Table of Contents
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Table of Contents E xe c u t i v e Summary 2 A u s t i n , Te x a s : P r otecting the Edwards A q u i fe r 5 An Endangered Resource 6 Attempts at Regulation 7 Conservation for Water Quality and Smart Growth 8 Defining Lands for Acquisition 8 Future Plans 9 Barnegat Ba y : P r otecting a Coastal Ecosystem 10 The Threat from Development 12 How Land Conservation Fits in 13 Generating Local Funds 15 Defining Lands for Acquisition 16 The Importance of the National Estuary Program 17 Mountain Island Lak e : S a fe g u a r ding a Pristine Reserv o i r 18 The Threat from Development 19 A Unique State Funding Source 19 Community Support 21 Defining Lands for Acquisition 2 1 Continuing Efforts 22 Indian River Lag o o n : Restoring a Damaged Estuary 23 The Threat from Development 24 A History of Land Conservation 26 One Local Funding Effort 26 A Blueway for Indian River Lagoon 27 Discussion and Conclusions 30 B i bl i og r ap h y 36 This report was made possible by funds granted by the Environmental Protection Agency. Editor: William Poole Research: Lynda Frost Production: Clare Brandt COVER IMAGE:GEORGE M.ARONSON 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY P O L L U T ANTS FROM NONPOINT SOURCES Building Green Infrastructure Land Conservation as a Watershed Protection Strategy he nation’s waters have become progressively clean- approach to overall watershed management. The exposed earth Water sources are naturally T er since the passage of the federal Clean Water Act In many communities, buying land to protect water at construction buffered by trees and other sites causes in- vegetation from polluted in 1972. Today, the main threat to clean water is not quality has become part of a broader “Smart Growth” creased soil and storm water runoff and industrial and sewage wastes, but nonpoint-source pollu- e ff o rt. Smart Growth is the name for a nationwide sediment deposits soil erosion. tants—often the byproduct of urban sprawl and develop- movement that seeks to direct development in ways in nearby water sources. ment—that are washed by rainwater into sources of that pre s e rve critical open space and natural re s o u rc e s . drinking water, or into streams that support recreation P rotected watershed lands become part of a communi- and fisheries. Nonpoint- t y ’s “green infrastru c- Heavy rains can wash pesticides source pollutants in- t u re”—an infrastru c t u re Animal waste, and fertilizers clude oil washed off as important to com- topsoil, fertil- off lawns and roadways and parking munity life and well- izers,and pesti- into nearby cides on water sources. lots; pesticides and fer- being as roads, schools, farmland can tilizers from agriculture, and utilities. wash into water sources. lawns, and golf courses; This report presents and sewage from septic the cases of four water- systems. sheds where land con- The U.S. Environ- servation is helping mental Protection preserve water quality. Oil,antifreeze, Used motor oil gasoline, salt, Agency’s (EPA) 1998 or antifreeze and sand accu- Clean Water Action • Austin, Texas, where poured directly mulate on park- into storm Plan estimated that nonpoint-source pollu- ing lots and drains can reach roads and ulti- about half the nation’s tion due to rapid devel- water sources mately drain into Non-point source pollution is often the b y- p r oduct of urban sprawl and dev el o p m e n t . within seconds. 2,000-plus major water- opment is threatening storm sewers and sheds experience de- the Barton Springs/ local waterways. graded water quality—polluted runoff a primary cause. Edwards Aquifer, a major drinking-water source. To address this problem, EPA has urged a watershed • Barnegat Bay, a coastal estuary of more than 450 Industrial emissions lead to acid rain; management approach, and proposed that 20 percent of Boats release square miles along New Jersey’s tidal shoreline. stored hazardous petroleum its Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) be set materials can seep Rapid development in the area threatens local drink- directly into aside to provide communities with more flexibility to into underground ing water, water quality in the bay, and the region’s water sources. water sources. protect water. important wildlife habitat. The Trust for Public Land’s 1997 report “Protecting the Source—Land Conservation and the Future of Ameri- • Mountain Island Lake, a pristine source of drinking ca’s Drinking Water” found that communities across water for Charlotte, North Carolina, and environs. America are increasingly adopting watershed manage- Development along the lakeshore and tributary ment plans as a way to ensure safe drinking water with- streams endangers water quality. out having to resort to costly water filtration and • Indian River Lagoon, a 155-mile-long estuary along treatment. Sometimes communities regulate the kinds of Florida’s east coast. Rich in habitat for both marine development and activities that can take place in a water- and shore species, the lagoon is threatened by ecolog- shed. Another effective way to protect a watershed is to ical changes due to past ditching and draining of buy critical watershed lands or development rights, some- water courses, as well as by development within the times as a complement to regulation, as part of a holistic wa t e r s h e d . 