1. No category

Photo by E.C. Stanley
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide
to Building
Watershed Communities
Community and Economic Development Extension
Agriculture and Natural Resources Extension
EDC 278—Revised
May 2006
Lois Wright Morton
Steve Padgitt
Jan Flora
Beverlyn Lundy Allen
Jeff Zacharakis-Jutz
Sandy Scholl
Alan Jensen
John Rodecap
James West
Joan Steffen-Baker
Renea Miller
LaDonna Osborn
Extension Community and Economic Development
(http://www.extension.iastate.edu/communities/)
Agriculture and Natural Resources Extension
(http://www.extension.iastate.edu/ag/)
Department of Sociology
(http://www.soc.iastate.edu/extension.html)
303 East Hall
Iowa State University
Ames, Iowa
Revised May 2006
This manual was made possible by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
CP98705301Project, “Building and Sustaining Resident-led Watershed
Management in At-risk Watersheds.”
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to
Building Watershed Communities
Executive Summary
This community leaders’ guide offers a process for local residents to come
together as a group to learn about their watershed and become more actively
involved in the management of their waters. It is designed for use by local leaders,
community development specialists, extension educators, and technical experts
who are seeking ways to increase citizen participation in land use and water
decisions. There are five basic assumptions that support this process:
1. Meaningful citizen involvement can make a difference in local
programs for improving water quality.
2. Science and local knowledge exchanges are essential foundations to
effective watershed management.
3. Citizens want to and can learn how to collect, evaluate, and integrate
information about their lands and waters.
4. A group structure provides a way for citizens to learn about their
watershed and influence public and private decisions.
5. Citizen groups must partner with government and private groups to
expand physical, technical, social, economic, and political knowledge
and resources.
The development of an active citizen group that can effectively partner with other
citizen groups, government, and natural resource experts takes time. The general
process is as follows:
May 2006
1. One person who is passionate about the watershed and willing to talk
to others about it acts as a catalyst. This one person (it could be a Soil
and Water Conservation District Commissioner, your neighbor, a
school teacher, a student, you or me) connects with others who care
about local water issues.
2. As a result, a core planning group develops to prepare a communitywide information meeting. This community meeting is not just called in
“crisis” situations but whenever citizens want to get together to improve
their watershed or see symptoms that could lead to water quality or
quantity problems.
3. A community-wide meeting is held for people to exchange with each
other what they know about their watershed and how they view it.
4. As an outgrowth of the community meeting, a voluntary watershed
group of self-selected citizens meet regularly around a growing vision
of their watershed. This vision is created through building personal
knowledge of their watershed and reflectively thinking about its past,
present and future. The vision is facilitated by increasing trust among
members of the watershed group.
5. Experts are invited to share the science of the ecological system and
technical responses so that the watershed group and community at
large can build personal knowledge for evaluating problems, proposing
alternatives and solutions.
6. The watershed group develops a clear mission statement with
objectives to guide action and puts in place a leadership structure for
guiding group activities.
7. The group frequently communicates to the whole watershed
community what the group is learning and doing as well as continually
extends invitations for others to join and participate.
8. Watershed citizens undertake activities that support the community
vision and the watershed group’s intent and mission.
9. The group continually engages their environment strengthening
relationships and knowledge about: social (schools, developers, land
use rules and regulations); political (elected commissioners,
supervisors-taxation, rules and regulations); environment (flooding,
excessive bacteria counts, high nitrogen levels) and works with the
community to seek solutions. The group negotiates, leverages, cajoles,
and cooperates with others to achieve the community watershed
vision.
There are 11 sections to this manual. The first section (Section 1) lists the basic
assumptions for involving citizens in local watershed management and offers
definitions of a watershed community, where to find a topographic map of your
watershed, and a table of nonpoint source pollutants and how they impact water
quality.
Sections 2 through 6 describe the process and examples for planning a community
forum and starting a citizen watershed group. Section 2 offers a “Community
Readiness” test and lays out the process for setting up a committee to plan a
community-wide forum. The test assists local leaders in evaluating the current
interest and potential of citizens to get more involved in watershed management.
The role of a third party facilitator in moderating the community forum and
supporting the organizational development of the citizen group is described in
Section 3.
Section 4 lays out in detail the goals, agenda, invitees, and public relations process
of preparing for the community forum. The goal of the community forum is to get
residents of the community together to talk about their watershed. This section
also offers handout templates and examples for modification by the planning
committee. Section 4 ends with a handout used in the community forum that asks
if people have an interest in meeting regularly to talk about and act on issues in
their watershed.
Section 5 provides direction for making a decision about forming a citizen
watershed group after the community forum. The main question for discussion in
the first meeting after the community forum is, “Are we ready to form a local
watershed group?” If the answer is “yes,” Section 5 offers guidance in developing
group intent and mission, potential group members and partners, watershed
awareness and information needs, and a group structure. Section 6 describes basic
group developmental stages and how to choose group-building strategies for
sustaining member interest. Once the citizen group has formed, begun to learn
about their watershed, and clarified their group mission and intent, they will be
ready to partner with other groups. Section 7 describes a number of public and
private local and state partners. These partners have expert knowledge, skills,
financial, and time resources that local citizen groups need to accomplish the
community vision for their watershed. Section 8 offers a troubleshooting table that
can help watershed group leaders and members identify problems in group process
and outcomes and strategies for solving them.
Section 9 addresses the different ways citizen groups can acquire information and
data about their watershed and the people who live there. Section 10 suggests
additional websites and informational materials that support the process by which
watershed groups develop and the activities they undertake. The last section,
Section 11, is a glossary of watershed terms.
