. The New England Interstate and supporting the activities of individual is the need for public involvement. Residents Water Pollution Control Commission, which interests in the Basin. Examples of activities of the Basin can be involved in the implemen- coordinates the fiscal affairs of the Lake by nonprofit/nongovernmental organizations tation process in many ways. They can change Champlain Basin Program, is itself a coopera- that implement elements of the Plan include activities in their own households, maintain tive partnership of the six New England States water quality monitoring, research, and con- septic systems properly, and reduce the use and New York State. servation of cultural heritage resources found of toxic chemicals in cleaning and lawn care. submerged in the Lake. Citizen groups, includ- They can support local initiatives for action, The coordinating role of the Lake Champlain ing watershed organizations, have been espe- or be prepared to demand action if none Steering Committee, which operates the cially successful in implementing educational is taken. They also can volunteer for local LCBP, relies on the cooperation of each of workshops, streambank stabilization, toxic boards, monitor their activities, and participate these efforts. Each of these organizations, reduction initiatives, aquatic species control, in citizen groups. Most importantly, residents and others like them, has played a vital role public forums, the restoration of contaminat- can inform themselves about caring for in drawing together key partners to produce ed sites, the encouragement of low impact their watershed. coordinated research and consistent policies for recreational activities, and continued commu- the Basin. For specific information on these nication with the Lake Champlain Basin organizations, see the next section on “Frame- Program about emerging issues and priorities. work for Plan Implementation.”

Page 80 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 FRAMEWORK FOR PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

Through the first five years of Plan implemen- Richelieu Board to examine regulation of water LCBP tation, the Lake Champlain Basin Program has levels in Lake Champlain during the 1970s. provided the institutional framework for coordinating the comprehensive pollution preven- Created by the Memorandum of Under- tion, control, and restoration actions for the standing on Environmental Cooperation on future of Lake Champlain Basin. The Lake the Management of Lake Champlain in 1988, Champlain Steering Committee has served as the Lake Champlain Steering Committee the program's primary decision-making body consists of top-level officials representing state through this period. Continued implementation and provincial government in New York, of the Plan will build upon the success of this Vermont, and Québec; local officials; US fund- Members of the Lake Champlain Steering Committee established teamwork to coordinate and assist ing agencies; and citizen representatives from and the Lake Champlain Basin Program staff. the stewardship efforts of all levels of govern- each jurisdiction. The Steering Committee ment, organizations, and citizens. serves as a forum for information exchange and a mechanism to coordinate state and Existing Frameworks provincial policies and programs. It is the only formal, international, tri-party, government- Several arrangements among agencies and based institution currently focused on organizations in the Lake Champlain Basin Lake Champlain. were formed prior to the passage of the Lake Champlain Special Designation Act in 1990 The New England Interstate Water Pollution and have thrived through the first five years Control Commission (NEIWPCC) is a non- of plan implementation. The arrangements profit interstate partnership established by described below have played important roles Congress in 1947. NEIWPCC’s mission is to in bringing together some of the key partners assist member states (New England states and identified in this Plan, including government New York) by providing coordination, public agencies, academic institutions, and citizens. education, training, and leadership in the protection of water quality in the region. The Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 created the International Joint Commission (IJC) to The role of NEIWPCC in the Lake Champlain resolve disputes regarding the use of bound- Basin is to conduct the business and financial ary waters. IJC membership is comprised of affairs of the LCBP, including staffing and six commissioners appointed by the President administration of grants and contracts. of the United States and the Prime Minister of Canada. The IJC convened a Champlain-

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 81 Framework for Plan Implementation

Citizens Advisory Committees (CACs) in The Lake Champlain Ecosystem Team is an New York, Vermont, and Québec have been association of organizations involved in the created to support the Steering Committee. conservation of plants, animals, and their Consisting of appointed representatives, the habitats in the Lake Champlain watershed. CACs make recommendations about the man- The Lake Champlain Ecosystem Team main- agement of Lake Champlain to the Steering tains and enhances ecological integrity Committee and facilitate many aspects of pub- throughout the Basin. Their efforts include lic outreach, including public forums concern- enhancing interdisciplinary cooperation and ing lake issues. During the five-year planning partnerships among federal, state, and private effort which has resulted in this Plan, the conservation organizations and academic insti- CACs also advised the Lake Champlain tutions; facilitating and coordinating biological Management Conference. The New resource conservation activities; and exchan- York CAC has fourteen members ging information.

ECHO appointed by the Commissioner of NYSDEC; the Vermont CAC has four- Several academic institutions have established a teen members appointed by the multidisciplinary research and education pro- Governor and the Legislature; and the gram for Lake Champlain called the Lake Québec CAC has eight to twenty-two Champlain Research Consortium. Mem- members appointed by the Minister bership in the Consortium currently consists of Environment. of selected academic institutions conducting research within the Basin boundaries. The The Lake Champlain Fish and Lake Champlain Research Consortium periodi- Wildlife Management Cooperative cally prepares a list of research needs and was created through written agreement priorities related to the management issues in 1973 by the US Fish and Wildlife in the Plan. Service, the New York State Depart- ment of Environmental Conservation All of these organizations have been involved and the Vermont Fish and Wildlife in important research and management activi- In 1999, the Rubenstein Ecosystem Science Laboratory, a new Department. The Cooperative Agree- ties for the Lake Champlain Basin. Continued state-of the-art lake research facility, opened on the Burlington ment, which was updated in 1995, created a coordination of these programs and activities waterfront as an extension of the University of Vermont, in Policy Committee consisting of program direc- is of paramount importance to successful Plan partnership with St. Michael’s College and ECHO at the Leahy Center for Lake Champlain. tors from the three agencies, and Management implementation. and Technical Committees of agency staff. Organizations in Québec are not formal part- The Lake Champlain Basin and Adirondack ners with the Cooperative but coordinate and region have been designated as one of the communicate with it. United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) international biosphere reserves. This designation is strictly honorary and carries with it no restric- tions, regulations, or funding.

Page 82 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 KEY FUNCTIONS FOR PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

The Lake Champlain Steering Committee has and support for recommended actions. Refer LCBP identified a list of functions that must be to “Informing and Involving the Public” accomplished to continue successfully imple- (p. 91) for actions dedicated to accomplishing mentation the Plan. These functions include this function. the following: Build Local-level Implementation Coordinate Programs and Implementation Activities Participation at the local-level is the corner- stone of successful Plan implementation. Coordination among government agencies, Addressing pollution problems at the local regional and local governments, the public level is important because those most affected and private sectors, nongovernmental/non- by an issue are often best able to address that profit organizations, and residents and visitors issue. Many communities have existing is critical to successful implementation of the resources and organizations to help implement Plan. Coordination involves facilitating data programs, but may lack technical expertise, Each year the LCBP and Citizens Advisory Committees adequate funding, or access to additional hold public meetings to hear comments on the imple- management and information exchange, data mentation of Opportunities for Action. sharing, and improving efficiency among key human and financial resources. Building local partners while not duplicating programs or capacity for Plan implementation requires a creating new layers of bureaucracy. strengthening of technical assistance to community groups, and may require additional Inform and Involve the Public financial support for local programs. Refer to “Building Local-Level Implementation” (p. 95) for actions dedicated to accomplishing Public information and involvement efforts are this function. required for successful implementation of the Plan. A public that understands water quality and resource management issues of the Basin Measure and Monitor Success can make informed choices about the long- Against Plan Benchmarks term protection and restoration of the Lake. A commitment to lifelong education about A critical component of watershed planning is Basin resources is needed to facilitate this monitoring. Monitoring must accomplish two process. Furthermore, involving the public roles. First, it must be a source of information in planning and implementation increases regarding the health of the Lake and Basin. both the sphere of responsibility for action Management capacity hinges on the availabili-

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 83 Key Functions for Plan Implementation ty and reliability of comprehensive monitoring Conduct Research Advise and Encourage Agencies of key ecosystem indicators. Second, monitoring Responsible for Implementation must measure the degree of success of man- The Plan identifies several areas in which agement programs and ensure accountability research is needed. Research has been an As the Plan evolves, various agencies will ful- to the public. Monitoring can help determine important component of preparing the Plan fill their responsibilities for implementing progress toward goals and whether or not and will continue to provide critical informa- certain actions. Listed benchmarks provide priorities need to be adjusted. Refer to tion as implementation evolves. Improved gauges for monitoring success. A mechanism “Measuring and Monitoring Success” (p. 99) knowledge of the physical, chemical, biologi- is needed that encourages those responsible for actions dedicated to accomplishing cal, and social characteristics of the Lake and for implementing actions to follow through this function. Basin will help resource managers make effec- with their commitments and reach these tive policy and management decisions in benchmarks. Create Links with the future. Legislative Bodies Secure and Direct Funding

Successful Plan implementation depends greatly QC MENV on the ability to gain political support for rec- The cost of implementing the Plan is high, but ommended actions. A framework is needed to not as high as the potential costs of failing to communicate needs and recommend actions act. The ability to implement watershed pro- concerning the Lake to legislative bodies who grams rests heavily on the availability of and formulate federal, state, and local laws and access to funding sources. A mechanism must appropriate funds to various programs. be in place to seek public and private funding for program implementation and to allocate Create Links with Interest Groups resources to appropriate entities based upon recommended priorities. Refer to “Strategies Implementation of the recommended actions in for Funding Implementation” (p. 103) for a the Plan depends greatly on continued support discussion of funding implementation efforts. In May 2002, the annual Lake Champlain Research from numerous individuals and groups. Consortium Symposium was held in Decisions concerning the management of the Update Plan Recommendations Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Québec. resources in the Lake Champlain Basin must be made through a consensus-based, collaborative Because environmental conditions in the Basin process that encourages the expression and will change over time and new technologies understanding of diverse viewpoints. This will be discovered, priorities for action in the process helps integrate economic and environ- Plan may change. Some management pro- mental goals into Plan implementation and grams may become more important, others ensures that a focus on implementation at the less. The Plan should be reviewed and local level is maintained. updated periodically to reflect these changing conditions.

Page 84 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 AFRAMEWORK FOR CARRYING OUT KEY FUNCTIONS

The guiding principle for all Steering Committee actions and policies is to ensure that the Lake gets better.

The following section provides recommendation for continued operations of the Lake Champlain Basin Program to ensure the successful implementation of the Plan. A partnership approach involving numerous partners is recommended to respond to the functions described below.

EPA New England Four New York State agency representa- RECOMMENDATIONS tives appointed by the Governor: New York should consider NYSDEC; NYS Department of 1) Continue the Present Steering Economic Development; NYS Department of Committee and Maintain the Agriculture and Markets; and NYS Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation to Breadth of Representation and be selected by the State; Perspectives for Decision-making Four Vermont State agency representatives The Steering Committee should continue to appointed by the Governor: Vermont should function in its present role as a participatory consider VTANR; VT Department of Agri- forum in which key state, provincial, and local culture, Food, and Markets; the VT Agency of The Lake Champlain Basin Program signed leaders from New York, Vermont, and Québec Commerce and Community Development; and onto the US EPA’s voluntary Clean Marine can discuss issues of Lake Champlain and its the VT Agency of Transportation, to be select- Engine initiative for Lake Champlain during watershed, and coordinate policies and pro- ed by the State; July 2002. Left to right: Jane M. Kenny, EPA Region 2 Regional Administrator, Bill grams. Each jurisdiction has identified its chief Howland, LCBP Program Manager, and delegate, who hosts and chairs Steering Four Québec representatives appointed by Robert Varney, EPA New England Regional Committee meetings in rotation. This pattern the Premier: Québec should consider three Administrator. contributes to teamwork. provincial representatives from the Ministry of Environment; the Ministry of Agriculture, The states of New York and Vermont and the Fisheries, and Food; and Wildlife and Parks, province of Québec should consider maintain- and a fourth representative to be selected by ing the following partners on the Steering the Province from provincial agencies; Committee to ensure a diversity of perspectives:

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 85 A Framework for Carrying Out Key Functions

Figure 11. Lake Champlain Basin Program Operating Structure

Lake Champlain Steering Committee New York Members Vermont Members Québec Members Federal Agency Members Dept. of Environmental Agency of Natural Resources Ministry of Environment US Department of Interior, USFWS Conservation Agency of Transportation Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and US Department of Agriculture, NRCS Dept. of Economic Development Department of Agriculture Food US EPA New England (includes VT) New York Local Government Agency of Commerce and Community Agency of Wildlife and Parks US EPA Region II (includes NY) Office of Parks, Recreation and Development Québec Local Government Additional Members Historic Preservation Vermont Local Government Québec CAC Chair Three Advisory Committee Chairs Dept. of Agriculture and Markets Vermont CAC Chair Lake Champlain Sea Grant Board New York CAC Chair Representative

Executive Committee Education & Technical Advisory A designated subset of Steering Committee Cultural Heritage Outreach Committee members, the Executive Committee conducts the business of the LCBP between Steering Committee & Recreation Advisory Advises the Steering meetings and reports to the Steering Committee. Committee. Comprised of Advisory Committee Committee technical experts and Advises the Steering Committee. Advises the Steering researchers from Includes CAC chairs, and heritage, Committee. Comprised universities, state and recreation, commerce, and of educators, provincial agencies, local Basin Program Staff transportation specialists from planners, management agencies and public & private sectors. communications (NEIWPCC, EPA, NY & VT) specialists and others. the private sector. Staff conduct the daily work of the LCBP and support all Committees as needed. NEIWPCC LCBP staff handle the business operations. NY and VT employ State LCBP Coordinators.

Citizens Advisory Committees - New York, Vermont, & Québec Lake Champlain Research Consortium Independent committees comprised of citizens representing recreation, tourism, farmers, Independent research consortium. Provides business, cultural heritage, and advocacy groups, and includes some legislative representation. coordinated research focus and networking support The CACs advise the Steering Committee and the public about lake issues and priorities of importance to the Technical Advisory Committee. to the public. The VTCAC also prepares an annual report to the VT legislature.

Page 86 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 A Framework for Carrying Out Key Functions Three local government representatives, c) Secure and direct Lake Champlain Basin one each from New York, Vermont, and Program funding. Québec. Local governments should nominate representatives and the governors/premier d) Charge the Executive and Advisory select from that list. Committees with tasks as needed.

Three CAC chairs or designees (see below). e) Reassess and update Plan recommendations every five years based on changing environ- One chair or designee from each of the mental conditions, management programs, Advisory Committees: TAC, CHRAC and and public input. E&O (see below). f) Develop an annual budget to ensure Plan One Sea Grant Board representative. implementation.

Three US federal agency representatives. g) Negotiate partnerships and commit- The US Department of Agriculture, the US ments among agencies and groups.

Environmental Protection Agency New QC MENV England Region and Region II, and the US h) Seek consistency in regulatory pro- Department of the Interior should be repre- grams and standards, such as those sented in these positions. concerning wetlands and toxic substances (consistency does not predeter- Modifying the membership of the present mine that standards will be more Steering Committee to include additional key restrictive or less restrictive than pres- players as needed will help to ensure that ent standards); and develop recipro- decisions concerning the management of Lake cal information programs such as the Champlain Basin resources are made through emergency spill response joint proce- a consensus-based, collaborative process. dure between New York, Vermont, and Québec. Steering Committee Charge The charge of the Steering Committee i) Provide technical and financial includes: assistance to local communities Members of the Missisquoi Bay Corporation, and organizations. compliments the Lake Champlain Steering Committee, tour a water quality project on Wallbridge a) Facilitate communication and coordination Stream with the Regional Director of Monteregie. among key partners working to implement j) Assist with the coordination of cultural the Plan. heritage and recreational resource enhancement programs associated with the Lake and b) Monitor and evaluate progress against Plan the Basin. benchmarks and communicate that information by periodically producing an annual imple- k) Make adjustments in the composition of the mentation status report, and other education Steering Committee as needed to achieve the and outreach tools. goals of the Plan.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 87 A Framework for Carrying Out Key Functions To increase its effectiveness, the Steering 2) Continue the Present Citizens f) Advise and encourage agencies that accept Committee has assigned eleven of its members Advisory Committees (CACs) and responsibility for implementing Plan recom- to comprise an Executive Committee to mendations to follow through with their com- meet six to eight times per year between Ensure that Various Stakeholders mitments, for example, by presenting an annu- Steering Committee meetings. The Executive Are Represented al report of recommendations to the legislature. Committee is comprised of Steering Committee representatives of the NYSDEC, VTANR, QC The New York, Vermont, and Québec CACs g) Participate in review panels for LCBP grant MENV, USEPA New England, USEPA Region II, should continue in their present roles as programs. and the chairs of the six advisory committees liaisons to the public. As positions become (VTCAC, NYCAC, Québec CAC, TAC, CHRAC, available on the CACs, the states and Québec h) Host public meetings for information and E&O). These eleven members comprise should strive to ensure that representatives exchange regarding plan implementation. the voting membership of the Executive from environmental groups, agriculture, busi- Committee. The Executive Committee chair ness/industry, sports and recreation, and local Cost estimate: To be determined through an annual budget development process rotates biannually among three key imple- government be included. Stakeholder groups menting agencies: VTANR, NYSDEC, and the Potential funding sources: State and federal appropria- should nominate representatives, and the per- tions, in-kind participation, public/private partnerships USEPA. Because it meets more frequently than sons/agencies in each state and Québec who Timeframe: Ongoing the Steering Committee, the Executive have the authority to appoint CAC representa- Benchmarks: Assistance to the Steering Committee in Committee provides leadership continuity tives should select from that list. All members production of annual report; provision of annual recom- through the year by representing the Steering of the CACs should serve two-to- three year mendations concerning the Lake to the Steering Com- Committee between meetings and interpreting appointments. The CACs should elect their mittee and legislative bodies; inclusion of representatives from environmental groups, agriculture, business/industry, the intent of the Steering Committee to the chair, who will serve as a voting member of staff. The Executive Committee chair reports sports and recreation, local governments on the CACs; the Steering and Executive Committees. The meetings of joint Citizens Advisory Committees each year back to the Steering Committee at regular role of the CACs include: Steering Committee meetings. 3) Continue the Technical Advisory a) Advise the Steering Committee about Cost estimate: To be determined through an annual public concerns. Committee budget development process Potential funding sources: State and federal appropria- b) Inform and involve the public in issues The Steering Committee should appoint and tions, in-kind participation, public/private partnerships, concerning the Lake and the Basin. grants from other funding sources, such as Sea Grant retain a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Timeframe: Ongoing comprised of professionals from academia, c) Link the Steering Committee to state legisla- Benchmarks: Financial and implementation commit- natural resource management agencies, and ments from LCBP partners identified for priority actions; pro- tive bodies and groups implementing the Plan other appropriate sectors as it deems appro- duction of annual progress report; preparation of annual at the local level. priate. The TAC members serve at the discre- budget; achievement of coordinated and consistent policies tion of the Steering Committee. The chair of and programs; six to twelve Steering Committee or d) Provide a regular forum for interest groups the TAC, appointed by the Steering Committee, Executive Committee meetings per year at times and local governments to discuss the issues convenient for members serves as a voting member of the Steering and facing the Lake and the Basin. Executive Committees. The role of the TAC includes the following: e) Provide recommendations to the Steering Committee about the reassessment of Plan recommendations.

Page 88 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 A Framework for Carrying Out Key Functions a) Present the Steering Committee with techni- 4) Continue the Cultural Heritage Organizations and partnerships established cally sound information to be used in the deci- and Recreation Advisory Committee independently of the LCBP to address cultural sion-making process. heritage and recreational issues in the Basin will continue to function in their own right, The Steering Committee should appoint and b) Advise the Steering Committee about emerg- but may also provide input to the CHRAC. retain a Cultural Heritage and Recreation ing issues with management implications, the These organizations include the regional mar- Advisory Committee (CHRAC) composed of necessary research or actions to address those keting organizations and chambers of com- professionals from local government, manage- issues, and related technical funding priorities. merce, scenic byways programs, cultural her- ment agencies, and other appropriate sectors. itage tourism initiatives, and councils on the The CHRAC members serve at the discretion c) Determine the technical merits of LCBP- arts in both states. of the Steering Committee. The chair of the funded scientific studies and projects. CHRAC, appointed by the Steering Committee, Cost estimate: To be determined through an annual serves as a voting member of the Steering and d) Facilitate project implementation and eval- budget development process Executive Committees. The role of the CHRAC uate final products and reports of those proj- Potential funding sources: State and federal appropria- includes the following: tions, in-kind participation, public/private partnerships ects as needed. Timeframe: 2002-ongoing a) Present the Steering Committee with sound Benchmarks: Assistance to the Steering Committee in e) Interpret the results of monitoring programs information concerning cultural heritage and production of periodic status reports; recommendations and other technical information to help deter- recreational initiatives to be used in the deci- to the Steering Committee on annual workplan for cultural mine success or redirection of projects. heritage and recreational resource programs sion-making process. Organizations and partnerships established b) Advise the Steering Committee about emerg- independently of the LCBP to address techni- ing issues with management implications and cal issues in the Basin will continue to func- the necessary research or actions to address tion in their own right, but may also provide those issues. input to the TAC. These organizations include the Lake Champlain Fish and Wildlife c) Advise the Steering Committee regarding Management Cooperative, the Lake Cham- opportunities for transboundary partnerships plain Research Consortium, Sea Grant, and and cooperative projects both within the Basin several taskforces and workgroups. and adjacent areas.