4 BUILDING GREEN INFRASTR U C T U R E 5 LESSONS LEARNED Complex land-protection programs require complex Taken together, the cases reveal the common elements partnerships between jurisdictions and professional dis- that lead to success in watershed land conservation: ciplines. Each of the case studies shows unique partner- ships between water managers and land-use managers Land conservation projects usually are driven by sever- who share compatible goals. Public and private agen- al motivations, in addition to the desire to protect wa- cies together with independent nonprofits can help pro- tershed or marine waters. Water managers may need vide a collaborative conservation solution to water to look to diverse sources for funding and support. quality problems. In addition to generating public sup- Supporters may also be motivated by the desire to pre- port, these organizations can promote sharing of infor- serve habitat, recreational opportunities, or the his- mation and help forge a cooperative effort—addressing toric values of a landscape; or by the more general both acquisition and management issues—among the Smart Growth goal of preserving quality of life and many public and private partners. In two of the cases curbing sprawl development. outlined, the National Estuary Program filled this orga- Decisions about land acquisition and public invest- nizational role. ment must be based on credible scientific or economic To be successful, land-acquisition programs require information. Such information might include data local funding, often generated through voter-approved from water-quality monitoring; demographic projec- bond sales or taxes. Beyond its fiscal contribution to tions; modeling of development scenarios using Geo- land acquisition, local funding helps ensure community graphical Information Systems (GIS); and cost analyses involvement and support. State funding often helps of alternatives to land acquisition, such as infrastruc- generate local funding, through incentives such as ture and water treatment costs. matching funds for land-protection programs. In the absence of sophisticated information, land-use Successful land acquisition often takes place within managers and water managers make decisions based a strong regulatory framework and alongside other on simpler models that show the cost-effectiveness and water-quality protection tools. Land acquisition is not multiple benefits of land conservation. The more ex- a replacement for regulation, but rather an alternative As rapid de velopment threatens drinking- tensive data now being developed will help managers for communities and landowners in cases where regula- Austin, Texas water sources, gov ernments and residents ar e better target and prioritize parcels for conservation, tion seems inadequate, or treatment prohibitively ex- looking for ways to protect water quality and will help them make the argument for investment Protecting the Edwards Aquifer through better land-use practices. pensive, to protect the resource. For example, a in watershed lands. successful program might combine a common regulato- ustin is a handsome, historic city in a pleasant part of Texas, with For programs to win support and funding, the public ry technique—such as zoning—with the acquisition of Arolling hill country to the west and the remains of the blackland prairie must be educated on the multiple values of watershed land or easements to protect a wellhead or set aside to the east. In the 19th century, the region supported immense herds of cat- protection. Grassroots efforts at public education may wetlands in need of restoration. tle. Now, the remains of ranches surround Austin, and a few ranchers still spring up around a specific incident of pollution. An graze a scattering of cattle, goats, and sheep. The region has undergone While the federal government played a small role in independent convener, such as an environmental or tremendous development in recent decades—its beauty and culture lure new these watershed-protection examples, the potential for civic group, may work to educate the public about residents and industries, particularly high-tech companies in search of a high stronger state and federal support is important and water pollution problems and conservation solutions. quality of life for their employees. The population of the greater Austin area growing. The National Estuary Program has shown In some areas, NEP has convened and helped educate has tripled since 1970, to over 540,000 in 1996.