In conclusion, we encourage you to modify the processes in this Facilitator’s
Guide to meet the needs of your community and your watershed group. Seek out
opportunities to learn what other groups are doing to solve their water issues.
Persist in the face of difficult situations. Remember there is strength in working
together, so keep talking even when you disagree. Meaningful long-term change
comes about slowly. Our common goal is the health of our shared waters. We wish
you success.
This publication is funded by the U.S. EPA Region VII
Water Quality Cooperative Agreement Program
Contract No. CP98705301.
Prepared by Lois Wright Morton, Steve Padgitt, Jan
Flora, Beverlyn Lundy Allen, Jeff Zacharakis-Jutz,
Sandy Scholl, Alan Jensen, John Rodecap, James
West, Joan Steffen-Baker, Renea Miller and LaDonna
Osborn, Iowa State University Extension Community
and Economic Development, Department of Sociology,
Ames, Iowa.
http://www.extension.iastate.edu/communities/
. . . and justice for all
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits
discrimination in all its programs and activities on the
basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion,
age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and
marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply
to all programs.) Many materials can be made available
in alternative formats for ADA clients. To file a
complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Office of Civil
Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and
Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 202509410 or call 202-720-5964.
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Table of Contents
Section 1: Assumptions and definitions of community watershed management
Section 2: Getting started—preparing for a community watershed meeting
Section 3: The role of third party facilitation
Section 4: Conducting the first community watershed meeting
Section 5: Community watershed group formation
Section 6: Sustaining local interest
Section 7: Local, state, and federal partners
Section 8: Troubleshooting
Section 9: Ways of knowing
A. Strategies and techniques for acquiring local knowledge
about watersheds
B. GIS: Displaying and presenting data to build local knowledge
and guide decision making
Section 10: Resources/websites
Section 11: Glossary of watershed terms
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leader’s Guide to Building Watershed Communities
i
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Section 1: Assumptions and
definitions of community
watershed management
Citizen involvement in community
watershed management doesn't just
happen. Citizens must have opportunities
to talk to others and learn about water
issues. For them to act on water
concerns, they must believe they can
make a difference and have access to
resources. In addition to sound science,
technical support, and financial
resources, they need to learn the process
of working together as a group—as a
watershed community. This manual is
designed for community leaders,
community development specialists,
extension educators, and technical
experts. It contains processes and
resources for developing and supporting
a community organization of citizens
who want to learn about their watershed
and partner with others to manage and
protect it.
The problem
Iowa occupies less than 5 percent of
the Mississippi River drainage basin.
However, the state, on average, “supplies
almost 25 percent of the nitrate-N that
the Mississippi River delivers to the
Gulf of Mexico” (Libra 1998:7). Other
nonpoint source pollutants in Iowa’s
waters include sediment, excessive
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders' Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Basic assumptions about community
watershed management:
1. Citizen-based efforts can make a
difference. The key to effective, high
impact sustainable programs is local
ownership of the process.
2. The exchange of information drawn from
both science and local knowledge is an
essential foundation for effective
watershed management.
3. As citizens learn how to collect, evaluate,
and integrate information, they are
positioned to partner with others to
protect their local lands and waters.
4. An organizational structure provides
citizens a way to influence, modify, and
support land use and water improvement
practices.
5. Local efforts are successful when citizens,
natural resource professionals, community
development specialists, and community
leaders act in partnership to address
watershed issues.
1-1
phosphorous,
synethic organic
chemicals, and
microorganisms.
Estimate of Iowa’s
Nitrate-Nitrogen
Export to the
Mississippi River
Water pollution is
not just a downstream
1
2
problem that
threatens Iowa
landholders with new
regulations. It is a
Source: Robert D. Libra. "Nitrate-Nitrogen: Iowa’s Unintended Export." Iowa Geology
local issue that
1998, Number 23. Iowa Department of Natural Resources.
affects the quality of
life of everyone in Iowa. Streams and lakes
Nonpoint source pollution is the cumulative
provide habitat for fish and wildlife. Water
result of everyone’s land use practices.
assures agricultural productivity and
Pollution occurs in our activities of daily
economic opportunities for existing
living: when used oil is poured on the
businesses to expand and new ones to
ground or down the drain, when livestock
relocate to the state. Iowa waters are
wade in a stream, when a farmer or lawn
sources of industrial and economic
owner applies too much fertilizer, when
development, flood control, fishing,
septic systems are inadequate, and when
boating, swimming, and visual pleasure.
urban growth paves over land, thereby
Impaired waters threaten the social,
accelerating runoff.
physical, and economic well being of
everyone.
The key to understanding and solving the
problem is to get everyone involved.
Iowa has not ignored the problem of water
quality. Private and public organizations and
One way to get everyone involved is to
agencies have mobilized to understand the
proactively initiate community-led
sources of pollution and to implement
watershed management. People who live
interventions. Farmers and other
in a watershed are the first line of defense
landowners have developed and adopted new
against contaminated waters to reduce
land use practices to improve and protect
pollution. All the money and expertise in
water quality. Research and demonstration
the world won’t solve water problems until
projects have proven the effectiveness and
local watershed residents and landowners
profitability of best management practices
invest their time and energies in creating a
that reduce sediment runoff and excessive
new norm – a norm that values local
nitrates and phosphorous. Yet, the need to
streams, rivers, lakes, groundwater supply,
expand current projects for additional water
and wetlands, and holds everyone
quality protection continues.
accountable for actions that threaten this
vital resource base of the community.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders' Guide to Building Watershed Communities
1-2
What's a watershed community?
A watershed community is a group of
people who are bound together by the land
that drains water into the physical flow of
their common streams, rivers, lakes, or
other bodies of water. A watershed
community can be as small as
the land basin (sub-watershed) and
as large as people from multiple subwatersheds are willing to undertake.