Cost estimate: To be determined through an annual budget development process d) Determine technical merit of LCBP-funded Potential funding sources: State and federal appropria- cultural heritage and recreation studies and tions, in-kind participation, public/private partnerships projects. Timeframe: 2002-ongoing Benchmarks: Assistance to the Steering Committee in e) Interpret the results of cultural heritage and production of annual status report; development of recom- recreation programs to help determine success mendations to the Steering Committee on annual workplan or redirection of projects. for research, monitoring, and technical assistance to implementation projects; monthly meetings of TAC as needed

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 89 A Framework for Carrying Out Key Functions

5) Continue the Education and Cost estimate: To be determined through an annual budget development process Outreach Advisory Committee Potential funding sources: State and federal appropriations, in-kind participation, public/private partnerships The Steering Committee should appoint and Timeframe: 2001-ongoing retain an E&O Advisory Committee comprised Benchmark: Assistance to the Steering Committee in pro- of professionals from educational institutions duction of periodic status reports; recommendations to the in the Basin and with representation from the Steering Committee on annual workplan for education and outreach programs CACs and other appropriate sectors. The E&O members serve at the discretion of the Steering Committee. The chair of the E&O Committee, appointed by the Steering Committee, serves as a voting member of the Steering and Executive Committees. The role of the E&O Committee includes the following: a) Present the Steering Committee with sound education and outreach information information to be used in the decision-making process. b) Advise the Steering Committee about potential outreach methods to achieve needed communication with stakeholders regarding emerging public information issues and recommend actions to address those issues. c) Guide and facilitate aspects of implementation projects to inform and involve the public. d) Interpret the results of information and outreach programs to help determine success or redirection of projects. Outreach tools, such as this poster, inform the public about nonpoint sources of phosphorus from urban/suburban development.

Page 90 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 INFORMING AND INVOLVING THE PUBLIC

To promote a better understanding and appreciation of the Lake Champlain Basin and its resources in order to encourage greater public participation, individual responsibility, and action for protect- GOAL ing these resources.

The future of the Lake Champlain Basin rests in the hands of its citizens and leaders. Public LCBP information and involvement efforts must continue and expand to involve people actively in protecting and appreciating the resources of the entire Basin. Ultimately, a public that understands the water quality and related resource management problems of the Basin, as well as possible solutions to those problems, can make informed choices about its long-term protection and restoration.

Informing the public and direct citizen involvement can achieve many of the priority actions discussed in this Plan. Each priority action in this Plan recognizes the need for strong public support and individual action. For example, an effective way to help reduce the spread of zebra mussels is to inform boaters to inspect and clean their boats if they have been in infested waters. This can be achieved through interpretive signs or displays, literature, presentations, and/or citizen taskforces. This has been accomplished successfully in Minnesota, where boater survey results indicate that boater education programs have been effective in changing boater behavior and reducing the spread of harmful exotic species.

The cumulative results of many individual actions make a difference in the complex issues facing the Lake Champlain Basin. Individual responsibility in protecting a shared resource is very important; people must become aware of how they contribute to pollution before they can take responsible actions to reduce and prevent it. When people are given the opportunity to develop awareness, knowledge, skills, and commitment towards a Basin issue, they can make informed decisions and take constructive actions. When people know how they can make a difference, Children learn about water pollution with the LCBP’s they will. watershed model at a Boy Scout field day.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 91 Informing and Involving the Public ISSUES The Need for More Individual Action OBJECTIVES The Need for Increased Public (not listed in priority order) Public awareness of the problems within the Awareness and Understanding Basin is growing, but there is a definite lack 1) Promote public and governmental aware- of Basin Issues of information about how each of us can help ness and understanding of issues in the Lake to solve these issues. People must understand Champlain Basin and the priority actions their responsibility as stewards of the Basin, needed to address them. Public awareness and understanding of Lake and must speak out for its protection. Using Champlain Basin issues and the priority the public's skills, energy, and enthusiasm is 2) Facilitate public participation in the develop- actions needed to address them is limited. important when addressing priority Basin ment of public policy for the Lake Champlain This is especially true of communities located issues. Additional opportunities that allow Basin and in activities relating to its cleanup further from the Lake whose residents may individuals to become involved and take and protection. be unaware that they are within the Lake action need to be created. Programs that Champlain drainage basin and therefore emphasize how each person can make a 3) Build community awareness and steward- connected to the quality of Lake resources. difference need to be implemented. ship of the Lake Champlain Basin ecosystem People need to become aware of a problem and its value to the region. before they can understand how they contribute to it and assume responsibility 4) Increase individual responsibility for Basin for solving it. LCBP issues by developing programs that allow individuals to become involved and take action. The Need for Local Community Involvement 5) Increase communication and cooperation among the diverse groups involved in Lake Champlain Basin education and outreach. The real power in public involvement comes from the local or community level. Programs 6) Develop a flexible, sustainable, community- that bring together students, professionals, and based organizational framework supported community members are powerful and cost- by public and private funds for public involve- effective tools. Community involvement is ment and education in all aspects of Basin especially important for addressing issues that management. occur in only specific areas of the Basin. People most affected by an issue are best able 7) Develop long-term environmental steward- to address that issue. At a community or ship and understanding of the Lake Champlain watershed level, partnerships can be created Basin by enhancing educational opportunities and local action taken. at all educational levels.

Launching the Red Wing, a long boat built by Addison County students at the Lake Champlain Maritime Museum.

Page 92 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Informing and Involving the Public f) Develop a speakers’ bureau on priority ACTIONS Basin issues. ACCOMPLISHMENTS (not listed in priority order) g) Provide comprehensive Resource Rooms Local connections and lake stewardship 1) Build Awareness and Under- where individuals can obtain historic and are fostered through many LCBP-support- standing of Basin Resources current information on the Basin. ed information and outreach programs. Ongoing programs include community h) Help coordinate communication between Work with the general public, interest groups, education grants, citizen involvement existing education and outreach organiza- and decision makers to build awareness and opportunities, and providing about 100 tions, and develop partnerships. understanding of the key natural resource school and community outreach pro- issues in the Basin and the priority actions i) Evaluate the effectiveness of education and grams annually. Some highlights include: needed to address them. This should include outreach activities to determine their impact information on how these priority issues and on local citizens, municipalities, and non- CHAMPLAIN BASIN EDUCATION INITIATIVE actions contribute to and interact with social governmental organizations. and economic values. Specific components of this action include: Through CBEI, the LCBP partners with six j) Foster partnerships with local media, includ- local education organizations, including ing television, radio, and print media to cover a) Develop printed and other educational the Adirondack Visitor Interpretive Center Basin issues regularly. materials such as citizen action guides, slide and Shelburne Farms, to help educators shows, internet materials, videos, public service teach about the Lake. Since 1992, 474 k) Maintain the volunteer Education Advisory announcements, press releases, mobile displays, Committee to help coordinate Basin-wide edu- educators have participated. and computer models for specific audiences. cational efforts. SPECIAL MEDIA PROJECTS b) Conduct presentations to special interest Potential key LCBP partners: Federal agencies, state groups, communities, and local government agencies, provincial agencies, municipalities, schools, univer- The LCBP issues news releases about the decision makers. sities/colleges, and private/nonprofit organizations Lake and progress towards implementing Cost estimate: $175,000 per year Opportunities for Action. In May 1999, the c) Display exhibits at conferences, fairs, and Potential funding sources: Federal grants, state funds, expositions. in-kind matches (private and nonprofit) LCBP began a new partnership with WPTZ Timeframe: Annually News Channel 5 and KeyBank, called d) Hold public forums and field trips on Benchmarks: Development and distribution of products Champlain 2000, which highlights Lake priority Basin issues and actions, and serve listed in a, d, and e; completion of b, c, and f through k issues. More than 100 topics, such as pulling as a vehicle for translating local Basin issues water chestnuts,“adopt-a-salmon,” and and priority actions. 2) Produce Coordinated Education reducing pesticides have aired.The series Programs for Students has won several environmental and media e) Hold a State of the Lake conference periodi- awards.The LCBP has also participated in cally to bring together those interested in the Work with state and local educators to organ- Basin and to share progress, address chal- a news series on Vermont Public Radio and ize educational materials about the Basin and has been a guest on local call-in programs. lenges, and provide public education and produce coordinated education programs for continued on page 94 involvement. students based on priority issues and actions.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 93 Informing and Involving the Public

c) Develop a comprehensive Basin Resource Plan. Examples of possible programs include: ACCOMPLISHMENTS Guide for educators to use in developing units on Lake Champlain (the Resource Guide a) Increase opportunities to prevent pollution, continued from page 93 should be based on protecting and enhancing such as toxic reduction programs, recycling the environmental integrity of the Lake programs, and citizen action guides. WEBSITES &PUBLICATIONS Champlain Basin, taking into consideration social and economic benefits). b) Coordinate nutrient management and In 1999, the LCBP significantly upgraded toxics reduction outreach to farmers. its website, www.lcbp.org, which provides d) Work with state education departments to online access to Opportunities for Action, integrate Basin education into classrooms. c) Develop opportunities for citizens to become more aware of and help monitor the spread of the Casin' the Basin newsletter, the Lake e) Provide opportunities for teachers and nuisance nonnative aquatic species. Champlain Basin Atlas, fact sheets, volun- students to participate in Basin-related field teer opportunities, and webpages for trips and restoration projects. d) Organize river and lake cleanups. local watershed groups. LCBP-supported publications include the curriculum f) Provide Basin-related presentations to e) Coordinate and support partnership oppor- guide, This Lake Alive!, and the Lake schools. tunities through local implementation and Champlain Basin Atlas. education grants to increase public involvement. g) Evaluate the success of education initiatives. THE LEAHY CENTER FOR LAKE f) Develop and organize a Lake Champlain h) Use the Internet and other media to share Basin Conservation Corps using existing CHAMPLAIN Lake Champlain data with students and teachers. programs, such as the Vermont Youth Conservation Corps (VYCC). Since 1995, the LCBP has supported the Potential key LCBP partners: Federal agencies, state Center's student and family educational agencies, provincial agencies, municipalities, schools, g) Strengthen the links among the public, local programs, hands-on learning, and resource universities/colleges, and private/nonprofit organizations groups, and volunteers. Cost estimate: $100,000 per year room.The LCBP will continue its support Potential funding sources: Federal grants, in-kind Potential key LCBP partners: Federal agencies, state during the development of their new matches (private and no-profit) agencies, municipalities, schools, universities/colleges, and Annually multimillion dollar facility and when the Timeframe: private and nonprofit organizations facility opens in 2003. Benchmark: Completion of components a through h Cost estimate: $125,000 per year above, including the distribution of Lake Champlain Federal grants, state fund- Resource Guide to Basin educators Potential funding sources: ing, in-kind matches (private and nonprofit) Ensure coordination with existing education Timeframe: Annually and outreach organizations. Components of 3) Provide Opportunities for Benchmark: Development and implementation of hands- this approach include: Hands-on Citizen Action and on activities, such as river and lake cleanups Implementation of the Plan a) Conduct teacher training workshops. b) Complete comprehensive teacher training Provide and encourage opportunities for citi- institutes. zen involvement in Basin issues and priority actions to aid in the implementation of the

Page 94 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 BUILDING LOCAL-LEVEL IMPLEMENTATION

Support and enhance cooperative watershed planning efforts to protect and improve water quality. GOAL

Chapters 2 through 4 identify specific actions for reducing various pollutants and enhancing cultural and recreational resources within the Basin. This section addresses the processes at the regional, municipal, and grassroots levels necessary to achieve many of these management goals. It focuses on watershed planning at the local scale, as this is the level at which most planning

Village of Champlain occurs in the Basin.

River and lake associations play a key role in organizing watershed protection efforts. These associations accomplish a great deal through education and outreach programs, democratic participation in the development review process, and participation in citizen monitoring activities. Watershed associations also act as catalysts for developing nonregulatory protection programs, and can effectively advocate for improved conservation-oriented land use practices. River and lake associations can encompass several local jurisdictions. Regional examples include the Boquet River and AuSable River Associations in New York; the Lewis Creek Association and the Friends of the Mad River in Vermont; and the Poultney-Mettowee Watershed Partnership in New York and Vermont. Watershed associations work closely with local government and respect a wide variety of interests, including property rights, environmental protection, and economic development.

Most land use planning in the Basin occurs at the municipal level. When watershed boundaries are contained within municipal boundaries, municipal watershed planning can be very effective. Municipalities may develop watershed districts that have special review criteria for new development based on a long-term water quality protection strategy. The designation of local riparian “buffer” zones along streams, lakes, and wetlands can be important water resources protection The Village of Champlain, New York received $13,000 tools. Local capabilities for watershed planning vary greatly throughout the Basin in both New from an LCBP grant to relocate a phosphorus injec- tion point, which will result in less phosphorus in the York and Vermont. In some areas (often near urban centers), municipalities have already developed plant's discharge. watershed plans and instituted aggressive water quality protection measures—Lake George, New York provides a good example. Municipalities in these areas typically benefit from ongoing technical support from local staff, watershed associations, regional planning commissions, county planning offices, or conservation districts. In other parts of the Basin, municipalities have very limited local capacity for any type of planning or land use regulation. Working in partnership with willing landowners is especially productive as most land in the Basin is privately owned.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 95 Building Local-Level Implementation ISSUES The Need for Innovative Partnerships OBJECTIVES (not listed in priority order) Insufficient Technical and Financial Experience in a number of communities and Assistance regions has pointed to the value of innovative 1) Support formal and informal local and partnerships in developing and implementing regional partnerships to pursue watershed One of the major impediments to developing effective watershed plans. For example, the protection efforts. and implementing watershed protection plans Mad River Valley Planning District in Vermont at the local and regional level is insufficient has developed a strong watershed planning 2) Increase public participation in watershed financial and technical support. Watershed capability through the formation of a three- protection efforts. groups may develop the necessary awareness way partnership among district towns, a pri- and enthusiasm for a project, but may need vate nonprofit environmental organization, 3) Encourage citizens, state and local govern- technical and organizational assistance. Some and the state of Vermont. This arrangement ments, and formal and informal local and assistance is currently provided to watershed provides for a funding base, extensive grass- regional partnerships to adopt a proactive associations in Vermont through the VTANR, roots involvement, strong local political sup- approach to watershed protection that considers and in New York through the NYSDEC, the port though the district board membership, the cumulative impacts on water resources. Cornell Cooperative Extension, and county and technical assistance from the state. There and regional planning commissions. However, often may be a role for state and federal gov- 4) Demonstrate new and emerging models for municipalities need additional technical and ernments, as well as county and regional plan- watershed planning within the Basin, especially financial assistance, and watershed associa- ning commissions, in this process (e.g., fund- those based on local and regional initiatives. tions need the resources to hire their own ing and technical assistance). 5) Ensure that nutrient and nonpoint source paid staff. Developing a local capacity grant management efforts are coordinated with local program for watershed associations may be and regional watershed planning initiatives one effective way to address this shortage. throughout sub-basins.

The Need for Better Communication 6) Promote public education and informed discussion about regional land use patterns Often communication about watershed planning in the Basin. among communities and regions within the Basin is insufficient. An effective process for dis- 7) Preserve the economic vitality of the region seminating information on successful watershed by capitalizing on the unique qualities of planning approaches is needed. Likewise, the the Basin. difficulties and problems encountered in less successful watershed planning efforts need to be documented and communicated to help others avoid these problems.

Page 96 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Building Local-Level Implementation

Timeframe: Ongoing ACTIONS Benchmark: Improved technical and financial assistance ACCOMPLISHMENTS (not listed in priority order) to communities as described LOCAL WATERSHED GROUPS 1) Expand Technical and Financial 2) Develop a Program to Facilitate Assistance for Watershed Planning Information Exchange among Local The LCBP has begun providing additional at the Local Level Watershed Associations technical and financial assistance for local watershed groups.The LCBP assists these Elements of this action include: This action would develop a program to con- groups via grants, training programs, pro- tinue the type of information exchange initiated fessional development funds, and assis- a) Provide technical assistance to communities by the successful LCBP Mad River Watershed tance with public relations and website for addressing issues such as shoreline protection, Planning Demonstration Project. The Mad development. Twice per year, the groups soil erosion, sediment control, wetland conserva- River Project included a series of meetings to gather to exchange information. As local tion, and on-site septic system troubleshooting; share lessons learned from watershed planning watershed groups expand, volunteers from emphasize nonregulatory approaches and make efforts throughout the Basin. Existing and local communities will have a stronger available model standards appropriate for adop- emerging local watershed organizations were voiceinprotectingthewaterresources tion by local communities. invited in the hope that the insights of older, throughout the Basin. Since 1992, more experienced organizations could aid newer than $736,000 of LCBP funds has been b) Provide state and federal financial support organizations in their development. Based on to watershed associations to enable them to the success of these meetings, this action is provided to local watershed projects. hire staff and pursue specific identified needs to establish a program to continue this infor- in each watershed. Both start-up and ongoing mation exchange. VYCC support funds are needed. a) Initiate forums for river and lake associa- c) Assist local and regional planning commis- tions to share experiences and information. sions in evaluating and responding to development trends and estimating future impacts of b) Use newsletters, the Internet, and list-serves these trends on water quality. to help groups share information. d) Provide technical assistance via data shar- Potential key LCBP partners: Watershed associations, ing, Internet use, and public relations. NYSDEC,VTDEC, regional planning commissions, county planning offices Potential key LCBP partners: USDA-NRCS, NYSDEC, Cost estimate: $25,000 per year VTDEC, USFWS, county and regional planning commissions, Potential funding sources: Federal and state NRCDs, SWCDs, nonprofit/private organizations, municipali- appropriations ties, businesses Timeframe: Ongoing Cost estimate: $350,000 per year Benchmark: Establishment of a forum for information The Vermont Youth Conservation Corps helps many Potential funding sources: Federal and state exchange among watershed organizations local watershed groups stabilize streambanks. appropriations continued on page 98

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 97 Building Local-Level Implementation 3) Conduct Watershed Planning ACCOMPLISHMENTS Demonstration Projects continued from page 97 Undertake demonstration projects to illustrate LOCAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE local/regional watershed approaches to planning and water quality protection, restoration, and improvement. These demonstration projects Many groups within the Basin are provid- should identify the full range of local water ing local technical assistance to munici- quality concerns along with recommended palities on planning, zoning, and land solutions. Additionally, local watershed proj- conservation efforts. For example, the ects should contribute to the attainment of town of Essex, NY,received financial water quality goals in downstream waters assistance from the LCBP for shoreline such as Lake Champlain. planning. Lake Champlain Sea Grant also provided technical assistance. In another Potential key LCBP partners: USDA-NRCS, NYSDEC, example, Highgate,VT, is working with VTDEC, watershed associations, universities, extension service, municipalities and nonprofit/private organizations, LCBP and the Northwest Regional landowners Planning Commission to develop a Cost estimate: $50,000-$100,000 per year lakeshore erosion guide for municipalities. Potential funding source: State and federal The Vermont Better Backroads Program, appropriations Time frame: Ongoing Cooperative Extension, and Soil and Water Benchmark: Completion of one or more watershed Conservation Districts also provide tech- planning demonstration projects per year nical assistance to Basin communities. MRBA

Education programs and river cleanups exemplify the type of work accomplished by local watershed groups.

Page 98 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 MEASURING AND MONITORING SUCCESS

Document progress and achievements resulting from implementation of the Plan. GOAL

Monitoring environmental conditions in the Lake and Basin is an essential part of Plan implementation and is an integral component of measuring the success of lake and watershed management efforts. The data produced from monitoring activities provide information on natural processes occurring in the Lake, basic characteristics of the ecosystem, and water quality trends. This information aids in understanding how human activities and management actions are affecting the Lamoille County NRCD Lake. Managing this data and making it available to policymakers, managers, researchers, community groups, and the public maximizes the success of management efforts.