Water belongs to everyone. As a resource
held in common, it is easy for no one to
take responsibility for it. An engaged
watershed community takes responsibility
for understanding their land and water
relationships and working with scientists to
manage them in ways that benefit the whole
community.
What is community watershed
management?
Community watershed management means
the people of the watershed invest their
time, talents, energies, and personal
resources in acquiring the knowledge they
need to take an active role in managing their
watershed. Watershed residents partner with
elected officials, those with a financial
stake in local lands, and natural resource
experts to gather information and make
decisions about local policies and land use
practices that protect and add value to their
land and waters. They frequently and
systematically communicate with others
within their watershed and connecting
watersheds.
Maps of the Watershed
Most roadmaps show major water bodies of a region. However, smaller streams, rivers, and
lakes are often not marked on transportation maps. Detailed topographic maps of the land
and waters in a particular region are available from the U.S. Geological Survey. A map is
usually named after the most prominent city, town, or natural landmark shown on it. State
maps and smaller scale maps are available. Refer to Catalog of Topographic and Other
Published Maps for names, dates, and prices.
Map Distribution
USGS Map Sales
Box 15286, Federal Center, Bldg. 810
Denver, CO 80225 — or
http://mac.usgs.gov/mac/findmaps.html
Iowa topographic maps can be downloaded from the USDA NRCS site at Iowa State
University:
http://ortho.gis.iastate.edu/drg24/drg24.html
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders' Guide to Building Watershed Communities
1-3
Community watershed groups can partner with Soil and Water
Conservation District Commissioners, environmental groups, farmers,
businesses, District Conservationists, natural resource professionals,
and others to:
1. help establish communication networks with other watershed residents and
groups,
2. educate and motivate others in the watershed to get involved,
3. initiate demonstration and field trials of best management practices,
4. collect local data such as water quality monitoring, wildlife inventories, resource
inventories, and surveys of farmer and resident land use practices,
5. undertake watershed activities such as willow planting, trash clean-up, prairie and
tree plantings,
6. identify priorities for allocating limited public financial resources,
7. set local water quality and quantity goals,
8. plan strategies for achieving goals,
9. offer innovative solutions for controlling potential water pollution, and
10. identify and seek additional funds to support local efforts to solve water quality
problems.
A first step in developing a local watershed
group is the convening of residents to
discuss their water. Initially, they may not
agree on the existence of water pollution in
the community, sources of water
contamination, or possible solutions. But, if
they can agree on a meeting date, time, and
place, they are off to a good start.
Sharing local knowledge
Watershed residents can begin to build local
knowledge by discussing with each other
what they already know about their
watershed. This means they talk with each
other about historical and current
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders' Guide to Building Watershed Communities
experiences – swimming, fishing, trapping,
bird watching, irrigating, and drinking water.
This local knowledge provides a foundation
for thinking about their own personal and
business practices that contribute to the
quality of their water (see Figure 1). It
should also lead to realizing there is a lot
they don’t know about their own watershed.
This prepares them to ask questions and
search for more information. The search for
more information often leads to collecting
expert and local knowledge. After sorting
and evaluating the information, citizens are
ready to frame watershed issues in their
own language.
1-4
known
science
economic
and
social
contexts
available
resources
Alternative Solutions
intervention
feedback
from past
practices
Framing the Problem
local experiences
and attitudes
local data about
watershed
Figure 1. Inputs for developing alternative solutions
Then, as a local group forms, watershed
residents are ready to begin as a group to
talk about what needs to be done and what
strategies are necessary to accomplish their
goals.
Watershed groups are a diverse collection
of people who have different reasons for
wanting to better protect and manage their
waters. They are farmers, rural landowners,
business or retired people, students,
teachers, sports enthusiasts,
conservationists, and residents of rural and
urban cities and towns. Some will be afraid
that a federal or state agency will regulate
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders' Guide to Building Watershed Communities
the management of their lands and see a
group effort as an opportunity to combat
outside mandates. Others will be nature
lovers, hunters, or environmentalists
committed to conservation. Some will have
had personal experience with illness or
disease that they attribute to water quality
issues. Some will be concerned about
regional economic vitality and see clean
water as an essential attribute for attracting
and retaining businesses. Community
watershed groups must deliberately create
an open environment for all of these
viewpoints to be voiced and seriously
discussed.
1-5
Things to think about
♦ Local groups must understand their water problems and feel they can make a
difference. Agencies which convene local groups must be prepared to let
citizens make a difference.
♦ Communication among citizens and agencies supporting local groups must be
as open and voluntary as possible.
♦ Local citizen priorities (as well as the resource system they are part of) are
dynamic and will be constantly changing.
♦ Free exchanges of information and communication among citizens and natural
resource experts is essential if they are to learn from each other and develop
action strategies that make a difference.
♦ Local groups are always nested in other decision-making structures – within the
county, region, state, and nation. Environmental, economic, social, and political
decisions within and outside of the watershed influence what kinds of actions
are possible.
♦ Reliance on government agencies alone to solve complex resource management
problems may miss important water problems and solutions.
♦ A neutral third party facilitator is beneficial in the organizational formation of
community watershed groups.
♦ Local citizen groups replace "educating" with "learning." People engage in
change best when given an opportunity to co-create their environment.
♦ Conflict is inevitable when people feel strongly about their environment. The
challenge is to redirect conflict and controversy to energize people to better
manage and protect their water resources.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders' Guide to Building Watershed Communities
1-6
Notes to facilitator and community leaders:
1. Table 1 summarizes major pollutants, their sources, and water quality impacts.
2. Each watershed will have different water problems of concern to citizens: flooding, loss of
fishing quality and implications for tourism, threats by EPA to regulate farm production
practices, health impacts of inadequate septic systems, high bacteria counts and pesticides
in drinking water, closed beaches and reduced water quantities due to drought or overuse.