Monitoring projects in the Basin have been designed for a variety of purposes and cover a wide range of topics from forest health and biodiversity to atmospheric and surface water quality. Recent monitoring programs include the Lake Champlain Long-Term Water Quality and Biological Monitoring Program (VTDEC, et al.; 2001); the Lake Champlain Diagnostic-Feasibility Study (VTDEC and NYSDEC, 1994); the Lake Champlain Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program (VTDEC, 2000); and the Vermont Lay Monitoring Program, which has provided lakewide monitoring of eutrophication-related parameters during the summer season using citizen volunteers and a consistent EPA-approved methodology every year since 1979 (Picotte, 2000). The Lake Champlain Sediment Toxics Assessment Program (Diamond, et al.; 1999) provides a current database on concentrations of organic and inorganic toxic substances in the sediments in many areas of the Lake. The Vermont Lay Monitoring Program and the Lake Champlain Long-Term Water Quality and Biological Monitoring Program are intended to be ongoing.

uate, and adjust the scope of the Lake Cham- Students from Lamoille County learn to monitor streams ISSUES plain Long-Term Water Quality and Biological for macroinvertebrates. Monitoring Program. Participants affirmed that Continuing the Lake Champlain this program should continue and should Long-Term Water Quality and serve as a primary means for monitoring key Biological Monitoring Program indicators of environmental quality throughout the Basin, detecting environmental trends, pre- During 1999-2000, the LCBP convened several dicting the effects of management actions, and workgroup sessions to design, assess, re-eval- guiding management actions over time.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 99 Measuring and Monitoring Success Workgroup participants also concluded that the Monitoring Land Use Changes Basin has also experienced an encouraging scope of the program should expand to sup- rise in the number of volunteer citizen moni- port new and ongoing monitoring activities and As noted in chapter 2, increased phosphorus toring groups. Improved coordination and special projects where feasible. Such activities loads generated by land use changes appear data-sharing may be expanded to incorporate may include monitoring toxic substances in to be offsetting some of the gains achieved work of these groups, many of which are the water, sediment, air, and biota; biological by point and agricultural nonpoint source affiliated with the states for data quality assur- indicator organisms, including selected species reduction efforts. As the population within ance purposes. of fish or other higher level organisms; exotic the Basin increases, particularly on the species; and meteorological data. The LCBP’s Vermont side of the Lake, more land will current ecosystem indicators project may lend become developed. A reliable way of monitor- ACTIONS insight into how to best integrate this additional ing land use changes over time is needed to (not listed in priority order) monitoring into the long-term monitoring pro- estimate the impacts of these changes on phos- gram. Improved integration of these monitoring phorus loadings to the Lake (LCBP, 2000). 1) Continue to Monitor Key activities will make more efficient use of avail- Baseline Parameters in the Lake able resources and strengthen monitoring Improving Coordination and Champlain Basin efforts. Statistically sound information about Data Sharing water quality, living resources, and habitats of a) Continue the bistate Lake Champlain Long- the Lake Champlain Basin, and GIS applica- Recent enhancements to data sharing and dis- Term Water Quality and Biological Monitoring tions of these data are necessary to assess semination include long-term water quality Program and related monitoring in Québec. progress toward achieving the goals in this monitoring data that are available in electronic Plan. format upon request and a summary on the b) Continue the USGS stream gauging network. LCBP and VTDEC websites, and the work of the Miss- c) Continue basic meteorologic monitoring. isquoi Bay Task Force that OBJECTIVES d) Develop annual data reports, annual load resulted in increased moni- estimates, and periodic trends analyses. (not listed in priority order) toring and stream gaging of Missisquoi Bay. Improved Potential key LCBP partners: NYSDEC,VTDEC, NYS 1) Monitor key indicators of environmental quality in the Lake coordination among man- Biological Survey, USFWS, USGS, QC MENV, LCRC, USEPA, Champlain Basin. agers responsible for water other relevant state, provincial, and federal agencies quality, fish and wildlife, Cost estimate: $600,000 per year Potential funding sources: Federal and state appropria- 2) Track land use changes that impact environmental quality in the aquatic nuisance species, and human health needs to tions,and in-kind participation of other federal and state agencies Lake Champlain Basin. Timeframe: Ongoing be expanded Basin-wide. A Benchmark: Continuation of programs listed above, docu- 3) Coordinate management and accessibility of Lake Champlain formal process to facilitate mentation of trends, direction and assessment of manage- Basin data. data sharing and interpreta- ment efforts tion is essential to Plan 4) Use the data assembled to assess ecosystem conditions and envi- implementation. Equally ronmental quality; document environmental trends; predict the important is the regular pro- effects of management actions on the Lake Champlain ecosystem; duction of summary reports and guide changes to management actions over time. for the general public. The

Page 100 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Measuring and Monitoring Success 2) Continue and Expand Companion Monitoring Programs Essential for Particular Management Concerns Pike River a) Provide a statistically sound data set on 1 toxic substances in fish and wildlife tissue for coordinated management use by both human Great Chazy 2 River health officials and fish and wildlife managers. Missisquoi River Little b) Document the introduction, spread, eco- Chazy River 3 4 nomic impact, and management of aquatic Lamoille nuisance species. 5 6 Saranac River River c) Periodically measure toxic substances, 7 including contaminants of concern and new Salmon River generation chemicals in the water column and Little AuSable lakebottom sediments. River 8 Winooski River 10 9 d) Monitor point source wastewater discharges, as LaPlatte necessary, to help measure success towards phos- AuSable River phorus and other point source reduction goals. River 11 Lewis Creek e) Expand monitoring at tributary mouths to Boquet obtain data sufficient to calculate annual Little Otter Lake Champlain Monitoring Sites River 12 loadings, and to measure success towards Creek phosphorus reduction goals more accurately. 1 Missisquoi Bay (Station 50) Putnam Otter 2 Alburg Center (Station 46) f) Periodically update information on land 13 Creek Creek 3 St. Albans Bay (Station 40) use, agricultural practices, and extent of natural 4 Point Au Roche (Station 36) habitats in the Lake Champlain Basin. 5 Cumberland Bay (Station 33) g) Expand monitoring in targeted watersheds 6 Inland Sea (Station 34) to evaluate effectiveness of BMP implementa- 14 7 Malletts Bay (Station 25) tion for control of nonpoint source pollution. 8 Burlington Harbor (Station 21)

9 Main Lake (Station 19) h) Periodically collect quality assurance samples Poultney 10 Shelburne Bay (Station 16) River from wastewater treatment facilities to ensure Figure 12: Lake and tributary sites 11 Diamond Island (Station 9) accurate estimates of point source phosphorus in the Long-Term Water Quality loads. and Biological Monitoring Mettawee 12 Cole Bay (Station 7) River Program. Source:VTDEC. 13 Crown Point (Station 4) 14 Benson Landing (Station 2)

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 101 Measuring and Monitoring Success

i) Measure land use changes to assess their Potential funding sources: State and federal ACCOMPLISHMENTS impacts on nonpoint source loads. appropriations Timeframe: Ongoing WATER QUALITY MONITORING SHIFTS j) Improve understanding of Lake Champlain Benchmark: Identification of indicators and monitoring sites TO TREND DETECTION hydrodynamics and its effects on in-lake phosphorus concentrations, toxic substances, and pollutant transport to drinking water intakes. 4) Create a Unified Data Access After 10 years of building a comprehensive Potential monitoring parameters could include System for Coordination and Data- database of Lake Champlain water quality water level, temperature, and water current. Sharing among Stakeholders in and biological information, the lake monitoring program is shifting from data col- Potential key LCBP partners: Federal, state, provincial, the Basin, and Produce Timely and lection to overall trend detection. Trends and local agencies (including USGS, NOAA, USFWS, state Accessible Summary Reports for and federal agricultural agencies); LCRC; lay monitoring will determine whether water quality programs, watershed associations; QC MENV; USEPA the General Public improvement targets are being met. All Cost estimate: $250,000 per year the data is readily accessible in electronic Potential funding sources: Federal appropriations and a) Establish an online information center with and paper formats. in-kind participation of other federal and state agencies; USEPA EMAP,Clean Lakes program, federal and state searchable data sets and links to repositories. appropriations EFFECTIVENESS OF BEST MANAGEMENT Timeframe: Ongoing b) Identify and locate existing data sets, Benchmark: Periodic monitoring reports incorporating including historical data where appropriate. RACTICES IS EING ECIPHERED P (BMP) B D these activities into the long-term monitoring program (in Action 1) where appropriate c) Update existing data repositories and establish Two long-term projects are evaluating the new ones where important gaps in data exist. effectiveness of BMPs to reduce nonpoint 3) Develop and Use Indicators of source water pollution. The projects focus Environmental Quality d) Identify protocols for data input, data on urban and agricultural sources of non- summaries, and accessibility, and ensure point source water pollution. These proj- a) Identify environmental indicators through that new data collected follow these protocols. ects contribute to solutions for hard-to- the current ecosystem indicators project. solve phosphorus reduction challenges. Potential key LCBP partners: Federal, state, and local b) Identify appropriate additional monitoring agencies (including USFWS, USGS), USEPA, LCRC, universi- sites and parameters throughout the Basin to ties, lay monitoring programs, watershed associations, the Province of Québec. USGS support the use of these indicators. Cost estimate: $25,000 to $50,000 per year Potential funding sources: State and federal appropria- c) Ensure that major habitats and manage- tions, in-kind contributions ment concerns are addressed. Timeframe: Ongoing Benchmark: Expand the process for data-sharing; publi- Potential key LCBP partners: LCRC, USFWS, NYSDEC, cation of status and trends report for the public VTANR,VTDOH, NYSDOH, LCFWMC, USEPA, universities, QC MENV Cost estimate: $150,000 per year and in-kind participa- A“Real-time”stream gauge monitors results. tion of agency representatives

Page 102 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 STRATEGIES FOR FUNDING IMPLEMENTATION

Each action in Opportunities for Action has an The Institutional Arrangements report (Yellow LCBP estimated cost and potential funding sources Wood Associates, 1995) suggested four princi- associated with it. The identified potential ples to guide successful funding of watershed funding sources reflect the most probable programs: 1) the sources and products of sources of funding for the action, but do not funding should be clearly understood by the indicate a monetary commitment from any public; 2) funding should be flexible and not organization. As various groups take responsi- solely tied to political sources; 3) funding bility for implementing actions, the funding sources should be diversified to reduce sources available to these organizations and dependence on specific organizations; and the actual costs of the actions will become 4) funding must be adequate to fully carry more clear. For many actions, the cost of out the intended purpose of the action. implementation changes, such that new estimates will be necessary from time to time. Opportunities for Action provides benchmarks under each action which are indications of In several instances in the Plan, specific fund- what will be accomplished when the action Many diverse funding sources help implement Plan ing sources are identified for actions. For is implemented. The public can refer to these actions. For example, funding from the North American example, in the section on “Protecting benchmarks to understand how the funding Wetlands Conservation Act helped implement the Lake Wetlands,” Action 1, “Continue to Secure for each action will be used. For several Champlain Wetlands Acquisition Strategy. Funding and Implement the Lake Champlain actions, the cost-estimate also outlines what Wetlands Acquisition Strategy,” lists the USFWS the funding will provide (e.g., $50,000 to hire North American Wetlands Conservation Act a wetland biologist and coordinator of state funding as a potential source of funding for programs). Each action also lists an expected the action. This source was identified because timeframe for implementation. it has been used effectively for the first two phases of funding for wetland acquisition in Opportunities for Action seeks diverse funding the Lake Champlain Basin. However, in addi- sources and does not limit itself to money tion to such specific funding sources, the allocated by traditional federal and state pro- action also lists general funding sources, such grams, local costshare contributions, founda- as state and private funds. By listing these gen- tion grants, and costs borne directly by the eral funding sources, the Plan recognizes the private sector. Several actions in the Plan call need for innovation wherever possible and for the formation of public/private partnerships does not limit itself to seeking funding from as a key means to reducing dependence on traditional, earmarked sources. one source of funding. For example, private entities could help maintain or improve public

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 103 Strategies for Funding Implementation parks or Lake accesses in exchange for publicity and other incentives (see section $225,000 on “Managing Recreation,” Actions 1, 8). USDA Natural Resource $1,500,000 $750,000 Conservation Service US Environmental US Army Corps Protection Agency Because of its evolving nature, Opportunities of Engineers for Action is intended to be updated and $300,000 Great Lake Fisheries evaluated every five years, at which time Commission new priority actions and sources of funding may emerge and be incorporated. Actions $350,000 have built in flexibility with a range of poten- National Park tial key partners and funding sources identi- Service fied. If funding from one source diminishes, $146,600 $2,363,300 Sea Grant other sources will be tapped. Also, because US Fish & Wildlife $250,000 Service the Plan covers a wide range of issues which $485,000 National Oceanic & US Geological have different funding sources, many of the Atmospheric Administration Survey actions will not compete with each other for Note: Additional funding includes $1,000,000 through the USEPA for the Montgomery Wastewater scarce financial resources. Financing options Treatment Plant upgrade. The Lake Champlain Basin Science Center received $500,000 through the US EPA and $500,000 through the Institute for Museum and Library Sciences. Missisquoi National Wildlife can be mixed and matched to fund the priori- Refuge received $2,000,000 for a new headquarters and visitor center through the USFWS. ty actions in the Plan successfully. Figure 13. Fiscal year 2001 federal Lake Champlain appropriations.

Page 104 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 CHAPTER SIX ECONOMICS IN THE LAKE CHAMPLAIN BASIN

conomic data demonstrate that good water Promote healthy and diverse economic activity, and sustainable develop- quality has a strong, positive impact with the Lake Champlain Basin, especially for ment principles within the Lake Champlain Basin while improving water local economies that depend on seasonal quality and conserving the natural and cultural heritage resources on E tourist expenditures for their revenue. GOA L Updated economic data and analysis are important which the regional economy is based. as Basin partners facilitate efficient and equitable distribution of the costs and benefits throughout the plan implementation process. An important goal of Opportunities for Action is to promote water quality objectives in ways that Les aspects économiques are compatible with economic vitality, and to tailor pollution prevention and control programs to Les données économiques actuelles montrent qu'une be both economically appropriate and environmentally effective. The summary information pre- bonne qualité de l'eau a un effet très positif l'ensemble sented in this chapter is drawn largely from the economic analyses prepared for the LCBP in 1996 du bassin du lac Champlain.Les communautés locales, (Holmes & Associates and Artuso, 1993; 1996), and has been augmented with additional econom- dont les revenus sont tributaires des retombées ic and population data for the Lake Champlain Basin that has more recently become available. économiques du tourisme saisonnier, en bénéficient particulièrement. Des données et des analyses économiques à jour sont importantes pour les parte- Sustainable development is an economic development concept that gives full consideration to naires. Ces informations leur permettront de répartir the social, economic, quality of life, and environmental aspects of development decisions. To efficacement et équitablement les coûts et les béné- promote sustainable development, it is essential to work closely with economic development fices tout au long de la mise en place du plan. agencies, chambers of commerce, business and industry groups, real estate development interests, local governments, and environmental organizations to identify actions and programs that can lead to sustained economic activity, good wages, long-term employment, affordable housing and a cleaner environment. For a number of years, the Province of Québec has been incorporating sustainable development principles into all government programs. The LCBP has provided funding for projects—such as alternative manure management and composting demonstration projects— that promote new technologies, improve environmental conditions, and generate revenues within the local economy. The Plattsburgh Air Force Base redevelopment is a recent example of the close integration of environmental cleanup and long-term development activity. The Triangle of Excellence Program is a good example of regional cooperation. The program is a joint effort organized by the mayors of Burlington, Plattsburgh, and St. Jean-sur-Richelieu to promote regional cooperation and economic development. The Plattsburgh Chamber of Commerce is also working on regional cooperative efforts to link economic activity among Québec, northern New York, and the Hudson River area.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 105 Economics in the Lake Champlain Basin

The LCBP has helped fund numerous recre- Vermont spent $4 billion in 1998-99 (April 98 for recreation. A survey investigating the eco- ational and historic preservation projects to March 99), 15% of the total state economy. nomic impact of the sea lamprey control pro- which help to stimulate the local economy, Tourism also contributed 23% of the jobs in gram found that residents within thirty-five such as Lake Champlain Bikeways, the Vermont and 23% of total state personal miles of Lake Champlain spent $118 million Birding Trail, and the Historic Landings income. Based on earlier socioeconomic in 1997 on water-based recreational activities Heritage Trail. The NYSDEC and VTDEC regu- research, about 68% of this sector of the on Lake Champlain. These dollars spent at larly schedule pollution prevention workshops Vermont economy occurs in the Lake local businesses by local residents are in addi- to help businesses reduce costs while ensuring Champlain Basin (Holmes & Associates 1993: tion to $228 million in Lake Champlain-related compliance with environmental regulations. 4-10). Accordingly, the Lake Champlain Basin expenditures made by visitors from outside portion of the Vermont tourism economy can the area. An additional component of the Many state and federal environmental issues, be valued at about $2.7 billion. Approximately Lake Champlain-related tourism economy is such as stormwater management, and TMDL 71% of the Lake Champlain Basin's economy the seasonal homeowners around the Lake. requirements require careful efforts so that occurs in Vermont, while 29% occurs in New Seasonal residents around the Lake spent $16 protection of water bodies from pollution is York (Holmes & Associates and Artuso 1993: million on nondurable goods in 1995 (EFCA, successful, and economic vitality and well- 4-13). It follows that the tourism economy of 1995; Holmes & Associates and Artuso 1996: 80). planned development may occur. The role of the Basin in New York equals approximately the LCBP in these efforts will be to promote $1.1 billion, and the total Basin-wide tourism The international feel of Lake Champlain and environmentally sound decision-making, economy reached about of $3.8 billion in the cooperative tourism efforts already encourage interagency and regional cooperation, expenditures in 1998-99. underway, especially within the US-Canadian support alternative and innovative technology, corridor along Missisquoi Bay and the and promote economic vitality, particularly in Two other statistics developed in earlier Richelieu River, makes the Basin one of the tourism and recreation, based on the appropri- socioeconomic research on Lake Champlain more appealing tourist destinations in the ate use of the natural resources of the Basin. allow us to approximate the economic impact Northeastern US. The Richelieu Valley region of tourism in the Basin. One is that approxi- of Québec has been working to stimulate mately 40% of tourism in the Basin occurs tourism interregionally by promoting outdoor THE ECONOMIC in the shoreland towns bordering Lake activities, cultural heritage, and eco-tourism Champlain (Holmes & Associates and Artuso activities provided by the natural, historical, IMPORTANCE OF 1993: 4-14). The other is that Lake Champlain and cultural attractions around Lake Cham- directly influences at least 15% of the tourism plain and the Richelieu River Basin. LAKE CHAMPLAIN occurring in those shoreland towns (Holmes & Associates and Artuso 1996; Yellow Wood The natural and cultural resources of the Lake Recreation and Tourism Associates 1995). Using the 1998-99 Vermont Champlain Basin provide a foundation that tourism data, it can be projected that $1.5 supports other components of the regional The Lake Champlain region has rapidly billion of tourism expenditures are occurring economy. Abundant and diverse natural evolved towards a service-oriented economy, in shoreland towns, and that $228 million of resources are a major reason many Basin resi- with one-third of total employment in the those expenditures are being spent on Lake dents choose to live where they do. Sport fish- service industries in 1990. Recreation and Champlain, related activities (e.g., boating, ing and hunting, as well as nonconsumptive tourism constitute a major portion of that camping, fishing, motels, etc.). Those are uses such as boating, hiking, and cross-country service economy. A recent comprehensive tourism-related expenditures by visitors to the skiing, all are made more attractive to local study of tourism showed that tourists in area. Local residents also use Lake Champlain residents by excellent water quality, abundant

Page 106 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Economics in the Lake Champlain Basin wildlife, and wildlife habitat. Whereas only a indicates that during the open water season, water, consuming fish that have accumulated generation ago, railroads, airports, and high- more than one-third (42%) of 1997 open water high levels of toxic substances in their tissues, ways were the key determinants for locating fishing expenditures were associated with fish- and swimming in water that has been contam- a new factory, economists are now finding ing for lake trout, 27% with fishing for land- inated by pathogens or toxins from bacteria. that recreational opportunities, quality of life, locked salmon, 11% with bass, and 8% were good schools, and healthcare are key factors associated with walleye fishing. There are 99 public water systems that draw guiding the location of new industries. water from Lake Champlain, comprised of 35 There are 98 fishing and fishing-related busi- residential suppliers and 64 non-residential While many types of recreation are available nesses within ten miles of Lake Champlain. In suppliers, such as motels, schools, businesses, within the Basin, water-based recreation pro- 1997, the owners of those businesses estimat- campgrounds, restaurants, gas stations, etc., vides the primary attraction for visitors. Bike ed that 78% ($5.6 million) of their $7.2 million serving approximately 188,000 people (35% of paths, scores of municipal and state parks, in gross fishing based income was derived the US population of the Basin). beaches, ski trails, boat launches, boat tours from anglers fishing Lake Champlain or on the Lake, and portions of the Green its tributaries. Approximately 137,803 Vermont residents are Mountain National Forest and the Adirondack served by 25 municipal and 6 commercial Park all are located in the Basin. Protection The plan recommends investigating the devel- drinking water supply systems that draw their and enhancement of the environmental, cul- opment of a joint New York and Vermont source water from Lake Champlain, indicating tural, and historic resources are clearly impor- Lake Champlain fishing license agreement. An that almost one quarter (24%) of Vermont's tant to many recreational users, as these in-depth benefit-cost analysis of that proposal, population relies on Lake Champlain for resources are the main focus of the recreation- which has not yet been undertaken, would be drinking water. Although the vast majority use al experience. Much of the challenge in recre- a positive development for anglers and the public water systems that are monitored and ation management lies in providing additional fishing economy around the Lake. Vermont regulated, approximately 4,000 people draw recreation opportunities in ways that do not and New York management agencies are con- their own water directly from the Lake. significantly worsen water quality. tinuing to discuss options for a reciprocal However, it is not recommended for drinking agreement and to study the potential impacts without treatment. In 1988, the average expenditure by New of various alternatives on vital fish and wildlife York anglers on nondurable goods at Lake program revenues. The Champlain Water District pumps approxi- Champlain was $19.61 per angler day, for a mately 11 million gallons of water per day total of $9.5 million in local expenditures. Economic Aspects of Clean Water from Lake Champlain. At a wholesale rate of They spent an additional $4.7 million en route. $1.11 per 1,000 gallons in 2001, Lake Holmes & Associates (1993) extrapolated the Approximately 200,000 people use Lake Champlain drinking water could be partially New York findings to Vermont and concluded Champlain as a source of drinking water, valued at $12 million, considering only its that angler expenditures on nondurable goods including an estimated 4,149 households with wholesale value and accounting only for those at Lake Champlain approximated $32 million private water systems drawing from the Lake. individuals served by the 11 municipalities in annually. A more recent survey of fishing Human health concerns related to Lake the Champlain Water District. Using the same license holders in New York and Vermont esti- Champlain have been elevated to a Highest wholesale value for the other two thirds (62%) mated that Lake Champlain anglers spent $100 Priority in this revised version of of Lake Champlain drinking water users, the million on nondurable goods (e.g., tackle, Opportunities for Action. The principal health total wholesale use value of Lake Champlain bait, refreshments) and $105 million on risks posed by water pollution in the drinking water would be approximately $36 durable goods (e.g., fishing rods, fishing Champlain Basin involve drinking unhealthy million in 2001. boats) in 1997 (Gilbert 2000). Gilbert's data

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 107 Economics in the Lake Champlain Basin

Overall, Lake Champlain compares very typically in the vicinity of the beach or OBJECTIVES favorably to surface water sources through- upstream in the watershed. There has been out the nation, and the Lake seems to be a significant progress on eliminating combined (not listed in priority order) more cost-effective source of water than sewer overflows, but work remains. In addi- alternative sources. While nutrient levels and tion, controlling urban runoff, agricultural and 1) Gather economic data to increase understanding turbidity at the Champlain Water District natural sources, and animal wastes will con- of the relationship between the economy and the water source are now below national aver- tribute to success. environment. ages, there would be direct adverse economic impacts in terms of increased drinking Beach users have many options when arriving 2) Encourage cost-benefit analyses to determine water filtration and treatment costs if Lake at a closed beach. They can look for another the most cost effective means of pollution Champlain nutrient levels were to increase or beach on Lake Champlain, travel to another prevention. if federal or state drinking water standards lake or cancel their beach trip. In the first were to become more strict. case, the economic benefit of their beach trip- 3) Encourage the use of federal, state, local, and related expenditures is transferred to the other private funding for brownfield redevelopment and Swimmable Waters beach location. In other scenarios, the recre- other activities that return previously contaminated ational expenditures are lost to Lake land to viable economic use. While the actual number of swimmers is Champlain area businesses. As an example, one Vermont beach was closed for most of 4) Improve capacity for regional cooperation on unknown, an estimated 968,000 visits to pub- 1995 because of pathogens possibly related to cultural heritage-based economic initiatives. lic and private commercial beaches on Lake Champlain occurred in 1993. Swimming and a malfunctioning septic system. The beach had 500 to 2,000 users per day in 1993. Using a 5) Encourage natural resource agencies to work wading were the most popular recreational Vermont State Park day use expenditure esti- cooperatively on appropriate marketing of Lake activities on Lake Champlain, accounting for Champlain's natural resources including fishing, 1.2 million user days and 38% of all Lake- mate of $26.82 per group, lost expenditures hunting, hiking, camping, and paddling. related recreational activity for residents liv- amounted to $3,800 to $15,340 per day. ing within 35 miles of the Lake. In addition, During the swimming season, local businesses 6) Fund projects to reduce the impact of sprawl swimming is an important recreation activity may have lost about $200,000 to $350,000. on the water quality of the Lake and its tributaries. at more than 9,000 seasonal homes and other year-round homes lakeshore towns. Periodic 7) Encourage the sustainable use of the Basin’s high levels of fecal coliform have caused OVERVIEW OF THE LAKE natural, cultural, and historic resources. public beach closings in some areas of the Lake, curtailing swimming activities and CHAMPLAIN BASIN 8) Work to reduce the negative economic impacts resulting in adverse economic impact on the of aquatic nuisance species in the Basin. local economy. ECONOMY

There are 54 public and commercial beaches Employment and Income and 10 private beaches on Lake Champlain. Recent beach closings, primarily in Vermont, The diverse economy of the Lake Champlain have been triggered by excessive coliform bac- Basin has helped it weather recessions teria counts. These problems appear to be site between 1980 and 2000. In addition to specific, and the source of contamination is tourism, major sectors of the Basin economy

Page 108 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Economics in the Lake Champlain Basin include manufacturing, agriculture, retail and fishing industry, totaling 12,000 people, while wholesale trade, healthcare, universities, pris- nationally the sector accounted for 2.7% of all ons, and state government. Research for the employment (US Department of Commerce). LCBP in the 1990s found that employment in In several locations around the Basin, primary the service sector comprises 35% of Basin businesses related to agriculture, mining, and employment by industry, followed by trade forestry are the major employers. For example, (22%), and manufacturing (15%). The trend in the “agriculture, forestry, and fisheries” indus- the last twenty years has been towards an try grouping accounts for more than 25% of increase in the service and trade sectors and a all employment in the Vermont towns of decrease in the manufacturing sector. The Bridport, Shoreham, and Addison. The town of most recent Economic Census for Vermont Willsboro, New York has approximately 11% (US Census Bureau 1997) indicates that sales of its employment in agriculture, forestry, and and receipts for all Vermont establishments mining activities (US Department of totaled more than $29 billion in 1997, and that Commerce 1990 Census; Holmes & manufacturing accounted for 27% of that Associates and Artuso 1996: 50-52). total; retail trade, 20%; wholesale trade, 16%; The term “primary employment” dis- and services, 13%. tinguishes direct harvesting and preliminary processing of natural Income from wages, especially in the rural resource commodities from “second- portions of the Basin, lags behind the national ary employment,” which involves average. In the Adirondack Park portion of the the subsequent transportation, pro- Proctor Maple Research Center Lake Champlain Basin, average annual wages cessing, packaging, and marketing in 1992 were $20,621, in contrast to $32,411 of the natural resource. While sec- for the State of New York and $25,903 for the ondary employment is difficult to nation. In Vermont, nonmetropolitan earnings quantify, secondary agriculture- per job were $24,774 in 1999, while metropol- related employment is thought to itan earnings were $28,039. Nationally, the comprise an additional 10% to 15% averages for nonmetropolitan earnings were of total local employment. $24,408 and for metropolitan earnings were $36,526. The Lake Champlain Basin produces approximately one- third of the maple syrup in the United States. Economic Dependence on Natural Resources

The more traditional rural industries of natural resource harvesting, resource extraction, and farming continue to make significant contributions to local economies. The 1990 US census data for Vermont indicated that 4.2% of employment was in the agriculture, forestry, and

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 109 Economics in the Lake Champlain Basin Agriculture the three New York Basin counties accounted for about 60% of total farm sales, while In the ten counties of New York and Vermont statewide, dairy product sales accounted for that are predominately in the Basin, there 53% of New York farm cash receipts. were approximately 4,840 farms in 1987, with the distribution roughly being one-third in According to the New York Soil and Water New York and two-thirds in Vermont. Conservation Committee, there are now 1,080 According to the 1997 Census of Agriculture, farms in the New York portion of the Basin. the number of acres of farmland in Vermont Of those, approximately 600 are considered decreased by one percent from 1992 to 1997, to be commercial farms. At least 55 of those to 1.3 million acres, while the num- farms are classified as concentrated animal ber of full-time farms decreased six feeding operations (CAFOs) with 300 or more percent to 3,300. animal units or approximately 215 mature dairy cows. These CAFOs must develop and Don Meals The total value of agricultural prod- implement comprehensive nutrient manage- ucts sold from farms in the Basin in ment plans within five years. Over the past 1990 was $415.5 million, with 58% five years, New York has committed $3 million of the total attributable to Vermont in cost-share funds for agricultural environ- farms. Sales from farms in the mental management in the New York portion Vermont sector of the Basin of the Basin, with farm operators committing accounted for approximately 64% nearly $1 million in matching funds. The costs of all Vermont farm sales. By 1997, of constructing manure storage structures con- sales from Vermont farms totaled tinues to rise and now can exceed $250,000. $476 million and the sales per farm averaged $82,000, indicating that Forest Products the total value of Lake Champlain Basin agricultural products had Forest products include a wide diversity of Dairy products account for the majority of farm sales risen to $526 million. In New York, commodities and manufactured items such as in both New York and Vermont. Washington County accounts for 51% of the building materials, paper, maple syrup, and New York Basin farm acreage, while in furniture. The importance of specific forest Vermont, Addison and Franklin Counties products-related industries to local economies account for 53% of the farm acreage. varies from one part of the Basin to another. Maple syrup contributes significantly to local Dairy products account for the majority of rural economies in the Basin. In 1999, farm sales in both New York and Vermont Vermont remained the largest producing state Basin areas. Data for 1989 indicate that dairy in the nation, accounting for 31% of the total products accounted for 72% of Vermont farm US maple production. Vermont's maple syrup cash receipts, followed by beef and veal production was valued at $10.5 million in (13%), horses (6%), hay (3%), and maple 1999, while production in New York portion syrup (3%). In 1990, dairy product sales in of the Lake Champlain Basin was valued at

Page 110 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Economics in the Lake Champlain Basin $1 million. Maple candy and other maple workforce in paper mills in the region. in Vermont, and 28% reside in New York. items are value-added products that increase However, wood manufacturing of value-added Approximately 45% of the Lake Champlain the economic impact of the maple syrup products, such as furniture, is a growing and Basin residents live in towns bordering the industry in local economies. Manufacturing of strong economic sector. shore of Lake Champlain. paper and paper products makes a significant economic impact on rural economies as well. The Vermont portion of the Main Lake area, For example, in 2000, International Paper's POPULATION CHANGE which includes the Winooski River Basin Ticonderoga Mill employed 690 people and and contains the cities of Burlington and had a payroll of $36 million. Approximately AND LAND USE Montpelier, comprises almost one-half of the 90% of all employees live in the New York population in the Basin (47%). The other main towns in the vicinity of Ticonderoga. In 2000, Population change can be an indicator of eco- population center is the Plattsburgh area of the mill purchased more than $30 million in nomic activity—or lack of economic opportu- New York which includes the Saranac and goods and services in the Ticonderoga area of nity—and can indicate high growth areas Chazy River basins. Here, 15% of the popula- New York State. The mill also purchased $20 where land use planning is needed to protect tion resides. Another population center is the million of fiber, wood chips, and bark from water quality. Table 3 presents the total popu- Mallets Bay area north of Burlington, repre- the Adirondack region, and 285 private truck- lation in each of nine major watersheds senting a portion of the Lamoille River Basin, ers were involved in bringing wood to the around the Lake Champlain Basin. with 12% of the population. The six percent mill. International Paper is the largest private increase in population between 1990 and 2000 landowner in New York State, owning and The preliminary 2000 Census data indicates was the lowest rate of increase of any of the managing nearly 300,000 acres of forestland, that the US population in the Basin numbers past five decades (Table 4). The higher growth most of it located within the Adirondack Park. about 541,000 people. An estimated 30,000 areas were Mallets Bay, Lake George, Miss- people live in the Québec portion of the Lake isquoi Bay, and the Inland Sea watershed In Vermont, three counties each account for Champlain Basin. About 63% of the 609,000 areas. The watershed area including 14% of the volume of sawlogs: Caledonia, residents in Vermont live in the Lake Cham- Plattsburgh experienced a 6% decline in Orleans, and Windsor. Of those, only Orleans plain Basin. Seventy-two percent of the popu- population is considered a Basin county, and only about lation in the US portion of the Basin resides one-half of the county lies within the Basin. In the New York sector of the Basin, a significant Lake Champlain Basin Total Population Percent (%) of amount of the land area is classified as com- Watershed/Lake Segment 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2000 Population mercial forestland: Clinton County (69%), Missisquoi Bay 270,752 109,42 260,05 282,78 245,22 258,10 Franklin County (61%), Essex County (48%), Inland Sea 11,922 12,516 13,427 14,123 16,200 17,921 3 Warren County (59%), and Washington County Malletts Bay 233,534 253,83 324,13 476,83 556,23 625,29 1 (48%). According to recent research on the Broad Lake, VT 151,393 163,893 194,040 216,256 236,698 254,228 47 forest-based economy of the northern forest South Lake, VT 124,290 136,15 126,12 158,01 189,92 241,22 region of New York, Vermont, New Hamp- South Lake, NY 23,219 22,641 24,572 25,057 27,607 28,666 5 shire, and Maine, jobs in lumber, wood, and Lake George 37,566 45,61 53,30 55,95 59,76 61,54 Table 3. paper products have declined from 1987 to Broad Lake South, NY 29,568 31,851 31,175 34,241 36,113 37,987 7 US population: Lake Champlain 1997. There is local evidence of that decline in Broad Lake North, NY 517,627 705,11 733,38 841,30 856,30 851,00 1 the closing of several sawmills and plywood watershed areas, Total US Basin Population: 335,871 370,041 412,207 464,563 510,077 540,983 100 1950-2000. mills during 2000-2001 in the New York por- Source: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1950, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000. tion of the Basin, and related reductions in the Watershed population analysis by Holmes & Associates for the Lake Champlain Basin Program (2001).

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 111 Economics in the Lake Champlain Basin

Since 1950, the Mallets Bay watershed area a map of the landscape of the Basin using and utilities, residential, commercial, and has experienced the most growth among the data from 1993. These efforts yielded a com- industrial, have grown to cover a little more nine areas; at 177%, its growth rate was three plete land use and vegetative cover inventory than 5% of the landscape. times the average for the Basin. Other high and a database that can be used to describe growth areas of the Basin over the past 50 years the relationship between land use and water A major landscape issue facing the Basin is are the Lake George watershed area and Broad quality in the Basin. For example, analysts sprawled development, a cumulative process Lake, Vermont watershed area (Table 4). have developed a numerical model that that results from the incremental growth of describes the rate at which phosphorus enters low-density residential and urban develop- Also very important to the Basin economy Lake Champlain as a function of the amount ment, typically scattered along a highway. are the seasonal homeowners and residents. of urban, agricultural, and forested land in Sprawled development tends to begin at the According to the 1990 Census data, there the Basin. edge of traditional community centers and were 38,530 seasonal homes in the Basin, extends outward into previously rural areas, or approximately 14.6% of all Basin housing Satellite data has yielded important informa- requiring new or larger roads, water and units. Approximately 9,118 of the seasonal tion about the Basin. The terrestrial part of the sewer capacity, and utility lines. Although homes are located in the Lake Champlain Basin is predominantly forested (about 64%), sprawl is not new to the Basin, the amount shoreland areas, or 24% of all seasonal homes including deciduous trees (33%), mixed woods and rate of this form of development has in the Basin. The 38,530 seasonal homes (16%), and conifers (14%). Agricultural land- made it a topic of concern and study in would equal a population increase of approxi- scape categories, including pasture and some parts of the Basin. mately 116,000 people if they were each orchards, cover about 16% of the Basin. The occupied by three individuals, amounting open waters of Lake Champlain and smaller The effects of sprawled development in the to a seasonal increase in Basin population lakes and rivers comprise the next largest Basin may result in a reduction of water quality by about 20%. Considering shoreland seasonal component of the landscape, approximately from increased urban runoff and loss of wet- homes only and a seasonal household size 10% of the surface area. Wetlands, a vital lands. As the landscape becomes increas- of three to six people, those 9,118 homes hydrological and ecological component of the ingly fragmented, wildlife habitat, farmlands, add 27,000 to 55,000 people to the Lake Basin, comprise less than 4% of the surface. and forests become less productive. The Champlain shoreland population in July and Lastly, the areas developed for transportation discussion of both the positive and negative August. The year-round population of 19,030 for the Missisquoi Bay area in Québec more Lake Champlain Percent (%) Change than doubles during the summer with the Watershed/Lake Segment 1950-60 1960-70 1970-80 1980-90 90-2000 1950-2000 influx of 21,274 summer residents. Missisquoi Bay -26.4 36. 173. 140. 141. 35. Inland Sea 5.0 7.3 5.2 14.7 10.6 50.3 Associated with population growth are devel- Malletts Bay 12.3 423. 317. 210. 146. 177. opment and changes to the landscape, among Broad Lake, VT 8.3 18.4 11.4 9.5 7.4 67.9 the primary human impacts on water quality South Lake, VT 123.0 -70. 161. 150. 66. 48. in the Basin. Quantifying the type and magni- South Lake, NY -2.5 8.5 2.0 10.2 3.8 23.5 tude of change is an essential part of under- Lake George 299.5 124. 122. -63. 173. 83. standing the impacts, both positive and nega- Broad Lake South, NY 7.7 -2.1 9.8 5.5 5.2 28.5 Table 4. Population change: Lake tive, of land use changes. In a project that Broad Lake North, NY 330.3 -82. 120. 61. -66. 40. combined federal, state, and local resources, Champlain watershed Total Change: 10.2 11.4 12.7 9.8 6.1 61.1 areas, 1950 to 2000. the Lake Champlain Basin Program developed Source: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1950, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000. Watershed population analysis by Holmes & Associates for the Lake Champlain Basin Program (2001).