Some citizens will believe they do not have a problem because their stream or lake is not on
the EPA 303(d) impaired waters list (http:www.state.ia.us/dnr/organiza/epd/wtresrce/
303dnotc.htm). However, every watershed is at risk if citizens don’t take proactive steps to
prevent practices and policies that result in poor water quality and reduced quantity.
3. A glossary of watershed terms can be found at the back of this manual.
See Section 2 for a test of community readiness.
A community meeting small group report.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders' Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Photo by Peggy Murdoch
1-7
Table 1. Some Nonpoint Source Pollutants, Their Sources, and Water Quality Impacts.
POLLUTANT
SOURCES
WATER QUALITY AND RELATED IMPACTS
sediment
agriculture
crops & grazing
ƒ decreases water clarity and light transmission through water,
which:
- causes a decrease in aquatic plant production
- obscures sources of food, habitats, refuges, and nesting
sites of fish
- interferes with fish behaviors which rely on sight, such as
mating activities
ƒ adversely affects respiration of fish by clogging gills
ƒ fills gravel spaces in stream bottoms, smothering fish eggs
and juveniles
ƒ inhibits feeding and respiration of macroinvertebrates, an
important component of fish diets
ƒ decreases dissolved oxygen concentration
ƒ acts as a substrate for organic pollutants, including
pesticides
ƒ decreases recreational, commercial and aesthetic values of
streams
ƒ decreases quality of drinking water
forestry
urban runoff
construction
mining
pesticides
agriculture
herbicides
forestry
urban runoff
ƒ kill aquatic organisms that are not targets
ƒ adversely affect reproduction, growth, respiration, and
development in aquatic organisms
ƒ reduce food supply and destroy habitat of aquatic species
ƒ accumulate in tissues of plants, macroinvertebrates and fish
ƒ some are carcinogenic (cause cancer), mutagenic (induce
changes in genetic materials-(DNA), and/or teratogenic
(cause birth defects)
ƒ create health hazards for humans consuming contaminated
fish or drinking water
ƒ lower organisms’ resistance and increase susceptibility to
diseases and environmental stress
ƒ decreases photosynthesis in aquatic plants
ƒ reduces recreational and commercial activities
ƒ accumulate in tissues of plants, microinvertebrates and fish
ƒ toxic to aquatic life
ƒ adhere to sediments; persist in environment longer than
most chlorinated compounds
polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs)
urban runoff
polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons
(PAHS)
urban runoff
ƒ accumulate in tissues of plants, macroinvertebrates and fish
ƒ when disgested, create substances which are carcinogenic
(cancer-causing)
ƒ toxic to aquatic life
ƒ toxicity is affected by salinity; estuaries with low salinities
may be the most biologically sensitive
petroleum
hydrocarbons
urban runoff
ƒ water soluble components can be toxic to aquatic life
ƒ portions may adhere to organic matter and be deposited in
sediment
ƒ may adversely affect biological functions
landfills
Table 1 provided courtesy of the Adopt-A-Stream Foundation from the Streamkeeper’s Field Guide, all rights reserved.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders' Guide to Building Watershed Communities
1-8
Table 1. Some Nonpoint Source Pollutants, Their Sources, and Water Quality Impacts, continued.
POLLUTANT
SOURCES
WATER QUALITY AND RELATED IMPACTS
pathogens and fecal
bacteria
agriculture
forestry
urban runoff
ƒ create human health hazard
ƒ increase costs of treating drinking water
ƒ reduce recreational value
nutrients
(phosphorus,
nitrogen)
agriculture
ƒ overstimulate growth of algae and aquatic plants, which
later, through their decay, cause:
- reduced oxygen levels that adversely affect fish and other
aquatic organisms
- turbid conditions that eliminate habitat and food sources for
aquatic organisms
- reduced recreational opportunities
- reduced water quality and increased costs of treatment
- a decline in sensitive fish species and an over-abundance of
nutrient-tolerant fish species, decreasing overall diversity of
the fish community
- premature aging of streams, lakes, & estuaries
ƒ high concentrations of nitrates can cause health problems in
infants
forestry
urban runoff
construction
metals
urban runoff
industrial runoff
mining
automobile use
sulfates
mining
industrial runoff
radionuclides
mining and ore
processing
nuclear power-plant
fuel & wastes
commercial/
industry
salts
agriculture
mining
urban runoff
ƒ adversely affect reproduction rates and life spans of aquatic
organisms
ƒ adversely disrupt food chain in aquatic environments
ƒ accumulate in bottom sediments, posing risks to bottom
feeding organisms
ƒ accumulate in tissues of plants, macroinvertebrates, and fish
ƒ reduce water quality
ƒ lower pH (increase acidity) in streams which stresses
aquatic life and leaches toxic metals out of sediment and
rocks
ƒ high acidity and concentrations of heavy metals can be fatal
to aquatic organisms, may eliminate entire aquatic
communities
ƒ release radioactive substances into streams
ƒ some are toxic, carcinogenic (cancer causing) and mutagenic
(induce change in genetic materials-DNA)
ƒ some break down into “daughter” products, such as radium
and lead, which are toxic and carcinogenic
to aquatic organisms
ƒ some persist in the environment for thousands of years and
continue to emit radiation
ƒ accumulate in tissues, bones and organs where
they can continue to emit radiation
ƒ eliminate salt intolerant species, decreasing diversity
ƒ can fluctuate in concentration, adversely affecting both
tolerant and intolerant species
ƒ impact stream habitats and plants which are food sources for
macroinvertebrates
ƒ reduce crop yield
ƒ decrease quality of drinking water
ƒ reduce recreation values through high salinity levels and high
evaporation rates
Table 1 provided courtesy of the Adopt-A-Stream Foundation from the Streamkeeper’s Field Guide, all rights reserved.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders' Guide to Building Watershed Communities
1-9
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Section 2: Getting started
Multi-objective planning
Community readiness
Watershed residents bring multiple concerns
and a variety of potential solutions to public
watershed discussions. These issues include
flooding, water quality, economic vitality,
and conservation of natural resources. When
residents are involved in a watershed
management planning process they are
engaging in multi-objective planning. To
achieve these objectives, effective
watershed groups will partner with other
residents, public agencies, and private
organizations and businesses to:
Each watershed community is uniquely
different in its physical, social, political,
and economic organization. This
uniqueness will affect how ready
community members are to undertake a
group effort to solve watershed problems.