Page 112 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Economics in the Lake Champlain Basin impacts of sprawl on the landscape, culture rivers, are increasingly compromised by the Employment, Income, and Agricul- and economy of the Basin has taken on an degradation of water quality as a result of the tural Statistics for Missisquoi Bay increased importance in view of recent devel- excess concentration of phosphorous. Water opment trends. quality at the bay's public beaches is usually A general economic portrait emerges by calcu- very good, according to the safety standards lating the averages of the indicators for the of the Environment-Plage program of the three regional county municipalities making CONOMIC ATA FOR Ministère de l'Environnement du Québec. In E D up the basin area (Haut-Richelieu, Brome- fact, of the five public beaches in Venise-en- Missisquoi and Memphrémagog). In 1999, THE QUÉBEC PORTION Québec, four received an annual average rat- the average annual per capita income in the ing of A (excellent) in 2000, and the other, a Missisquoi Bay area was around $22,000 OF THE MISSISQUOI BAY B rating (good). Even so, these beaches had (Canadian currency). The average labor force to be closed in mid-summer recently because participation rate in 1996 was around 61.7%; DRAINAGE BASIN of a major blue-green algae bloom. the employment rate, 55.2%; and the jobless Recreation and Tourism around Wastewater and Drinking Water rate, 10.4%. Missisquoi Bay Infrastructure for Québec Muni- Agriculture and natural resources account for cipalities around Missisquoi Bay 5.6% of the labor market, manufacturing and After agriculture, the economic engines in the construction for 29.9%, and transportation, Missisquoi Bay basin are recreation and In the Québec portion of the Missisquoi Bay trade, and services for 64.5%. Agriculture is tourism. It is easy to imagine the major impact drainage basin, 50% of the population is con- the economic mainstay in the Missisquoi Bay the seasonal influx of vacationers can have on nected to a sewerage system, 86% of which is drainage basin. According to Statistics Canada the economy of several municipalities. When a served by a wastewater treatment plant. Seven (1996 census), farms cover 45.5% of the basin population doubles or even quadruples during municipalities already have a sewerage system area, 24.6% of which is under cultivation. a period of several months, it drives up annu- with treatment plants and another is in the Corn and fodder are the two main crops, al sales of local businesses. However, there process of installing one. These systems serve accounting for 21.5% of the total farm area. have yet to be any specific studies on the eco- 10,471 people at a total construction cost of This translates into 700 farms, including 400 nomic impact of seasonal population growth $23,616,800 (Canadian). in the Brochets sub-river basin. In terms of in the Missisquoi Bay drainage basin. livestock production, there are 1.4 animal Eight municipalities in the basin have a drink- units (AU) per hectare (1 AU = 500 kg live The area of the drainage basin offers a wealth ing water supply system connected to a filtra- weight), with beef cattle accounting for 46.2% of recreational, regional tourism, and destina- tion plant. These systems serve roughly 10,000 of production; pigs, 43.4%; poultry, 6.8%; and tion tourism opportunities. Agricultural and people. The system furnishing water to the other animals, 3.6%. forest areas are popular spots for skiing, hik- city of Bedford and the Philipsburg area of ing, and hunting, activities that are less direct- Saint-Armand has trouble maintaining water ly affected by water quality. The same is not quality standards when the suspended solids true, however, for other recreational activities or microscopic algae content in the bay are such as swimming, fishing, and boating. These too high. Several drinking water warnings activities, which are practiced primarily on the have had to be issued since the start-up of shores and in the waters of the bay and its the filtration plant. main tributaries, the Brochets and Missisquoi

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 113 Economics in the Lake Champlain Basin Population Change and Land Use HIGH PRIORITY ACTIONS guide funding priorities, it is important to in the Missisquoi Bay Region assess the costs and benefits of potential (not listed in priority order) actions to project or assess their effectiveness in various parts of the Basin. The population of the Missisquoi Bay drainage 1) Update Socioeconomic Data basin is distributed over two Québec adminis- for theLakeChamplain Region Potential key LCBP partners: federal, state and local trative regions (Montérégie and Estrie), three agencies, universities. regional county municipalities, and 29 munici- Cost estimate: $5,000 to $10,000 per project assessed palities. During the early 1990s, the LCBP developed Potential funding sources: USEPA, NPS, NRCS,VTACCD, an economic database for the Lake Champlain NYS Empire State Development The total population in this area was 21,638 in region based on the results of the 1990 cen- Timeframe: Ongoing 2000. The population grew by 3.8% between sus. The database provides important informa- Benchmark: Completion of cost-benefit analysis for key actions 1996 and 2000. Eastman is the only municipal- tion on employment by industry and occupa- ity in the entire basin to have experienced tion, as well as economic activity generated by significant population growth (44%) between agriculture, forestry, mining, and other natural 3) Support Cost-Benefit 1996 and 2000. There has been almost no resource-based industries. The study also ana- Analyses of Aquatic Nuisance change in the population of the other basin lyzed the regional tourism economy and the Species Control Efforts municipalities. economic benefits generated by various recreational activities, such as fishing, hunting, hik- Management decisions about the control of ing, and camping. Data on tourism from The population increases substantially during aquatic nuisance species in the Basin would Québec and use of Lake Champlain by the summer, particularly in the three municipali- benefit from improved economic information Québec boaters were also included in the ties of Venise-en-Québec, Saint-Georges-de- about the available options, especially to report. This database now needs to be updat- Clarenceville, and Saint-Armand. The seasonal guide the allocation of limited resources. To ed with information soon to be available from population is 7000 in the summer, with the provide essential information about aquatic the most recent census data in New York, population of Venise-en-Québec quadrupling, nuisance species management strategies, Vermont, and Québec. and that of Saint-Georges-de-Clarenceville studies to assess the costs and benefits of doubling. This results in a veritable urban con- potential actions and to project their effective- centration in a narrow strip along the shores Potential key LCBP partners: State and regional economic development agencies and tourism offices ness in various parts of the Basin should be of the bay during a time of year when the Cost estimate: $40,000 to $50,000 per year for two years. supported and encouraged. environmental conditions in the bay are the Potential funding sources: USEPA, NPS, NRCS,VTACCD, most sensitive. Numerous cottages and several NYS Empire State Development Potential key LCBP partners: Federal, state, and local summer campgrounds are located in these muni- Timeframe: 2002-2003 agencies, universities. cipalities. Tourism leads to a seasonal influx of Benchmark: Completion of database update Cost estimate: $5,000 to $10,000 per project assessed people in other basin municipalities as well, such Potential funding sources: USEPA, NPS, NRCS,VTANR, as Frelighsburg, Dunham, Sutton, and Eastman. 2) Support Cost-Benefit Analyses NYSDEC,VTACCD, NYS Empire State Development Timeframe: Ongoing of Pollution Prevention Projects Benchmark: Completion of cost-benefit analysis for Only 5% of the area of the Missisquoi Bay key actions drainage basin is urbanized, and there are no The LCBP funds many demonstration and major agglomerations. Approximately 45% of implementation projects to prevent pollution the basin area is farmland, and the remaining in the Basin. To provide essential information 50% forest and water. about pollution prevention strategies and to

Page 114 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Economics in the Lake Champlain Basin 4) Work with Federal, State, and heritage tourism and recreation management, habitat, farmlands, and forests. The most Local Communities to Identify which are detailed in other sections of this recent land use and land cover data for the Plan. Successful implementation of these Lake Champlain Basin was published by LCBP Brownfield Redevelopment Areas regional initiatives depends on water quality in 1993. In order to track changes in land use that May Be Eligible for Federal protection and improvement projects. and its related impacts, more current land use and or State Funding data must be acquired to assist mangers in set- Potential key LCBP partners: Landowners, businesses, ting priorities and implementing management nonprofits organizations, local and county governments The LCBP should take a proactive role to programs, and this information must be made and tourism offices, regional commissions, chambers of available to the public. work with local communities to identify loca- commerce, housing and conservation boards, NPS, USEPA, tions within the Basin which are in need of NYSDEC,VTANR, NYSOPRHP,VTDHP,and Québec Societe de environmental cleanup and eligible for federal la Faune et des Parcs Potential key LCBP partners: USEPA, USGS, USACOE, VTDEC, NYSDEC, APA, universities, local/regional planning and state funding for brownfield redevelop- Cost estimate: $75,000 to $150,000 per year Potential funding sources: NPS, USEPA,VHCB, agencies ment. non profits organizations, USDA-NRCS, HPF, HUD, National Cost estimate: $100,000 to $250,000 Trust for Historic Preservation, USDA-FMHA Potential funding sources: USEPA,USACOE Potential key LCBP partners: USEPA,VTDEC, NYSDEC Timeframe: Ongoing Timeframe: 2002-2003 Cost estimate: $15,000 Benchmark: Synthesis of regional marketing goals and Benchmark: Updated land use/ land cover report Potential funding sources: USEPA their integration into recreation and tourism plans (see Timeframe: Ongoing Action Items 6 and 7 in chapter 4 and creation of an Benchmark: Development of report that identifies appropriate regional marketing effort for the Basin. eligible sites 6) Update Land Use/ Land Cover 5) Continue an Integrated Approach Database to Environmental, Cultural Resource, and Recreation Management Satellite data and locally derived information has yielded important facts about the Basin. For more than a decade, the LCBP has worked Sixty-four percent the landscape in the Basin on water quality, recreation management, and is still forested, and agricultural lands cover cultural heritage programs through a variety of approximately 16% of the Basin. The urban funding sources. Regional tourism is directly landscape currently represents only 5% of tied to a clean environment, improved recre- the total land use. However, urban areas ational access, and increased understanding contribute a far larger portion of phosphorus of our cultural heritage resources. In 2001, loadings to Lake Champlain than other land the LCBP established a cultural resource and uses on an acre by acre basis. Continuing recreation advisory committee consisting of urbanization and sprawled development have local officials, historic preservation experts, the potential to add additional phosphorus and state agency representatives to provide loadings to the Lake and its tributaries unless input and recommendations on regional recre- specific mitigation measures are taken. The ation and cultural resource initiatives within effects of sprawl potentially include not only the Basin. New and exiting opportunities exist reduction of water quality but also increasing- to expand regional cooperation on cultural ly fragmented and less productive wildlife

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 115 Economics in the Lake Champlain Basin CONCLUSION

The available economic data and analyses demonstrate that the priority actions for LCBP improving water quality will have a strong positive impact within the Lake Champlain Basin in all sectors of the economy. From clean drinking water to recreational, aesthetic, and cultural values, the public strongly endorses maintaining clean water and preventing pollution in the Basin. The positive economic importance of maintaining clean water is very significant, especially for local economies that depend on seasonal tourist expenditures for their annual revenue. Moreover, the economic cost of remediating polluted areas is far greater than the cost of maintaining clean water in the first place.

It is important to facilitate efficient and equitable distribution of the costs and benefits throughout the Plan implementation process. The economic analyses should provide guidance in that direction. Increased attention to the collection and analysis of economic data is recommended, and the continued inclusion A father and daughter show off a great catch at the annual of economic interests in the planning process Vermont Fish and Wildlife Kid’s Fishing Day. for protecting Lake Champlain is essential.

Page 116 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 REFERENCES

Brown, E., A. Duchovnay, A. Shambaugh, and A. Holmes & Associates and A. Artuso. 1996. Economic Miller, K. 1994. Press Release on 1994 maple syrup pro- Williams. 1993. 1992 Lake Champlain Biomonitoring Analysis of the Final Draft Plan for the Lake Champlain duction. Albany, NY: New York State Agricultural Program. Vermont Water Resources and Lake Studies Basin Program. LCBP Technical Document No. 17B. Statistics Service. Center. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont. Boston, MA: USEPA. Missisquoi Bay Phosphorus Reduction Task Force. Budd, L. and D. Meals. 1994. Lake Champlain Nonpoint Holmes, T. and A. Artuso. 1995. Preliminary 2000. A Division of Responsibility Between Quebec and Source Pollution Assessment. LCBP Technical Report No. Economic Analysis of the Draft Plan for the Lake Vermont for the Reduction of Phosphorus Loads to the 6A. Boston, MA: USEPA. Champlain Basin Program. LCBP Technical Report No. Missisquoi Bay. Grand Isle, VT: LCBP. 12. Boston, MA: USEPA. Diamond, et al. 1999. Ecological Effects of Sediment- National Park Service. 1999. Champlain Valley Heritage Associated Contaminants in Inner Burlington Harbor, Holmes, T. and A. Artuso. 1995. Preliminary Corridor Project: Report of a Special Resource Study. Lake Champlain. Owens Mills, MD: Tetra Tech, Inc. Economic Analysis of the Draft Plan for the Lake Boston, MA: National Park Service, Northeast Region. Champlain Basin Program - Part 2. LCBP Technical Economic and Financial Consulting Associates, Inc. Report No. 14. Boston, MA: USEPA. New York State Department of Environmental 1993. Demonstration of Local Economic/Other Conservation. 1992. Agricultural Management Practices Community Impacts. Community Case Studies for Lake Champlain Basin Program Phosphorus Catalogue for Nonpoint Source Pollution Prevention and Economic Plan Elements. LCBP Demonstration Report No. Reduction Team. June 2000. Preliminary Evaluation of Water Quality Protection in New York State. Albany, NY: 2 Grand Isle, VT: LCBP. Progress Toward lake Champlain Basin Program New York State Nonpoint Source Management Practices Phosphorus Reduction Goals: A Lake Champlain Basin Task Force. Economic and Financial Consulting Associates, Inc. Program Internal Report. Grand Isle, VT: LCBP. 1995. An Estimation of the Economic Importance of Travel, New York State Department of Environmental Tourism and Recreation in Grand Isle County and the Lake Champlain Management Conference. 1996. Conservation, University of the State of New York Inland Sea Region of Vermont. Opportunities for Action: An Evolving Plan for the Future Biological Survey and the New York State of the Lake Champlain Basin. Grand Isle, VT: LCBP. Freshwater Institute, and the Vermont Department Eliopoulos, C. and P. Stangel. 2001. Lake Champlain of Environmental Conservation. 1995. Long-term 2000 Zebra Monitoring Program: Final Report. Waterbury, Marchant, D. 1996. Personal communication. Grand Water Quality and Biological Monitoring Program for VT: VTDEC. Isle, VT: VTDFW. Lake Champlain. Interim data report prep. for USEPA. Albany, NY: NYSDEC, SUNYBS and NYSFI, Waterbury, Gilbert, A.H. 2000. Lake Champlain Angler Survey 1997. McIntosh, A., ed. 1994. Lake Champlain Sediment VT: VTDEC. Federal Aid Job Performance Report: Final Report. Toxics Assessment Program: An Assessment of Sediment VTDFW, Waterbury, VT. Associated Contam- inants in Lake Champlain, Phase I. Ottauquechee Regional Planning Commission. 1979. LCBP Technical Report No. 5. Boston, MA: USEPA. The Vermont Backroad Erosion Control Handbook. Hegman, W. et al. 1999. Estimation of Lake Champlain Waterbury, VT: VTDEC. Basinwide Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Export. LCBP Meals, D. 1990. LaPlatte River Watershed Water Quality Technical Report No. 31, Grand Isle, VT: LCBP. Monitoring and Analysis Program, Comprehensive Final Parsons, J. 1988. A Characterization of Vermont's More Report. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, School of Important Wetlands. Waterbury, VT: VDFPR. Holmes and Associates, 1993. Socio-economic Profile, Natural Resources, Vermont Water Resources Research Database, and Description of the Tourism Economy for Center. Picotte, A. 2001. 2000 Lake Champlain Lay Monitoring the Lake Champlain Basin. LCBP Technical Report No. Report. Waterbury, VT: VTANR. 4B. Grand Isle, VT: LCBP. Meals, D. 2001. Lake Champlain Basin Agricultural Watersheds Section 319 National Monitoring Program Schaefer, D. and K. C. Gaspari. 1997. 1996 Lake Holmes & Associates and A. Artuso. 1993. Lake Project: Final Project Report May 1994 - November 2000. Champlain Basin Cultural Heritage Tourism Survey and Champlain Economic Database Project - Executive Waterbury, VT: VTDEC. Marketing Plan. Grand Isle, VT: LCBP. Summary. LCBP Technical Document No. 4A. Boston, MA: USEPA.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 117 References

Silviculture Management Practices Sub-Committee Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. of the New York State Nonpoint Source 2001. Lake Champlain Phosphorus TMDL, Vermont Management Practices Task Force. 1993. Silviculture Portion: Draft for Public Discussion. Waterbury, VT: Management Practices Catalogue for Nonpoint Source VTDEC. Pollution Prevention and Water Quality Protection in New York State. Albany NY: NYSDEC. Vermont Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering. 1981. Special Report to Tiner, RW. 1987. Preliminary National Wetlands the Vermont General Assembly on the Effectiveness of Inventory Report on Vermont's Wetland Acreage. Newton the Phosphorus Detergent Prohibition on Household Corner, MA: USFWS. Cleaning Products and Compliance with a 1.0 Milligram Per Liter Discharge Limitation. Montpelier, VT: VDWREE. United States Department of Agriculture-Soil Conservation Service. 1989. New York Guidelines Vermont Local Roads Program. Maintaining the for Urban Erosion and Sediment Control. 2nd Printing, Vermont Backroad. Transportation Information March, 1989, Syracuse, NY: USDASCS. Exchange, Fact Sheet T-205. Winooski, VT: St. Michael's College. Vermont Agency of Natural Resources. 1996. Environment 1996: An Assessment of the Quality of Vermont Rural Clean Water Program Coordinating Vermont's Environment. Waterbury, VT: VTANR. Committee. 1991. St. Albans Bay Watershed Rural Clean Water Program. Winooski, VT: USDA Soil Conservation Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation Service and Burlington, VT: Vermont Water Resources and New York State Department of Environmental Research Center, University of Vermont. Conservation. 2002. Long Term Water Quality and Biological Monitoring Project for Lake Champlain: Vermont State Statute Title 10 Conservation and Cumulative Report for Project Years 1992 - 2001 Basin Development Chapter 123. Protection of Aquatic Nuisance Species Management Plan. Waterbury, Endangered Species § 5402. Endangered and VT and Albany, NY. VTDEC and NYSDEC. Threatened Species List.

Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation Watzin, M.C. 1992. A Research and Monitoring Agenda and New York State Department of Environmental for Lake Champlain. Proceedings of a Workshop, Dec. 17- Conservation. 2000. Lake Champlain Basin Aquatic 19, 1991, Burlington, VT. LCBP Technical Report No. 1. Nuisance Species Management Plan. Waterbury, VT and Boston, MA: USEPA. Albany, NY: VTDEC and NYSDEC. Yellow Wood Associates. 1993. Case Study of the Town Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation of Champlain. LCBP Demonstration Report No. 1. Grand and New York State Department of Environmental Isle, VT: LCBP. Conservation. 1997. Lake Champlain Diagnostic- Feasibility Study Final Report - A phosphorus budget, Yellow Wood Associates. 1995. Report on Institutional model, and load reduction strategy for Lake Champlain. Arrangements for Watershed Management of the Lake Waterbury, VT and Albany, NY: VTDEC and NYDEC. Champlain Basin. LCBP Technical Report No. 11C. Boston, MA: USEPA. Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 1994. Lake Champlain Diagnostic- Feasibility Study. Final Report Draft 7/1/94. A phosphorus budget, model, and load reduction strategy for Lake Champlain. Waterbury, VT and Albany, NY: VTDEC and NYDEC.