To test the readiness of the watershed
you’re working with, answer the questions
on the following page. Ask several local
leaders including Soil and Water
Conservation District Commissioners and
District Conservationists to take the test.
4 Inventory watershed resources and
If you answer “yes” to any of the questions
on the following page, your community
may be ready to tackle some watershed
management initiatives. If you answer
“yes” to the majority of these questions,
you have a very “hot” community topic.
Residents are ready to develop a local
group to address their water issues. If you
circle a lot of, “Don’t Know,” you need to
collect more information about what
people are thinking and talking about.
Talk to community leaders, landowners,
businesses, and residents of the region to
determine how important water issues are.
conditions
4 Analyze watershed problems
4 Establish watershed goals and objectives
4 Consider best management practices and
solutions to achieve goals and objectives
4 Develop effective action plans
4 Engage in implementing action plans
4 Monitor actions and changes in the
watershed and water quality
4 Evaluate progress toward watershed
goals; realign goals, activities, and
outcomes as situations change
4 Become a dynamic group as goals/
situations within the watershed change
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
2-1
Community Readiness
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Yes
No
Don’t
Know
Is water quality or quantity a topic of informal
discussions when residents get together?
1
2
3
Do people talk about swimming, boating, and
fishing in local waters?
1
2
3
In the last year or so, has your watershed been in the
news? Have there been newspaper, radio or TV
stories, letters to the editor and opinion pieces about
flooding or local water quality/quantity problems?
1
2
3
Do you have one or more local groups that feel
passionate about the environment and are involved
in activities to improve it?
1
2
3
Are residents “showing up” at planning board, town
council, or county supervisor meetings and
expressing concern about the impact of development
on the environment?
1
2
3
Are leaders and staff of agencies and organizations
promoting watershed management planning and are
they willing to listen to and involve citizens?
1
2
3
Are farmers and landowners searching for solutions
to soil and nutrient loss to reduce input costs and
retain soil productivity?
1
2
3
Do you have business leaders who want to draw new
business to the region and see water resources as a
valuable amenity?
1
2
3
Do the people in the watershed drink the water from
their watershed region?
1
2
3
Has a water crisis occurred in the last 5 years
(flooding, drought, accidental chemical spills,
discovery of an endangered species)?
1
2
3
Is the watershed on the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) 303d impaired waters list? (This
watershed is a prime candidate for state and federal
regulation and intervention.)
1
2
3
L.W. Morton. 2002. “Community Readiness.” Department of Sociology, Iowa State University.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
2-2
Time and commitment
Community watershed management is a
long-term commitment. It may take a year
or two for a local group to form and
develop plans for activities and strategies
to achieve their vision for the watershed.
Short and medium term projects will help
sustain resident involvement and interest.
Until the group is formed and recognized
by local decision making bodies, it will be
at risk of falling apart. If local residents
perceive that they are unable to contribute
to the public decision making process
about how land within the watershed is
managed, they will lose interest and leave
the group.
Since successful watershed groups bring
together a diversity of interests in the
watershed, it is often appropriate—indeed
necessary—to select an outside facilitator
who can focus on involving all segments
of the community in the new organization.
The facilitator’s role is to:
• encourage the group to persist,
• offer guidance in developing the group
structure, and
• moderate and facilitate the group
discussions until leadership structure is
in place.
(See Section 3 for more details on the role
of the facilitator.)
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Forming the first core group:
A planning committee to involve
residents
It only takes one motivated person to see
the need for citizen involvement in a
watershed and a willingness to act. (See
Section 5 for an overview of the Process of
Group Formation, Figure 5.4.) That one
person can become a catalyst by finding
others with similar concerns. This core
group of people provides the initial
impetus for community action. The goal of
this group is to bring together landowners,
residents, and other stakeholders to talk
about their watershed. A plan might
include the following:
What: A face-to-face community meeting
where watershed residents can talk with
each other.
Planning Committee: Ask 4-7 people to
form a working committee to plan the
community meeting. Include people who
represent different sectors of the
community (e.g., farmer, rural resident,
urban and suburban residents, environmentalist) as well as those who have a
passion and concern for the environment.
Who to Invite: All landowners, farm
operators, and residents of the watershed;
also businesses, industries, government
agencies and institutions located in the
watershed. See Figure 2.1 for more
examples. Invitations can be mailed to all
residents. In person, word-of-mouth
invitations or phone calls are the most
2-3
effective. Posters, announcements at group
meetings, radio and newspaper notices will
also encourage and remind residents to
attend.
When: Choose a date and time when most
of the landowners can attend. Some groups
have chosen a week night, 7-9 p.m.; larger
watershed groups have convened an allday meeting, 9 a.m.-3 p.m. Avoid planting
and harvest seasons to ensure farmers can
attend.