Page 118 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 GLOSSARY

cceptable management practices arnyard runoff system Biological indicators (bioindicators) (AMPs) an installed system for the interception, biological characteristics at the cellular, organism, popu- a phrase used in Vermont to indicate a collection, and safe disposal of runoff water lation, or community level that are representative of a forestry practice or pollution control mech- from a barnyard or concentrated feedlot. given habitat or its ecological condition. ABanism that is effective in reducing nonpoint source pollution to surface water and Biomagnification groundwater. Basin the process whereby harmful substances become the surrounding land that drains into a waterbody. For increasingly concentrated in tissues or internal organs Acquisition Lake Champlain, the land that drains through the many of organisms with each step up the food chain. to obtain property through direct purchase, easement, rivers and their tributaries into the Lake itself. donation, or other means, in order to protect, enhance, Biota or restore habitat functions and values. Benchmark the animal or plant life of a region. a standard against which the success of a program or Algae action may be measured. Bioturbation small aquatic plants that occur as single cells, colonies the stirring up of sediments caused by biological activity. or strands. Algae use carbon dioxide and nutrients such Best management practices (BMPs) as nitrogen and phosphorus to make their own food practices or activities that reduce the amount of pollution Blue-green algae/cyanobacteria through photosynthesis. Algae form the base of the entering a body of water. The most primitive group of algae, some of which pro- aquatic food chain. duce natural toxins. No known human health problems Bioaccumulation have arisen in the US from these toxins. However, the Algae bloom or algal bloom the retention and buildup in the tissues of an organism USEPA is considering putting one of the toxins on its list the growth and rapid reproductions of algae caused from breathing contaminated air, drinking contaminated of water contaminants. by excess nutrients.. Algae blooms are dense mats on water, or eating contaminated food. the surface of the water and can cause unpleasant Brownfields conditions for swimmers or boaters. Biocriteria (biological criteria) abandoned, idled, or under-used industrial and commercial numerical or descriptive measures of the characteristics facilities where expansion or redevelopment is compli- Alternative wastewater treatment technologies of a biological community. Biocriteria are used as an cated by real or perceived environmental contamination. ecologically engineered systems that remove nutrients, index of the health of the community. solids, bacteria, and trace metals from wastewater, such Buffer zones (strips) as constructed wetlands and ponds containing aquatic Biodiversity protective land borders that reduce runoff and nonpoint plants that naturally filter wastewater. the variety of plants and animals, their genetic variabili- source pollution loading to critical habitats or water bod- ties, and their interrelationships and ecological processes, ies. Buffer zones lessen the negative effects of land Alternative watering systems including the communities and landscapes in which development on animals and plants and their habitats. drinking water arrangements for farm animals such as they exist. a trough or tank served by a pipeline from a spring arrying capacity or well that keep livestock away from streambanks Bioenergetic models in recreation management, the amount of and riparian zones and out of streams and rivers. mathematical or conceptual illustrations of an ecosystem use a recreation area can sustain without that account for all or some known characteristics of a deterioration of its quality. In wildlife man- Aquatic food web. Bioenergetic models predict how changing agement, the maximum number of animals growing in, living in, or dependent upon water. one part of the food web affects the rest of the food web. C an area can support. Carrying capacity depends upon the conditions of the habitat. Bioenergetics the study of energy flow through the food web.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 119 Glossary

Catch basin Cultural eutrophication Ecological integrity typically a human-made area that drains to a watercourse eutrophication that is caused by additions of extra nutri- a structurally sound and fully functional ecosystem. or waterbody. ents from human activities (see eutrophication). Such an ecosystem is self-maintaining and resilient when disturbed. Concentration Cultural heritage the amount of a material dissolved in a solution. historic and archeological past reflected in existing culture. Ecologically sensitive areas an area that is prone to disruption of the ecological Contaminant Cultural heritage resources processes if there is alteration of biotic or abiotic systems in the area. Also commonly used to mean any area that a substance that is not naturally present in the environ- the physical record and memory of the past. ment or is present in amounts that can adversely affect contains rare and endangered species. the environment. Cumulative impacts Ecosystem environmental impacts that add up over time and space a group of plants and animals occurring together, and Contamination from a series of similar or related individual actions, the physical environment with which they interact. in water resources, the impairment of water quality by contaminants, or projects. Although each action may waste to a degree that creates a hazard to public health seem to have a negligible impact, the combined effect Ecosystem approach or living resources through poisoning or the spread of can be severe. disease. Air and soil can also be contaminated in a a way of looking at socioeconomic and environmental similar way. atabase information based on the boundaries of ecosystems, such as the Lake Champlain Basin, rather than based a collection of data arranged for ease and on town, city, and county boundaries. Cost-effective speed of retrieval. in environmental policymaking, the least-cost means of achieving a predetermined environmental objective. Ecosystem-based management D an approach to making decisions based on the characteris- Costs include long-term, short-term, direct, and indirect costs to producers, society, and the environment. Dioxin tics of the ecosystem. This style of management takes any of a family of compounds known chemically as into consideration interactions between the plants, dibenzo-p-dioxins. Dioxins are sometimes generated by animals, and physical characteristics of the environment Cost-share industrial processes, and can contaminate water and soil. a method for sharing installation costs for conservation when making decisions about land use or living Tests on laboratory animals indicate that it is one of the resource issues. practices, including BMPs, between a governmental body most toxic human-made chemicals known. (federal, state, local) and a farmer or landowner/land user. Elevated levels Drainage basin Criterion levels that are higher than natural background levels for land area from which water flows into a river or lake, an area. a standard, rule, or test by which something can be either from streams, groundwater, or surface runoff judged or its valued measured. (see Watershed). Endangered species a species in immediate danger of becoming extinct. Critical habitat asement any area which has unique or fragile natural, historic, an agreement by which a landowner gives up geological, archeological, or wildlife value. Areas essen- End-of-pipe or sells one of the rights on his/her at the point of discharge to the environment. tial to the conservation of an officially listed endangered property. For example, a landowner may or threatened species and require special management donate a right of way across his/her property to considerations or protection are also critical habitats. E Erosion allow community members access to the loosening and subsequent transport of soil away the Lake. Cryptosporidium from its native site. Erosion often results from wind or the removal of vegetation, or the wearing away of the a disease-causing microorganism found in water contam- Ecological communities land surface by running water, wind, ice, or gravity. inated by fecal matter and that can cause stomach and a group of interacting plants and animals inhabiting a intestinal illness when ingested. given area.

Page 120 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Glossary

Eutrophic eographic Information Systems (GIS) Habitat restoration from Greek for “well-nourished.” It describes a lake with a computer system that is used to compile, the artificial manipulation of a habitat to restore it to its low water clarity and excessive plant growth caused by store, analyze, and display geographic and former condition. high concentrations of nutrients. associated data tables. This system can be G used to produce maps that overlay informa- Hazardous waste Eutrophication tion layers of locations of various environ- any solid, liquid, or gaseous substance that is a by-prod- the slow natural process of aging of a lake, estuary, or mental and physical features. uct of society and classified under state or federal law as bay. Dissolved nutrients enter the waterbody, often lead- potentially harmful to human health or the environment. ing to excess plant growth and decreased water quality. Geomorphic assessment Hazardous wastes are subject to special handling, ship- As the plants die, they are decomposed by microorgan- an analysis of drainage patterns, river channels, flood- ping, storage, and disposal requirements and possess at isms, which use up dissolved oxygen vital to other plains, terraces, and other watershed features and how least one of the following four characteristics: ignitability, aquatic species, such as fish. Over very long periods of they have changed over time. corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity. time, the decaying plant matter builds up and causes the lake to fill in to form a bog or marsh. Cultural eutrophi- Geomorphology Health risks cation speeds up this natural process. is the study of surface forms of the earth and the anything which may reduce human health. Risks are processes that developed those forms. ranked as high, moderate, or low. Exotic species a species that is nonnative or that is introduced from Giardia Household hazardous waste another location. a protozoan which causes stomach and intestinal illness. substances found in the home that contain hazardous materials. These substances should be disposed of ailed, failing, or faulty septic system Grassland agriculture properly to prevent pollution to the air, groundwater, a septic system that releases untreated or the use of grass, legumes, and/or hay to achieve livestock and surface water. inadequately treated wastewater to surface dietary requirements without the need for corn silage. or groundwater by surfacing and overland flow Hydrodynamics F of effluent or by subsurface percolation. Guidelines the study of how water flows from one area to another. standards or principles by which to make a judgement Fee title or determine a policy or course of action. nfiltration indicates ownership of land. a process in which something passes into or abitat through a substance by filtering or permeating, Fishery the place where a particular type of plant such as rainwater filtering through the soil to the act, process, occupation, or season for taking fish. or animal lives. An organism's habitat must I the roots of plants. provide all of the basic requirements for life Fish passage facility H and should be free of harmful contaminants. Institutional framework a structure that is built, installed, or established to help formal and informal relationships among organizations, fish bypass impediments in a waterway. Habitat conservation agencies, and individuals responsible for implementing the protection of plants and animals to habitat to ensure the Plan. Food web that the use of that habitat by the animals or plants is the pattern of food consumption in a natural ecosystem. not altered or reduced. Integrated crop management A food web is composed of many interconnecting an agricultural practice that uses a systems approach to food chains. Habitat corridor manage the application of nutrients and pesticides in an a strip of habitat that joins two larger blocks of habitat efficient and environmentally sound manner to reduce Furan and permits movement of wildlife during dispersal or pollution of water, land, or air and to preserve soil fertility. a colorless liquid, prepared from wood tar and used as a migration, such as a wooded area along a river. solvent for resins and plastics or as a tanning agent. Iterative process Habitat degradation a process that involves repetition and gradual refinement. reduction of the quality of the environment in which an organism or biological population usually lives or grows.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 121 Glossary

Invertebrate Mitigation ligotrophic small organisms, such as worms and clams, that do not actions taken to compensate for the negative effects of a from the Greek for “poorly nourished” have a backbone. particular project. Wetland mitigation usually takes the describes a lake with low plant growth form of restoration or enhancement of a previously dam- and high clarity. Oligotrophic lakes ake Champlain Byways aged wetland or creation of a new wetland. O contain little organic matter and have a a bistate program to implement a transporta- high dissolved oxygen level. tion corridor management plan that supports Mitigation bank economic development and tourism infra- credits and debits that account for habitat restoration, Optimum sustainable yield structure improvements within an historic and creation, or enhancement undertaken as mitigation prior the amount of a natural resource harvested that is best L economically for humans but that also ensures that the landscape context. to future development actions that will incur unavoid- able habitat losses. resource is not depleted. Land trusts Multimedia reduction strategies athogens organizations dedicated to conserving land by purchas- approaches to controlling toxic contaminants that pre- organisms—usually viruses, bacteria, or ing land, receiving donations of land, or accepting con- vent them from entering water, air, sediment, and biota. fungi—capable of causing disease. servation easements on land from landowners. ongame species Load (also loading) P wildlife species, such as songbirds and rap- Perennial streams the amount of a material entering a system from all tors, that are not commonly hunted, killed, streams where surface waters flow sufficiently to pro- sources over a given time interval. or consumed by humans. duce a defined channel year round. Load allocation N Persistent contaminants the maximum desirable pollutant load from one or more Nonnative harmful compounds that do not readily degrade in sources needed to meet desired load reduction. in this Plan, not originating naturally in the Lake the environment. Champlain Basin. Local watershed Phosphorus coefficient in this Plan, any watershed within a sub-basin of Nonpoint source pollution an average value for the amount of phosphorus that Lake Champlain. nutrients or toxic substances that enter water from dis- runs off from a unit area per year. This number is used persed and uncontrolled sites, rather than through pipes. to estimate phosphorus loading from nonpoint pollution anage Sources of nonpoint source pollution include runoff from sources to waterbodies. to control the movement or behavior agricultural lands, urban and forest land, and on-site of; to manipulate. sewage disposal. Phytoplankton very small, free-floating plants found in waterbodies. M Nuisance species species having adverse ecological and/or economic impacts. Management (natural resources management) Point source pollution nutrients or toxic substances that enter a waterbody to make a conscious, deliberate decision on a course of Nutrient action to conserve, protect, restore, enhance, or control from a specific entry point, such as a pipe. For example, a substance or ingredient that nourishes life. These are natural resources, or to take no action. the discharge from a sewage treatment plant is point essential chemicals needed by plants or animals for source pollution. growth. If other physical and chemical conditions are Mass balance approach appropriate, excessive amounts of nutrients can lead Pollutant an approach to managing chemicals that relies on bal- to degradation of water quality by promoting excessive something that pollutes. ancing inputs and outputs. growth, accumulation, and subsequent decay of plants, especially algae. Some nutrients can be toxic to plants Pollution Mesotrophic and animals at high concentrations. a moderately nutrient-enriched lake, between oligotroph- impairment of land, air, or water quality caused by agri- ic and eutrophic. Nutrient management cultural, domestic, or industrial waste that negatively impacts beneficial uses of the land, air, or water or the an integrated approach designed to maximize the effi- facilities that serve such beneficial uses. cient use of nutrients, particularly phosphorus, which is found in animal manure and fertilizer. Page 122 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Glossary

Pollution prevention Restoration Sitesofconcern any action—such as the efficient use of raw materials, any action taken to repair, maintain, protect, and areas where toxic substances are found in concentrations energy, and water—that reduces or eliminates the cre- enhance the ecological integrity of the Basin. greater than acceptable levels, or where several toxic ation of pollutants. In the Pollution Prevention Act, pol- substances are found together. lution prevention is defined as source reduction (see Retrofitted stormwater management source reduction). the installation of best management practices (BMPs) Source reduction in existing developed areas to improve water quality any practice that reduces the amount of any hazardous Polychlorinated biphenyls and lessen other negative impacts associated with substance, pollutant, or contaminant entering wastewater. a group of manufactured chemicals—including about urbanization. Source reduction decreases the hazards to public health seventy different but closely related compounds made and the environment associated with the release of such up of carbon, hydrogen, and chlorine—used in trans- Riparian (habitat or zone) substances, pollutants, or contaminants. Technology formers and capacitors for insulating purposes. If habitat occurring along rivers, streams, and creeks that modifications, process or procedure modifications, refor- released to the environment, PCBs do not break down provides for a high density, diversity, and productivity of mulation or redesign of products, substitution of raw for long periods and can biomagnify in food chains. plant and animal species. materials, and improvements in housekeeping, mainte- PCBs are suspected of causing cancer in humans nance, training, or inventory control are all examples and other animals and are an example of an organic Rotational grazing of source reduction. toxic chemical. a pasture management system that uses several paddocks during a grazing season, alternating paddocks to Spoil sites Polycyclic or polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons allow for forage regrowth. Livestock generally graze for places where waste material is deposited. a class of complex organic compounds, some of which less than a week before being rotated to another pad- do not easily break down and may cause cancer. These dock. This system improves vegetative cover and Sprawl compounds are formed from the combustion, or burn- reduces erosion and nutrient runoff. low density development outside compact urban ing, of organic material and are widespread in the envi- and village centers, along highways, and in the rural ronment. PAHs are commonly formed by forest fires Runoff countryside. and by the combustion of gasoline and other petroleum water from rain, melted snow, or agricultural or land- products. They often reach the environment through scape irrigation that flows over the land surface into Stewardship atmospheric fallout and highway runoff. a waterbody. caretaking based on the premise that we do not own resources, but are managers of resources and are responsi- Pond reclamation ale of development rights ble to future generations for their condition. the control or restoration of an unbalanced population of the process of selling the legal right to develop a fish in a pond through the use of chemicals, nets, weirs, parcel of land. Stormwater runoff biological controls, regulations, or water-level control. precipitation running off saturated soils and impervious The pond is then restocked with a balanced population surfaces, such as paved parking lots, streets, or roofs. of fish. S Salmonids Stream flow management regimes Population a member of the family Salmonidae, which includes different management scenarios of stream flow past a the number of inhabitants in a country or region. In salmon, trout, and whitefishes. dam, including management of the upstream impound- ecology, a population is a group of organisms of the ment and the flows downstream. Each management same species living in a specified area and interbreeding. Scenic byway scenario selected has positive effects on some fish and a transportation route and adjacent area of particular wildlife species and negative effects on others. Population of concern scenic, historic, recreational, cultural, and archeological a population that has been designated as one in distress value that is managed to protect such values and encourage Sub-basin or need of help. economic development through tourism and recreation. a smaller drainage area within a large drainage basin, such as the Saranac River sub-basin of the Lake are species Sedimentation Champlain Basin. In this Plan, “sub-basin” refers to one a species not presently in danger, but at risk the deposition or accumulation of sediment, such as of the thirty-four drainage areas (larger than 26 sq. km. ) R because of low numbers. sand, silt, or clay. to Lake Champlain. Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 123 Glossary

Surface water conveyance Tributary wet meadows, and marshes are examples of wetlands. a mechanism for transporting water from one point to a stream or river that flows into a larger stream, river, The boundary of Lake Champlain wetlands has been another, such as pipes, ditches, and channels. Or the or lake. defined at 105 feet (31.1 meters) above mean sea level. drainage facilities, both natural and human-made, that collect and provide for the flow of surface water and rban runoff Wildlife stormwater from the highest points on the land down stormwater from city streets and adjacent for the purposes of this Plan, “wildlife” includes any to a receiving water. Natural systems include swales or domestic or commercial properties that may nondomesticated mammal, fish, bird, amphibian, reptile, a wetland streams and human-made systems include carry pollutants of various kinds into the mollusk, crustacean, arthropod, or other invertebrate gutters, ditches, pipes. U sewer systems and/or receiving waters. or plant. Sustainable tourism aste Exchange Willing seller basis see Carrying capacity. any transaction whereby the waste of when a landowner of land volunteers to participate in a one person's, business, or industry land purchase or acquisition. Sustainable yield become the raw materials for another the amount of harvest of a natural resource able to be W person’s, business, or industry. maintained over a long period of time with no destruction of the productivity of the resource. Watershed the geographic reach within which water drains into a errestrial species particular river, stream, or body of water. A watershed species that live on the ground rather than in includes both the land and the body of water into which the water. the land drains. T Watershed association a citizen-based group interested in protecting a nearby Threatened areas waterway and its surrounding drainage area. areas that in imminent danger of being degraded by pollution. Watershed planning cooperative local and regional land use planning that Threatened species recognizes watershed boundaries rather than political a species with a high possibility of becoming endan- boundaries and considers water resources management gered in a short period of time. the central planning objective. Total Maximum Daily Load Wet ponds the maximum amount (load) of a single pollutant from a human-made basin with a permanent pool of water. all contributing point and nonpoint sources that a waterbody can receive and still meet water quality Wetland enhancement standards. to make a wetland more complete (see wetlands). Toxic Wetland restoration poisonous, carcinogenic, or otherwise directly harmful to life. any action that aids in preserving, repairing, maintaining, or enhancing wetlands (see wetlands). Toxic substances Wetlands any substance which upon exposure, ingestion, inhala- tion, or assimilation into any organism causes death, dis- lands that are transitional between land and water where ease, genetic mutations, physiological malfunctions, or the water table is usually at or near the surface of the physical deformation. Examples of toxic substances are land. Wetlands are characterized by unique hydric soils cyanides, phenols, pesticides, and heavy metals. and contain plant and animal communities adapted to aquatic or intermittently wet conditions. Swamps, bogs,

Page 124 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 LIST OF ACRONYMS

AAC Agricultural Advisory Council NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination UNESCO United Nations Education, Scientific, AEM Agricultural Environmental Management System and Cultural Organization AMPs Acceptable Management Practices NPS National Park Service USACOE United States Army Corps of Engineers APA Adirondack Park Agency NRCD Natural Resource Conservation District USDA United States Department of Agriculture ARS Agricultural Research Service NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service USDOI United States Department of the Interior ASCS Agricultural Stabilization and NWI National Wetlands Inventory USEPA United States Environmental Protection Conservation Service NYSCC New York State Canal Corporation Agency BMPs Best Management Practices NYSDAM New York State Department of UNESCO United Nations Education, Scientific, CACs Citizens Advisory Committees Agriculture and Markets and Cultural Organization CAFOs Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations NYSDEC New York State Department of USFDA United States Food and Drug CHRAC Cultural Heritage and Environmental Conservation Administration Recreation Advisory Committee NYSDOH New York State Department of Health USFS United States Forest Service CNMP Comprehensive Nutrient Management NYSDOT New York State Department of USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service Planning Transportation USGS United States Geological Survey CMAs Crop Management Associations NYSOPRHP New York State Office of Parks, VCGI Vermont Center for Geographic CREPs Conservation Reserve Enhancement Recreation, and Historic Preservation Information Programs NYSSWCC New York State Soil and Water VHCB Vermont Housing Conservation Board CWA Clean Water Act Conservation Committee VNRC Vermont Natural Resources E&O Education and Outreach PAH Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon Council EMAP Environmental Monitoring and PCB Polychlorinated biphenyl VOCs Volatile organic compounds Assessment Program QC MAPAQ Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries & VTACCD Vermont Agency of Commerce and EQIP Environmental Qualities Incentives Food of Québec/Ministère de Community Development Program L’Agriculture, des Pecheries et de VTANR Vermont Agency of Natural Resources FHA Farmers Home Administration L’Alimentation du Québec VTDAFM Vermont Department of Agriculture, FHWA Federal Highways Administration QC MENV Ministry of the Environment of Québec Food and Markets FSA Farm Services Agency /Ministère de L’Environnement du VTDEC Vermont Department of Environmental GIS Geographic Information Systems Québec Conservation HPF Historic Preservation Fund QC MNR Ministry of Natural Resources of VTDFPR Vermont Department of Forests, Parks HUD United States Department of Housing Québec/ Ministère des Ressources and Recreation and Urban Development Naturelles du Québec VTDHP Vermont Division for Historic IJC International Joint Commission QC RRSSS Regional Health and Social Services Preservation ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Office/Régie Régionale de la Santé et VTDOH Vermont Department of Health Efficiency Act des Services Sociaitt VTFWD Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department LCB Lake Champlain Bikeways QC SFP Society of Wildlife and Parks of VTRANS Vermont Agency of Transportation LCBP Lake Champlain Basin Program Québec/Société de la Faune et des LCC Lake Champlain Committee Parcs du Québec LCFWMC Lake Champlain Fish and Wildlife RIBS Rotating Intensive Basin Studies Management Cooperative RMO Regional Marketing Organization LCMC Lake Champlain Management RPC Regional Planning Commission Conference SCS Soil Conservation Service LCMM Lake Champlain Maritime Museum SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act LCRC Lake Champlain Research Consortium SEIS Supplemental Environmental Impact NBS National Biological Service Statement NEIWPCC New England Interstate Water SPDES State Pollutant Discharge Elimination Pollution Control Commission System (New York) NEPA National Environmental Policy Act SWCD Soil and Water Conservation District NOAA National Oceanographic and TAC Technical Advisory Committee Atmospheric Administration TNC The Nature Conservancy