Where: Choose a neutral location, e.g.,
library, city hall, or community center,
where everyone will feel comfortable.
Some of these costs can be covered
through donations from organizations and
agencies involved in the planning process.
A sponsoring agency (Resource
Conservation & Development [RC&D],
Cooperative Extension, Soil & Water
Conservation District [SWCD] office,
municipal water agencies) can provide
valuable in-kind support and coordination.
If additional funds are needed, the
planning group will need to explore small
grants or in-kind support from the SWCD
office and/or make personal requests to
local businesses, Farm Bureau, churches,
and groups like Trees Forever and Izaak
Walton League.
Agenda: The goal of the meeting is to
identify residents and others who are
willing to form a local watershed group. A
community development facilitator can
help shape the agenda. Section 4 of this
manual offers details on developing an
agenda and conducting the meeting.
Budget: Costs of the meeting may include:
♦ room rental
♦ invitations to the meeting: invitation
design, printing, and mailing (postage)
♦ community posters about the meeting
♦ facilitator
♦ refreshments
♦ handouts (maps, educational materials,
and sign-up forms)
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
2-4
civic
interes
ts
d
*lan s
er
own
d
cte s
ele i c i a l
off
bu
pe sine
rso ss
ns
*la
ope nd
rato
rs
al
ent
nm
iro sts
env ntere
i
dia
me sons
r
pe
co
san unty
itar
ian
agricultural
interests
*rural
non-farm
residents
Community
Meeting
*u
sub rban/
res urban
ide
nts
educators and
students
ion
eat p
r
c
re rou
g
*These are potentially critical people who need to make up a large part of the group.
Figure 2.1. Invitations to the community meeting should include primary stakeholders and all sectors
that are affected by the watershed
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
2-5
Community Meeting Checklist
q Form a planning committee of 4-7 members who represent multiple
watershed interests. This core group will probably be the core of the
council—be sure it is not a committee of agency, education, and business
people—this needs to be comprised of landowners and residents who have
personal stakes in the watershed. (Use the blank spidergram, Figure 2.2,
to construct your own spidergram and then discuss it with others.)
q Select a meeting date, time, and location.
q Develop a timeline for meeting preparation.
q Plan a budget, request donated services and facilities.
q Seek additional funding if necessary.
q Select a facilitator to conduct the community meeting
(see Section 3).
q Compile an invitation list (includes all watershed residents and their
addresses). Agency partners can help prepare the list; the planning
committee can review for additions or deletions.
q Create the agenda for first meeting (see Section 4 for an example).
q Design, print, and mail invitations. Include a concise statement of issues
and a map of the watershed (see sample). Everyone should be notified 5
times (early for them to save the date, 2 mail contacts 3 weeks and 1 week
prior to the meeting, newspaper and posters and personal invitations).
q Publicity: newspaper, posters, radio, letters to editor, columnists
contacted. Write media news releases 3 weeks and 1 week before the
meeting (see example at the end of this section).
q Refreshments
q Identify and reproduce handouts (see Section 4).
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
2-6
Watershed
Community
Meeting
Figure 2.2. Primary stakeholders and local interests that should be included in our watershed
community meeting
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
2-7
Publicity Example
Opinion/Editorial Article for The Tribune
Ames, Iowa March 12, 2001
At an ISU conference on March 5-7 entitled Agriculture and the Environment: State and
Federal Water Initiatives, I learned that we are on the verge of a dramatic change in the
focus of soil and water management practices throughout the nation. This change in
focus is critical to bringing about improvement and protection of water quality in our
rivers, lakes, streams and oceans. Under the Clean Water Act, state and federal agencies
working together with citizen’s groups and individuals are beginning to impose numeric
concentration and mass limits on pollutants that enter rural and municipal stormwater
discharges, especially discharges to already polluted waters. The pollutants are
collectively referred to as either non-point source (NPS) or point source (PS) pollutants.
The limits that are being imposed are expressed as Total Maximum Daily Loads
(TMDLs). The implications for farmers and local communities nationwide in terms of
pollution control costs, growth management, and land-use planning are unprecedented.
When the health of our streams, rivers and lakes is threatened, each of us is threatened.
The solution to this problem starts with each of us in our own backyard, on our city
streets and parking lots, in our place of work, in our parks, and on our farms. If we don’t
take the necessary steps to clean up our waters locally, Congress has given the
Environmental Protection Agency the authority to impose solutions. In lieu of this
happening, resident-led management initiatives offer the opportunity for people to
voluntarily get involved in their watershed and to find their own solutions. Federal and
state funding incentives are available in support of these voluntary initiatives. Iowa State
University Extension is pioneering the development of volunteer resident-led
management approaches in several small watersheds in northeast Iowa.
Resident-led watershed groups consist of people bound together by the physical flow of
their common streams, rivers, or lakes--people who live and work in the same
watershed and are willing to work together to develop local policies and practices that
protect their waters. Most importantly, they care about keeping the land whole and the
water clean. We saw the beginning of this process over the last year when Ames and
Story County residents came together on several occasions to voice their concerns over
water quality issues at Hallett’s Quarry and College Creek. The Story County Water
Monitoring Group was organized to help monitor local streams and lakes as part of a
state-wide volunteer-led monitoring effort called IOWATER. Frequent flooding on
Squaw Creek and the Skunk River has destroyed homes and damaged property and the
City of Ames has had to struggle with the process of revising floodway boundaries
within our floodplains. Comprehensive watershed and floodplain management are
absolutely essential to protecting water quality, reducing peak flows during wet periods,
and preventing our streams and wells from going dry during drought.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
2-8
What can resident-led groups do? Sociologist Lois Wright Morton, and a team of
associates in ISU Extension to Communities have authored a publication entitled
“Resident-led Watershed Mangement” that includes a long list of action items for groups
made up of conservationists, farmers, environmentalists, business people, educators, local
governments, and natural resource technicians. These groups form watershed councils
that assume an expanded role beyond that of an advisory committee. Council members
educate themselves about land use and water quality issues in their watershed. They
continuously gather and share information and seek local partners in solving the problems
of their watershed. Councils are action-oriented and have personal stakes in how their
watershed resources are managed. When residents and natural resource experts work as a
team they can make sustainable changes in farm management, urban lawn care, municipal
stormwater management and other land use practices that lead to clean water. At the
Agriculture and Environment Conference I heard several success stories from resident-led
watershed management groups from Appanoose, Clayton and Jones counties. It was
inspiring to hear Pauline Anson, farmer and retired school teacher from Jones County tell
how Mineral Creek Watershed residents are making a difference.
Local citizens soon will have the opportunity to get involved with a resident-led group
for the Squaw Creek Watershed, a 231-square-mile area that includes parts of Boone,
Hamilton, Story, and Webster counties. More than a 1000 invitations have been mailed to
landowners, farmers, city and county officials, and others to attend a stakeholders meeting on Thursday, March 22, 9:00 AM to 3:30 PM, in the Scheman Building at Iowa State
University. The purpose of the meeting will be to identify problems and create solutions
to long-term water quality. Anyone who lives, manages land, works or cares about
Squaw Creek Watershed is welcome. The preregistration fee is $10 ($15 on the day of
the meeting) and includes lunch. You can pre-register by downloading a form from the
internet at: http://www.lifeleamer.iastate.edu/conference/yearOl 03con£htm or by contacting Erv Klaas at: eklaas@iastate.edu or 515-294-7990 during regular business hours.
Erwin Klaas, Story County Soil and Water Conservation District Commissioner,
1405 Grand Ave., Ames, Iowa 50010 * 515-294-7990
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
2-9
SAMPLE INVITATION TO A COMMUNITY MEETING
[Name of your watershed] connects farmers, residents, and all those with interests in [names of counties
your watershed is in] counties to each other and to the land that is a part of us. In recent years there has
been growing concern about the quality and safety of the water in [name of your watershed]. We can make
a difference!
Join us in talking about issues, concerns, successes, and challenges in preserving the
special beauty and water quality of [name of creek(s)]. Help us plan for the future of
the [name of your watershed].
Insert a map of your watershed here.
http://ortho.gis.iastate.edu/drg24/drg24.html
We are forming a community group for the [name of your watershed]. Residents
and landowners in [names of counties] Counties who live, work, and have
interests in the [name of your watershed] are invited to join us for a community
discussion.
The meeting will be held from [times] on [date] at [place]. If you are unable to
attend but interested in joining this effort, please contact [name of contact, phone
number, email].
DAY OF WEEK, DATE – TIME (from) – (to)
Time
Registration
Time
Getting to know our watershed
How has our watershed changed?
Current uses of our watershed
Time
Renewing our watershed;
responding to the challenge
How can watershed residents
contribute to local solutions?
What are possible resident roles
in managing our local watershed?
Your concerns about the watershed
Strategies for local actions
Documented water issues
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
2-10
SAMPLE REGISTRATION FORM (ON-SITE OR EARLY)
[NAME OF YOUR WATERSHED] MEETING – [Date]
Participant Information
First Name
Last Name
County
e-mail
Day Phone
Fax
Evening Phone
Street Address
City
State
Zip Code
What is your relationship to the [Name of Your Watershed] W atershed?
Check as many as apply:
† landowner, but don’t live in the watershed
† landowner who lives in the watershed
† resident, but don’t own land
† manage one or more farm(s) in the watershed
† own/manage a business in the watershed
† local elected/regulatory official with policy/practice oversight that affects the watershed
† natural resources agency personnel with watershed responsibilities
† land developer
† land use planner
† other (please specify)
It’s Easy to Register!
Name of where to send registration and who to call if questions:
Name
Address
City, State, Zip
Phone
Fax
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
2-11
SAMPLE SAVE-THE-DATE POSTCARD
local media and posters.
Watch for more details in
SAVE THE DATE!
A community meeting
to discuss water quality issues
A joint project of [your Soil and Water
Conservation District, watershed citizens,
Iowa State University Extension, and . . .
insert sponsoring partners]
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
:DWHUVKHG&RPPXQLW\0HHWLQJ
'DWH
7LPH
/RFDWLRQ
2-12
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Section 3: The role of third
party facilitation
People have different uses for and place
different levels of importance on the land
and waters in their watershed. Water is a
shared resource whose management often
creates conflicting expectations about
acceptable levels of water availability,
access, quantity, and quality. Regions
may have already experienced conflicts
and controversies about flood plains and
development, endangered species,
impaired water designations,
contaminated drinking water sources,
intensive livestock management, and
agricultural production practices. These
multiple understandings about the extent
of problems and alternative solutions can
lead to polarized standoffs without
problem solving outcomes.
emergence of citizen awareness and action.
Facilitators also ensure the representation
of all stakeholders – providing a neutral
ground for those who may not have cordial
relationships. When all community
stakeholders are involved, people will hold
diverse opinions and perspectives. It is
important to allow these differences to be
voiced in public discussions. These
potentially uncomfortable exchanges can
be sources of innovative solutions,
improved practices, and expanding local
resources. The third party facilitator is
essential in providing opportunities for
minority and dissenting viewpoints to be
People in watershed communities have
historical relationships with each other.