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 125 Appendix A

PUBLIC LAW 101-596 - NOV. 16, 1990 prevention, control, and restoration plan (hereafter in this section referred to as the ‘Plan’) for Lake Champlain. TITLE III - LAKE CHAMPLAIN “(2) The Plan developed pursuant to this section shall— “(A) identify corrective actions and compliance schedules addressing point SHORT TITLE and nonpoint sources of pollution necessary to restore and maintain the chem Sec. 301 This title may be cited as the “Lake Champlain Special Desination Act of ical, physical, and biological integrity of water quality, a balanced, indigenous 1990” population of shellfish, fish and wildlife, recreational, and economic activities in and on the lake; DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM “(B) incorporate environmental management concepts and programs estab lished in State and Federal plans and programs in effect at the time of the Sec. 302 Paragraph (2) of scetion 314(d) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act development of such plan; (33 U.S.C. 1324(d) is amneded by inserting “Lake Champlain, New York and Vermont;” “(C) clarify the duties of Federal and State agencies in pollution prevention before “Lake Houston, Texas” and control activities, and to the extent allowable by law, suggest a timetable LAKE CHAMPLAIN MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE for adoption by the appropriate Federal and State agencies to accomplish such duties within a reasonable period of time; “Sec. 1270. (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established a Lake Champlain Management “(D) describe the methods and schedules for funding of programs, Conference to develop a comprehensive pollution prevention, control, and restoration activities, and projects identified in the Plan, including the plan for Lake Champlain. The Administrator shall convene the management conference use of Federal funds and other sources of funds; and within ninety days of November 16, 1990. “(E) include a strategy for pollution prevention and control that includes the “(b) MEMBERSHIP.—The Members of the Management Conference shall be promotion of pollution prevention and management practices to reduce the comprised of.— amount of pollution generated in the Lake Champlain basin. “(1) the Governors of the States of Vermont and New York; “(3) The Administrator, in cooperation with the Management Conference, shall pro- “(2) each interested Federal agency, not to exceed a total of five members; vide for public review and comment on the draft Plan. At a minimum, the Management “(3) the Vermont and New York Chairpersons of the Vermont, New York, Conference shall conduct one public meeting to hear comments on the draft plan in the Quebec Citizens Advisory Committee for the Environmental Management of State of New York and one such meeting in the State of Vermont. Lake Champlain; “(4) Not less than one hundred and twenty days after the publication of the Plan “(4) four representatives of the State legislature of Vermont; required pursuant to this section, the Administrator shall approve such plan if the plan “(5) four representatives of the State legislature of New York; meets the requirements of this section and the Governors of the States of New York and “(6) six persons representing local governments having jurisdiction over any Vermont concur. land or water within the Lake Champlain basin, as determined appropriate by “(5) Upon approval of the plan, such plan shall be deemed to be an approved man- the Governors; and agement program for the purposes of section 1329(h) of this title and such plan shall be “(7) eight persons representing affected industries, nongovernmental organiza deemed to be an approved comprehensive conservation and management plan pursuant tions, public and private educational institutions, and the general public, as to section 1330 of this title. determined appropriate by the trigovernmental Citizens Advisory Committee “(f) GRANT ASSISTANCE— (1) The Administrator may, in consultation with the for the Environmental Management of Lake Champlain, but not to be current Management Conference, make grants to State, interstate, and regional water pollution members of the Citizens Advisory Committee. control agencies, and public or nonprofit agencies, institutions, and organizations. “(c) TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE.— (1) The Management Conference shall, not later “(2) Grants under this subsection shall be made for assisting research, surveys, stud- than one hundred and twenty days after November 16, 1990, appoint a Technical ies, and modeling and technical and supporting work necessary for the development of Advisory Committee. the Plan and for retaining expert consultants in support of litigation undertaken by the “(2) Such Technical Advisory Committee shall consist of officials of: appropriate State of New York and the State of Vermont to compel cleanup or obtain cleanup dam- departments and agencies of the Federal Government; the State governments of New age costs from persons responsible for pollution of Lake Champlain. York and Vermont; and governments of political subdivisions of such States; and public “(3) The amount of grants to any person under this subsection for a fiscal year shall and private research institutions. not exceed 75 per centum of the costs of such research, survey, study and work and “(d) RESEARCH PROGRAM.— (1) [1] The Management Conference shall establish a multi- shall be made available on the condition that non-Federal share of such costs are pro- disciplinary environmental research program for Lake Champlain. Such research provided from non-Federal sources. gram shall be planned and conducted jointly with the Lake Champlain Research “(4) The Administrator may establish such requirements for the administration of Consortium. [1] So in original. Subsec. (d) enacted without a par. grants as he determines to be appropriate. “[1] The Management Conference shall establish a “(g) “LAKE CHAMPLAIN DRAINAGE BASIN” DEFINED— For the purposes of this section, the “(e) POLLUTION PREVENTION,CONTROL, AND RESTORATION PLAN.— (1) Not later than three term “Lake Champlain drainage basin” means all or part of Clinton, Franklin, Warren, years after November 16, 1990, the Management Conference shall publish a pollution Essex, and Washington counties in the State of New York and all or part of Franklin,

Page 126 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Appendix A

Grand Isle, Chittenden, Addison, Rutland, Lamoille, Orange, Washington, Orleans, and (1) in cooperation with appropriate universities and private research institu Caledonia counties in Vermont, that contain all of the streams, rivers, lakes, and other tions, and the appropriate officials of the appropriate departments and agen bodies of water, including wetlands, that drain into Lake Champlain. cies of the States of New York and Vermont, develop an integrated geographic “(h) STATUTORY INTERPRETATION— Nothing in this section shall be construed so as to information system of the Lake Champlain basin; affect the jurisdiction or powers of— (2) convert all partial recording sites in the Lake Champlain basin to continu “(1) any department or agency of the Federal Government or any State govern ous monitoring stations with full gauging capabilities and status; and ment; or (3) establish such additional continuous monitoring station sites in the Lake “(2) any international organization or entity related to Lake Champlain created Champlain basin as are necessary to carry out basic data collection and moni by treaty or memorandum to which the United States is a signatory. toring, as defined by the Secretary of the Interior, including groundwater map “(i) AUTHORIZATION— There are authorized to be appropriated to the Environmental ping, and water quality and sediment data collection' Protection Agency to carry out this section $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1991, (c) COOPERATION OF THE UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF 1992, 1993, 1994, and 1995. THE INTERIOR— Notes on Title 33, Section 1270 (1) RESOURCE CONSERVATION PROGRAM.—The Secretary of the Interior, acting SOURCE through the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in cooperation with the (June 30, 1948, ch. 758, title I, Sec. 120, as added Nov. 16, 1990, Pub. L. 101-596, title Lake Champlain Fish and Wildlife Management Cooperative and the III, Sec. 303, 104 Stat. 3006.) Management Conference established pursuant to this subsection shall— (A) establish and implement a fisheries resources restoration, development FEDERAL PROGRAM COORDINATION and conservation program, including dedicating a level of hatchery production Section 304 of Pub. L. 101-596, as amended by Pub. L. 104-127, title III, Sec. within the Lake Champlain basin at or above the level that existed immediately 336(a)(2)(F), Apr. 4, 1996, 110 Stat. 1005, provided that: “(a) Designation of Lake preceding the date of enactment of this Act (Nov. 16, 1990); and Champlain as a Priority Area Under the Environmental Quality Incentives Program— (B) conduct a wildlife species and habitat assessment survey in the Lake (1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Lake Champlain basin, including— Champlain basin, as defined under section 120(h) of the Federal Water (i) a survey of Federal threatened and endangered species, listed Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1270(h)), shall be designated by the Secretary or proposed for listing under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 of Agriculture as a priority area under the environmental quality incentives pro U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), New York State and State of Vermont threatened gram established under chapter 4 of subtitle D of title XII of the Food Security and endangered species and other species of special concern, migra Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3839aa et seq.). tory nongame species of management concern, and national (2) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE REIMBURSEMENT.— To carry out the purposes of this resources plan species; subsection, the technical assistance reimbursement from the Agricultural (ii) a survey of wildlife habitats such as islands, wetlands, and Stabilization and Conservation Service authorized under the Soil Conservation riparian areas; and and Domestic Allotment Act (16 U.S.C. 590a et seq.), shall beincreased from 5 (iii) a survey of migratory bird populations breeding, migrating per centum to 10 per centum. and wintering within the Lake Champlain basin. (3) COMPREHENSIVE AGRICULTURAL MONITORING.—The Secretary, in consultation (2) To accomplish the purposes of paragraph (1), the Director of the United with the Management Conference and appropriate State and Federal agencies, States Fish and Wildlife Service is authorized to carry out activities related to— shall develop a comprehensive agricultural monitoring and evaluation network (A) controlling sea lampreys and other nonindigenous aquatic animal nui for all major drainages within the Lake Champlain basin. sances; (4) ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.—In allocating funds under this subsection, the (B) improving the health of fishery resources; ' Secretary of Agriculture shall consult with the Management Conference estab (C) conducting investigations about and assessing the status of fishery lished under section 120 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and to the resources, and disseminating that information to all interested parties; and extent allowable by law, allocate funds to those agricultural enterprises located (D) conducting and periodically updating a survey of the fishery resources at sites that the Management Conference determines to be priority sites, on the and their habitats and food chains in the Lake Champlain basin. basis of a concern for ensuring implementation of nonpoint source pollution (d) AUTHORIZATIONS.—(1) There is authorized to be appropriated to the Department of controls throughout the Lake Champlain basin. Agriculture $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, and 1995 to carry (b) COOPERATION OF THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE out subsection (a) of this section. INTERIOR.—For the purpose of enhancing and expanding basic data collection and moni- (2) There is authorized to be appropriated to the Department of (the) Interior toring in operation in the Lake Champlain basin, as defined under section 120 of the $1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, and 1995 to carry out subsec- Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1270), the Secretary of the Interior, acting tions (b) and (c) of this section. through the heads of water resources divisions of the New York and New England districts of the United States Geological Survey, shall—

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 127 Appendix A

Page 128 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Appendix A UNITED STATES SENATE The focal point of the Lake Champlain Special Designation Act is the convening of WASHINGTON DC 20510 the Lake Champlain Management Conference to develop a comprehensive Pollution Prevention, Control and Restoration Plan. The Conference, to be staffed by personnel of EPA Regions I and II, will be broadly representative of the many parties having an LAKE CHAMPLAIN SPECIAL DESIGNATION ACT interest in the welfare of the basin. We expect that once the appointments are com- STATEMENT OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT plete, the principle of broad representation will be upheld.

The Management Conference is charged with selecting a technical advisory committee Three short years ago we began our efforts to create the "Lake Champlain Special and establishing a multi-disciplinary environmental monitoring and research program. Designation Act." Through speeches, hearings, mark-ups and floor statements, each one Within three years of enactment, the Conference will produce its master Plan, which of us has made recommendations that would ultimately lead to this all encompassing will detail pollution prevention and control strategies; clarify the duties of various effort. The legislative history reflects the comments and concerns of residents, govern- state and federal agencies in implementing the strategies; identify corrective actions mental agencies and Congressional colleagues. and compliance schedules; and coordinate federal, state and private funding for carrying out these actions and schedules. As the Lake Champlain Management Conference embarks on its historic first meeting, we would like to summarize the history and intent of the federal legislation establishing The composition of the Management Conference speaks of the breadth of involve- the Conference. As the sponsors of the legislation in the U.S. Senate, we have drawn ment necessary to coordinate local, state and federal actions. Members of the upon our own recollections and records in order to convey the sense of purpose which Conference include citizens, legislators, regulators, researchers and educators. State led to this Act being passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bush. and federal agencies are to be involved, as are local farmers, fishermen and business- men. That the legislation envisioned a strong citizens role is evidenced by the statu- While the desire to achieve and maintain good water quality is an overriding concern, tory inclusion of a Citizens Advisory Committee. We strongly support the current the issues surrounding the Lake Champlain basin are much more comprehensive and CAC, and the Act is intended to reinforce, not replace, its function. This is particular- complex than can be described by mere chemical and physical measurements. And ly true in the area of public outreach and education. while it may have been the abundance of fish life in the lake that first attracted native Americans, it was along the shore that they would live, and it was also from the woods Because the federal government must marshal its resources to consolidate and coordi- and hills that they would take their food. Later, as European settlers migrated from the nate activities, the Environmental Protection Agency is given the lead management south and from the north, the lake would provide the highway, while the land held the role, with specific tasks assigned to it and the Departments of Agriculture and Interior. natural resources to transform explorers into settlers. Today, it is the lake which pro- These agencies will work together with State governments, local communities, aca- vides the drinking water, but it is the land within the basin which hosts the communi- demic institutions, and the public to develop a plan for pollution research, preven- ties, be they Vermonters, New Yorkers or Canadians. tion, management and control.

It is important that the Management Conference look beyond aspects of water quality Much research on Lake Champlain has already been done, although in various for- and address all issues affecting the lake. As one Vermonter put it, "we want it all -- mats. Yet, a continuous, comprehensive data base does not exist. In formulating a jobs, recreation, and environmental integrity." To meet this vision, it is important that comprehensive research program, the management Conference is encouraged to iden- the Management Conference be inclusive rather than exclusive in drawing up its list of tify and use existing research projects and data bases, identify research heeds, and issues to be addressed. The Lake Champlain Special Designation Act envisions that all establish a comprehensive data base to meet the objectives of the Act. aspects of human and ecological life within the basin be maintained in harmony with one another. In addition to the activities outlined in the development of a Pollution Prevention, Control, and Restoration-Plan under Section 120(e), the Management Conference The significance of the Lake Champlain basin is underscored by its recent designation, should also examine the impact of growth and development on water quality in the by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural organization, as an basin, and examine the impact of water quality degradation, as well as mitigation International Biosphere Reserve. The historic Memorandum of Understanding on the efforts, on cultural resources that are an important part of the region's history. management of Lake Champlain, signed August 23, 1988 by the Governors of Vermont and New York and the Premier of Quebec, speaks of "Lake Champlain and its water- Some components of the Plan already exist or will be completed soon. As with the shed." And so the legislation envisions a Geographic scope to include the basin as a research program, these existing efforts should be used in the Management whole, from the spine of the Adirondacks to that of the Green Mountains; from the Conference's deliberations and incorporated into the final plan to avoid duplication of swift-flowing trout streams in the south to the fertile farm lands to the north. efforts and unnecessary expenditures. For example, Vermont was among the first states to have its Non-point Source Management Program approved by EPA, and New York and Vermont are currently conducting a basin-wide phosphorus management program with assistance from EPA.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 129 Appendix A

The Act envisions that the EPA Administrator will make staff available to the Lake Lake Champlain played an essential role in the War of Independence and then in the Champlain Management Conference, with at least one from Region I and one from War of 1812. The lake and its basin hold important regional and national signifi- Region II. Ideally, these staff persons will be located within the basin in order to con- cance. Within this historical archeological context, the Department of Interior plays duct regular and periodic meetings with members of the Management Conference, the an important role in protecting cultural resources. The Secretary of the Interior, acting Citizens Advisory Committee, the Technical Advisory Committee, the Research through the National Park Service, is encouraged to consult with the management Consortium and other interested parties. Conference in carrying out historic preservation and natural landmark programs with the basin. Of special interest is the survey and inventory of lakeshore and underwa- The Administrator is authorized to make grants to public and private agencies and ter historical and archeological resources. organizations for the purpose of supporting work necessary for the development of the Plan, and to maintain long-term research efforts necessary to establish a comprehensive In order to improve and maintain the health of wildlife and fishery resources within data base for the Lake Champlain basin. The Administrator is to consult with the the basin, the Fish and Wildlife Service should expand its efforts there. Special atten- Technical Advisory Committee and the Lake Champlain Research Consortium in devel- tion should be given to threatened and endangered species and their habitats, and to oping a multi-disciplinary environmental research program for the basin, giving priority migratory species. Recognizing that aquatic nuisance species are causing great dam- to initiatives recommended by these groups. age to the fishery resources in the basin, the Secretary of the Interior is given clear authority to conduct lamprey control activities and other salmonid restoration work. In issuing grants to non-federal organizations, the Administrator may fund demonstration The secretary should also use, as appropriate, equipment purchased with funds pro- and pilot projects for purposes of assessing the feasibility of such projects as mitigation vided through the Great Lakes Fishery Commission. techniques. The Administrator may also fund joint requests by the States of New York and Vermont. We also note that appropriated funds for the Department of the Interior should be judiciously distributed between the Geological Survey and the Fish and Wildlife Funds appropriated to the EPA should be evenly distributed on an annual basis between Service, including consideration for the Cooperative Research Unit, and based on the Management Conference, Grant Program and Research Program. It is recognized, annual needs and the priorities of the Management Conference. We intend that funds however, that appropriations distributions will, and in some cases should, vary to meet would be made available by the E.P.A. to the U.S. Corps of Engineers to enable it to annual priorities within these program areas. provide technical assistance in areas that the Management Conference deems appropriate. The Lake Champlain Special Designation Act designates the lake basin as a Special Project Area under the Agriculture Conservation Program. While attention should be Today, New Yorkers and Vermonters are embarking on one of the nation's first all- given to the basin as a whole, current projects conducted by the Department of encompassing pollution prevention efforts. Again, we ask that the Conferees think Agriculture which have proven to be successful in reducing phosphorus and nonpoint comprehensively. The resources of the Lake Champlain basin -- human, cultural and sources of pollution should be continued. The Act seeks to enhance, not replace, such natural -- are precious commodities. We are honored to have helped establish this efforts. cooperative Management Conference, and look forward to actions and recommendations to promote a healthier Lake Champlain. In order to expand monitoring efforts within the basin, we believe the Secretary of Agriculture should develop a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation network for all Signed by Senators: major drainages within the basin. Whenever practical, monitoring and associated research shall be developed and conducted jointly with existing efforts in the basin. Patrick J. Leahy (VT) James M. Jeffords (VT) The Act also provides for Department of Interior programs. Although the U.S. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (NY) Geological Survey and Fish and Wildlife Service have limited new authorities, we have Alfonse M. D' Amato (NY) always envisioned a much greater effort is needed and should be addressed by the Management Conference. If the Conference identifies areas where state or federal agen- November, 1990 cies are limited by their current authorities, the Plan should recommend amendments to be pursued by state and federal representatives.

The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the heads of the water resources divisions, should develop an integrated geographic information system (GIS) for the basin. Whenever practical, monitoring and associated research should be developed and conducted jointly with extension efforts within the basin.

Page 130 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 LIST OF LCBP REPORTS

LCBP Technical Reports (a) Lake Champlain Sediment Toxics Assessment Basin. Executive Summary. Yellow Wood Associates, Program. An Assessment of Sediment - Associated Inc., January 1995. Contaminants in Lake Champlain - Phase 1. Executive (b) Report on Institutional Arrangements for 1) A Research and Monitoring Agenda for Lake Summary. Alan McIntosh, Editor, University of Vermont Watershed Management of the Lake Champlain Champlain. Proceedings of a Workshop, December School of Natural Resources. February 1994. Basin. Yellow Wood Associates, Inc., January 1995. 17-19, 1991, Burlington, VT. Lake Champlain Research (c) Report on Institutional Arrangements for Consortium. May 1992. 6) Lake Champlain Nonpoint Source Pollution Watershed Management of the Lake Champlain Assessment. Lenore Budd, Associates in Rural Basin. Appendices. Yellow Wood Associates, Inc., 2) Design and Initial Implementation of a Development Inc., and Donald Meals, UVM School January 1995. Comprehensive Agricultural Monitoring and of Natural Resources. February 1994. Evaluation Network (CAMEN) for the Lake (a) Lake Champlain Nonpoint Source Pollution 12) (a) Preliminary Economic Analysis of the Draft Champlain Basin. New York-Vermont Strategic Assessment. Appendix. Lenore Budd, Associates in Plan for the Lake Champlain Basin Program. Core Group. February 1993. Rural Development Inc. and Donald Meals, University Executive Summary. Holmes & Associates and of Vermont School of Natural Resources. February 1994. Anthony Artuso. March 1995. 3) (a) GIS Management Plan for the Lake (b) Preliminary Economic Analysis of the Draft Champlain Basin Program. Vermont Center for 7) Internal Phosphorus Loading Studies of St. Plan for the Lake Champlain Basin Program. Geographic Information, Inc., and Associates in Rural Albans Bay. Executive Summary. VT Dept of Holmes & Associates and Anthony Artuso. March 1995. Development. March 1993. Environmental Conservation. March 1994. (b) Handbook of GIS Standards and Procedures (a) Dynamic Mass Balance Model of Internal 13) Patterns of Harvest and Consumption of Lake for the Lake Champlain Basin Program. Vermont Phosphorus Loading in St. Albans Bay, Lake Champlain Fish and Angler Awareness of Health Center for Geographic Information, Inc. March 1993. Champlain. Eric Smeltzer, Neil Kamman, Karen Advisories. Nancy A. Connelly and Barbara A. Knuth. (c) GIS Data Inventory for the Lake Champlain Hyde, and John C. Drake. Vermont Department of September 1995. Basin Program. Vermont Center for Geographic Environmental Conservation. March 1994. Information, Inc. March 1993. (b) History of Phosphorus Loading to St. Albans 14) (a) Preliminary Economic Analysis of the Draft Bay, 1850-1990. Vermont Department of Environmental Plan for the Lake Champlain Basin Program-Part 2. 4) (a) Lake Champlain Economic Database Project. Conservation. March 1994. Executive Summary. Holmes & Associates and Anthony Executive Summary. Holmes & Associates. March 1993. (c) Assessment of Sediment Phosphorus Artuso. November 1995. (b) Socioeconomic Profile, Database, and Descrip- Distribution and Long-Term Recycling in St. (b) Preliminary Economic Analysis of the Draft tion of the Tourism Economy for the Lake Cham- Albans Bay, Lake Champlain. Scott Martin, Plan for the Lake Champlain Basin Program-Part 2. plain Basin. Holmes & Associates. March 1993. Youngstown State University. March 1994. Holmes & Associates and Anthony Artuso. November 1995. (c) Socioeconomic Profile, Database, and Description of the Tourism Economy for the Lake 8) Lake Champlain Wetlands Acquisition Study. 15) Zebra Mussels and Their Impact on Historic Champlain Basin - Appendix. Holmes & Associates. Jon Binhammer, Vermont Nature Conservancy. June 1994. Shipwrecks. Lake Champlain Maritime Museum. January March 1993. 1996. (d) Potential Applications of Economic Instruments 9) A Study of the Feasibility of Restoring Lake for Environmental Protection in the Lake Cham- Sturgeon to Lake Champlain. Deborah A. Moreau and 16) Background Technical Information for Opport- plain Basin. Anthony Artuso. March 1993. Donna L. Parrish, Vermont Cooperative Fish & Wildlife unities for Action: An Evolving Plan for the Future (e) Conceptual Framework for Evaluation of Research Unit, University of Vermont. June 1994. of the Lake Champlain Basin. Lake Champlain Basin Pollution Control Strategies and Water Quality Program. June 1996. Standards for Lake Champlain. Anthony Artuso. 10) Population Biology and Management of Lake March 1993. Champlain Walleye. Kathleen L. Newbrough, Donna L. 17) (a) Executive Summary. Economic Analysis 5) Lake Champlain Sediment Toxics Assessment Parrish, and Matthew G. Mitro, Fish & Wildlife Research of the Draft Final Plan for the Lake Champlain Program. An Assessment of Sediment-Associated Unit, University of Vermont. June 1994. Management Conference. Holmes & Associates and Contaminants in Lake Champlain - Phase 1. Alan Anthony Artuso. July 1996. McIntosh, Editor, University of Vermont School of 11) (a) Report on Institutional Arrangements for Natural Resources. February 1994. Watershed Management of the Lake Champlain

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 131 Appendix B

(b) Economic Analysis of the Draft Final Plan for Department of Environmental Conservation and Vermont 35) Determination and Quantification of Factors the Lake Champlain Basin Management Conference. Department of Environmental Conservation. 1998. Controlling Pollutant Delivery from Agricultural Holmes & Associates and Anthony Artuso. July 1996. Land to Streams in the Lake Champlain Basin. 27) Cumberland Bay PCB Study. Cliff Callihan, New J. W. Hughes, W. E. Jokela, D. Wang, C., and Borer, 18) Catalog of Digital Spatial Data for the Lake York State Department of Environmental Conservation, University of Vermont. September 1999. Champlain Basin. Vermont Center for Geographic Lyn McIlroy, SUNY Plattsburgh, Robert Fuller, SUNY Information, Inc., September 1996. Plattsburgh. October 1998. 36) Cost-Effective Phosphorus Removal from Secondary Wastewater Effluent through Mineral 19) Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Modeling of 28) Lake Champlain Underwater Cultural Resources Adsorption. Larry D. Goehring, Sr., Tammo S. Lake Champlain. Applied Science Associates, Inc. July Survey, Volume 1: Lake Survey Background and Steenhuis, Andrea S. Brooks, and Melissa N. Rosenwald, 1996. 1996 Results. Scott A. McLaughlin, Anne W. Lessman, Jennifer Chen, Cornell University and Victor J. Putnam, under the direction of Arthur B. Cohn, Lake Champlain Essex County Planning Department. December 1999. 20) Understanding Phosphorus Cycling, Transport Maritime Museum. December 1998. and Storage in Stream Ecosystem as a Basis for LCBP Demonstration Reports Phosphorus Management. James P. Hoffmann, E. 29) Evaluation of Soil Factors Controlling Phos- Allan Cassell, John C. Drake, Suzanne Levine, Donald phorus Concentration in Runoff from Agricultural 1) Case Study of the Town of Champlain. Yellow W. Meals, Jr., Deane Wang. University of Vermont. Soils in the Lake Champlain Basin. Frederick R. Wood Associates. October 1993. December 1996. Magdoff, William E. Jokela and Robert P. Durieux, University of Vermont, Department of Plant and Soil 2) (a) Demonstration of Local Economic/Other 21) Bioenergetics Modeling for Lake Trout and Sciences. June 1997. Community Impacts: Community Case Studies other Top Predators in Lake Champlain. George for Economic Plan Elements. Economic and W. LaBar and Donna L. Parrish, University of Vermont. 30) Lower Trophic Level Interactions in the Pelagic Financial Consulting Associates, Inc., October 1993. December 1996. Foodweb of Lake Champlain. Suzanne N. Levine, (b) Demonstration of Local Economic/Other Mark Borchardt, Moshe Braner, Angela Shambaugh, and Community Impacts: Community Case Studies for 22) Characterization of On-Farm Phosphorus Susan Spencer, UVM School of Natural Resources and Economic Plan Elements-Appendix. Economic and Budgets and Management in the Lake Champlain Marshfield Medical Research Foundation. July 1997. Financial Consulting Associates, Inc., October 1993. Basin. Robert D. Allshouse, Everett D. Thomas, Charles J. Sniffen, Kristina Grimes, and Carl Majewski, Miner 31) Estimation of Lake Champlain Basinwide 3) The Archeology on the Farm Project: Cultural Agricultural Research Institute. January 1997. Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Export. William Resource Protection on Agricultural Lands: A Hegman, Associates in Rural Development, Inc, and Vermont Example. Jack Rossen, VT Division for 23) Lake Champlain Sediment Toxics Assessment Catherine Borer and Deane Wang, UVM Water Historic Preservation, VT Agency of Natual Resources, Program: An Assessment of Sediment-Associated Resources & Lake Study Center. September 1999. Otter Creek Natural Resources Conservation District. Contaminants in Lake Champlain - Phase 2. Alan May 1994. McIntosh, Mary Watzin and Erik Brown, University of 32) The Freshwater Mussels of the Lower Miss- Vermont. School of Natural Resources. October 1997. isquoi River: Current Status and the Potential for 4) (a) The 1992 Fort Ticonderoga-Mount a Refugium from Zebra Mussel Impacts. Paul Independence Submerged Cultural Resource 24) Development of Land Cover/Land Use Geo- Marangelo, VT Agency of Natural Resources. June 1999. Survey-Executive Summary. Arthur Cohn, Lake graphic Information System Data Layer for the Champlain Maritime Museum. May 1995. Lake Champlain Basin and Vermont Northern 33) Ecological Effects of Sediment-Associated (b) The 1992 Fort Ticonderoga-Mount Independence Forest Lands Project Areas. Thomas Millette, Mount Contaminants in Inner Burlington Harbor, Lake Submerged Cultural Resource Survey. Arthur Holyoke College. October 1997. Champlain. Tetra Tech, Inc. September 1999. Cohn,Lake Champlain Maritime Museum. May 1995. (c) The Great Bridge "From Ticonderoga to 25) Urban Nonpoint Pollution Source Assessment 34) (a) Benthic Phosphorus Cycling in Lake Cham- Independence Point". Arthur Cohn, Lake Champlain of the Greater Burlington Area: Urban Stormwater plain: Results of an Integrated Field Sampling/ Maritime Museum. May 1995. Characterization Project. James Pease, VT Water Quality Modeling Study. Part A: Water (d) Geophysical Reconnaissance in the Mount Department of Environmental Conservation. Dec. 1997. Quality Modeling. HydroQual, Inc. June 1999. Independence Area: Larrabee's Point to Chipman (b) Benthic Phosphorus Cycling in Lake Champlain: Point, Lake Champlain. Patricia Manley, Roger Flood, 26) Long-Term Water Quality and Biological Results of an Integrated Field Sampling/Water Todd Hannahs. May, 1995. Monitoring Project for Lake Champlain. Cumulative Quality Modeling Study. Part B: Field Studies. Report for Project Years 1992-1996. New York State HydroQual, Inc. June 1999.

Page 132 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Appendix B (e) Ticonderoga's Floating Drawbridge; 1871-1920. LCBP Education Reports Other LCBP Publications Peter Barranco, Jr., Lake Champlain Maritime Museum. May, 1995. 1) Lake Champlain: Its Future Depends on Us. 1) Opportunities for Action: An Evolving Plan for (f) Bottom Morphology and Boundary Currents of Conference Proceedings; September 8-9, 1992, South the Future of the Lake Champlain Basin (First Lake Champlain. Hollistir Hodson. May 1995. Burlington, VT. NH/VT and Empire Chapters of the Edition). Lake Champlain Management Conference. Soil and Water Conservation Society. July 1993. October 1996. 5) Implementation, Demonstration, and Evaluation of BMPs for Water Quality: Application Methods 2) Public Input in the Lake Champlain Basin. Results 2) 1991-2000 Annual, State of the Lake, and ("Manure Injections") for Improved Management of a series of Public Input Meetings. April-May, 1993. Progress Reports. Lake Champlain Basin Program. of Manure Nutrients. Bill Jokela, Sid Bosworth, and Education & Outreach Committee. October 1993. Don Meals, University of Vermont. September 1995. 3) Casin' the Basin. Lake Champlain Basin Program 3) Lake Champlain's Future: A Community-Based Newsletter, 1992-present. 6) (a) Malletts Bay Recreation Resource Manage- Strategy for Environmental Policy Development. ment Plan. T. J. Boyle and Associates, Resource Bryan Higgins, SUNY Plattsburgh, Richard Kujawa, St. 4) Fact Sheet Series 1-6. Lake Champlain Basin Systems Group, Associates in Rural Development, Michael's College, Thomas Dietz, George Mason Program. and Engineering Ventures. October 1995. University, Linda Kalof, SUNY Plattsburgh, and Timothy (b) Malletts Bay Recreation Resource Management P. Holmes, Holmes & Associates. June 1994. 5) Lake Champlain Basin Atlas. Northern Plan: Executive Summary. T. J. Boyle and Associates. Cartographic and Lake Champlain Basin Program. October 1995. 4) Alternative Wastewater Treatment: Conference Fall 1999. CD-ROM update issued May 2002. (c) Review and Relevant Studies: Malletts Bay Proceedings. Judy Bond, AWWT Conference Coordinator. Recreation Resource Management Plan. T.J. Boyle January 1995. 6) Lake Champlain Wayside Exhibit Manual.. Lake and Associates. October 1995. Champlain Basin Program. Summer 2001. (d) Natural and Built Resources Inventory Data 5) Summary of Public Input on Opportunities for Documentation: Malletts Bay Recreation Resource Action - A Summary of the Draft Plan for the Future of 7) Nonpoint Source Pollution Posters.. Series of four Management Plan. Associates in Rural Development. the Lake Champlain Basin: Results of a Series of Public posters. Lake Champlain Basin Program. Summer 2001. October 1995. (These data will not be published, but Input Meetings, March-April 1994. Education & Outreach data are available at the LCBP office.) Committee. February 1995. (e) Survey Implementation and Analysis: Malletts How to Obtain LCBP Publications Bay Recreation Resource Management Plan. 6) Responses to Public Comments on the June 1996 Resource Systems Group. October 1995. The above publications are all available from the LCBP Draft of Opportunities for Action: An Evolving Plan (f) Institutional Review and Analysis: Malletts Bay (with exceptions noted). Contact the LCBP to order by for the Future of the Lake Champlain Basin. Lake Recreation Resource Management Plan. Engineering calling (800) 468-5227 (NY & VT) or (802) 372-3213. An Champlain Management Conference. October 1996. Ventures. October 1995. up-to-date list of reports is maintained on the LCBP website, www.lcbp.org/reports.htm. Some publications, such as 7) The Best River Ever: A Conservation Plan to LCBP Recreation Reports Opportunities for Action, the Casin’ the Basin newsletter, Protect and Restore Vermont's Beautiful Mad fact sheets, and recent annual reports are also available River Watershed. Mad River Valley Planning District 1) Lake Champlain Boat Study. Susan Bulmer. 1993. electronically on the website. and Friends of the Mad River. December 1995. 2) Lake Champlain Recreation - Public Involvement. 8) On-Farm Composting Demonstration Project Maja Smith. 1994. Clinton County Soil and Water Conservation District. December 1996. 3) Lake Champlain Recreation - User Surveys. Kelly Dziekan. 1995. 9) Addison County Demonstration Project: Alter- native Sewage Disposal Technologies. Judy Bond. 4) Lake Champlain Recreation - Resources February 1997. Inventory. Greg Farnum. 1995.

10) A Sustainable Working Forest and Competitive 5) Lake Champlain Recreation Assessment Report. Wood Products Industry. Economic Development Kelly Dziekan and Maja Smith. 1995. Council of Northern Vermont, Inc. July 1997.

Lake Champlain Basin Program Page 133 Appendix C A Process for Developing 2) Establish allowable nonpoint source loads by The first 25% reduction must be incorporated in Phosphorus Loading Targets state, by contributing watershed, using the mini- specific nonpoint source actions or specific point for Lake Champlain mum cost optimization procedure. source permit modifications to be identified by October 1, 1996, and implemented in the next June 6, 1996 3) Establish preliminary total phosphorus loading five years. targets by state, by contributing watershed, by • USEPA, NYSDEC, and VTDEC agree that Lake summing the allowable point and nonpoint source The states are free to choose the appropriate mix Champlain is a priority watershed for protection. loads established in (1) and (2) above, as listed in of point and nonpoint source actions to be imple- Table 21. The watershed of Missisquoi Bay is mented in each contributing watershed. • USEPA, NYSDEC, and VTDEC accept the interim shared by Vermont and the Province of Quebec, management goals specified in the 1993 “New and the responsibility for attaining the necessary The specific actions to achieve the remaining 75% York - Quebec - Vermont Water Quality phosphorus reductions in Missisquoi Bay should reduction will be identified within five years. Agreement: In-Lake Phosphorus Criteria” as suit- also be shared. Vermont will seek an agreement able goals for developing phosphorus loading with the Province of Quebec to achieve a target Steps 4-5 will be completed by October 1, 1996 targets for Lake Champlain. The goals may be load of 109.7 mt/yr. and provided by the states as early implement- revised in the future, as appropriate, based on new ation outputs. information. 4) Allow each state the opportunity to adjust its total loading targets by contributing watersheds as • Final agreement by USEPA, NYSDEC, and VTDEC • USEPA, NYSDEC, and VTDEC accept the Lake it sees fit, as long as the adjusted loads continue to on the results of this process will be contingent on Champlain Diagnostic-Feasibility Study model as a meet the in-lake phosphorus concentration goals. the acceptance of the adjusted point and nonpoint suitable tool for developing interim phosphorus source loading targets to be specified by the states loading targets, by state, by contributing watershed. During this step each state would keep the other under steps 4 and 5 above. USEPA, NYSDEC, and VT DEC will develop a pro- state's allowable loads fixed as in (3) above. gram to enhance the model and to revise/finalize the phosphorus loading targets, as necessary, with- The adjusted loads for each state would then be in five years. checked together to ensure that the in-lake goals are achieved. • USEPA, NYSDEC, and VTDEC will proceed as follows to develop total phosphorus loading targets 5) Each state will commit to reduce the differ- by state, by contributing watershed: ences between existing (1995) loads by contribut- 1) Establish individual, allowable point source ing watershed, and loading targets by contribut- loads using the following procedure: For all facili- ing watershed, by 25% every five years for the ties, the point source target values are calculated next 20 years. This commitment is contingent upon using either the permitted flow or 1.5 times the the availability of federal and/or state funding of current (1995) flow, whichever is less. For facilities the capital costs of phosphorus treatment at munic- that are affected by the 0.8 mg/L policy (i.e. non- ipal sewage treatment plans, supplemented, as nec- lagoon plants larger than 200,000 gallons per day essary, by local match to the extent that it can be permitted flow), the load targets are calculated covered by in-kind services. This commitment is using the minimum of either the current (1995) also contingent upon the availability of adequate concentration or 0.8 mg/L. For facilities that are not federal and/or state funds to support voluntary affected by the 0.8 mg/L policy, the load targets nonpoint source implementation. are calculated using the current concentration.

Page 134 Opportunities for Action - April 2003 Lake Champlain Steering Committee

C. Randall Beach Gérard Cusson Fran Keeler Robert Reinhardt Plattsburgh, NY Longueuil, Québec Winooski, VT Albany, NY Empire State Development Ministère de L'Environnment US Dept. of Agriculture, NRCS NYS Office of Parks, Recreation, & Historic Preservation Tamsen Benjamin Canute Dalmasse Steve Lanthier Montpelier, VT Waterbury, VT Albany, NY Dan Stewart VT Agency of Transportation VT Agency of Natural Resources NYS Dept. of Agriculture Plattsburgh, NY & Markets Mayor Michèle Bertrand Mario Del Vicario Philipsburg, Québec New York, NY Gérard Massé Dave Tilton Chair, Québec Citizens Advisory US Environmental Protection Longueuil, Québec Essex Junction, VT Committee Agency, Region 2 Société de la Faune et des Parcs US Fish and Wildlife Service

Gérard Boutin Larry Forcier Ronald Ofner Emily Wadhams Saint-Hyacinthe, Québec Burlington, VT Crown Point, NY Montpelier, VT Ministère de l'Agriculture, des Lake Champlain Sea Grant Board Chair, NY Citizens Advisory VT Agency of Commerce & Pecheries et de l'Alimentation Committee Community Development - State Leon Graves Historic Preservation Officer Stuart Buchanan Montpelier, VT Gerald Potamis Ray Brook, NY VT Dept. of Agriculture Boston, MA Mary Watzin NYS Dept. of Environmental US Environmental Protection Burlington, VT Conservation Buzz Hoerr Agency, New England UVM School of Natural Resources and Colchester, VT TAC Chair Peter Clavelle Chair, VT Citizens Advisory Committee Burlington, VT Mayor and Chair, CHRAC

Staff Supporting the Lake Champlain Basin Program (as of April 2003)

Nicole Ballinger Colleen Hickey Sylvain Primeau Thank you to former staff for their Communications & Publications Education & Outreach Coordinator Ministère de L'Environnment, work on this document: Coordinator Québec Bill Howland Jim Connolly Erik Beck Program Manager Art Stemp Tricia Foster Project Officer, US EPA Region 1 NY Lake Champlain Coordinator Barry Gruessner Kathy Jarvis Denise Quick Jim Brangan Office Manager Michaela Stickney Maja Smith Cultural Heritage & Recreation VT Lake Champlain Coordinator Coordinator Miranda Lescaze Technical Coordinator Lisa Windhausen Terry Faber Aquatic Nuisance Species Project Officer, USEPA Region 2 Jane Potvin Coordinator Receptionist Design: Maja Smith Produced under US EPA grant #LC991923-01. Printed on recycled paper with soy-based inks. Graphics: Nicole Ballinger Lake Champlain Basin Program

Gordon Center House P.O. Box 204 54 West Shore Road Grand Isle,VT 05458

(802) 372-3213 (800) 468-LCBP [email protected] www.lcbp.org