These connections may inhibit free
exchange of information and reproduce
biases that are barriers to solving water
pollution problems. Being a good
neighbor may include not voicing
concern about land management practices
that are destructive to the land.
Third party facilitators are valuable in
assessing and building community
readiness to act. They can facilitate the
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Photo by Lois Wright Morton
The facilitator helps citizen groups frame their watershed
issues and search for alternative solutions.
3-1
expressed. When local citizens convene
and politely agree, real disagreements and
disapproval of the resource use of others is
not allowed to emerge. This becomes a
barrier to identifying true water
contamination problems and finding
technically and politically supportable
solutions. The third party facilitator may
have to assume the unpopular role of
pushing the community to face its water
issues. Once a community identifies its
water problems, the facilitator then guides
the group in building capacity to ask the
right questions, to obtain data, and to
construct cooperative solutions and act on
them.
Polarized positions and people who are not
open to new information nor respectful of
differing viewpoints often are barriers to
effective problem solving. The role of the
facilitator is to draw out personal
perceptions about what is happening to the
watershed without compromising the
individual who volunteered these
perceptions. The third party facilitator
creates a neutral and safe zone for citizens
to share their knowledge, opinions, and
values and to learn from each other. In this
role, the facilitator encourages problem
solving around watershed use by mediating
conflict and drawing out suppressed
knowledge.
The facilitator creates an environment in
which respectful discussions can occur.
This person has skills in group dynamics
and processes that can help the planning
group accomplish its agenda. However, it
is not the facilitator’s role to solve local
problems. It is the responsibility of
residents in the watershed to seek
information and frame problems, seek
alternative solutions, make policy and
practice recommendations, undertake
activities in support of selected solutions,
and evaluate the end results.
The facilitator’s role is to:
1. work with the steering committee or a few key people to develop meeting goals and
agendas,
2. coordinate discussion and decision making among multiple stakeholders,
3. ensure organizational continuity and cohesiveness until a group forms that is able
to assume leadership,
4. create a respectful environment in which differences of opinion can be shared,
5. ensure divergent voices are included in public decisions, and
6. mediate, negotiate, and redirect conflicting viewpoints into productive problem
solving.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
3-2
Significant change can only take
place when local people:
1 realize that the local environment
matters to them and is at risk, and
2. believe that doing something will
improve their own lives and
strengthen the community.
The facilitator helps citizens build their
capacities to solve their own problems
through developing leaders and
organizational infrastructures. In some
communities, leadership for developing a
citizen-led group will initially come from
external agencies. In other places,
community groups are emerging and need
nurturing and encouragement from
agencies and district commissioners. And
in some communities, a community group
is already formed and is looking to partner
with others. Most watersheds cross
political boundaries (county/state lines)
and require a cooperative approach among
communities and local governments. A
third party facilitator is a valuable resource
in working with watershed communities to
build readiness, group capacity, and
partnerships across county lines.
Many communities have not worked
together on their water quality issues.
Individuals may feel strongly about water
quality but haven’t connected to others in
their watersheds. Farmers and landowners
may talk to staff and technicians at the
Farm Service Agency, Natural Resource
Conservation Service, Planning Board, or
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Iowa State University Extension, but not
to other farmers, other rural residents,
business operators, and town or urban
residents. Or when they do talk, they don’t
think about the watershed as their common
resource. They don’t realize the positive
impact they could have on their water if
they worked together to improve it.
Guidelines for selecting a watershed facilitator and matching a
facilitator to the community
Having an “outside” facilitator is often
necessary if there is a high probability of
conflict and a diversity of interests among
participants. Watershed groups, if they are
to truly represent the diverse interests in
the watershed (stakeholders), will have to
deal with differing perspectives, interests,
and approaches to watershed improvement. Some guidelines for choosing a
facilitator follow:
n
Be sure that a diverse group (that
includes major interests or stakeholders
in the watershed) are included in the
generation and discussion of names of
potential facilitators. Not only does this
ensure that appropriate candidates are
not overlooked, but also provides a test
of how any candidate would be
accepted by those with different
perspectives on the watershed.
•
The person chosen must have a
broad reputation for fairness and
should not be strongly identified
with a particular group in the
watershed.
3-3
•
•
n
Avoid choosing an outsider who has
no knowledge of the workings of the
community or of the different
interests and personalities involved.
A good candidate will be politically
savvy. Tropman (1997) suggests that
if a candidate for facilitator does not
know the community well, s/he
should be willing to invest some upfront time in learning the
community’s culture, politics (public
as well as interpersonal), and patterns
of behavior. Where more than one
community is involved in the
watershed, the facilitator should know
or be willing to learn about
intercommunity patterns of behavior
that form the context in which the
watershed group will have to operate.
If the choice boils down to someone
who has no knowledge of the local
situation and someone who leans
toward a particular perspective, but is
viewed as fair-minded by diverse
interests or factions, the latter is
preferable.
Once a list of potential candidates is
drawn up, they should be ranked.
Beginning at the top of the list, they can
be contacted one at a time to determine
their interest and to obtain a list of
references of former clients. Oral
recommendations are preferred to written
ones. If everything checks out, an
interview with the committee should be
arranged. Characteristics other than those
mentioned above should be assessed in
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
both the personal interview with the
candidate and interviews with references:
•
Does the individual have good
interpersonal (including listening)
skills and a record of success in
facilitation?
•
Does the person take a participatory
approach that encourages
involvement of diverse players?
•
Is s/he skillful in defusing conflict,
but at the same time good at
challenging ideas with the objective
of clarifying values and thought
processes?
•
Does s/he know when to leave an
irresolvable issue and steer discussion
toward still-central topics in which
there is a greater potential of
agreement?
•
Is s/he good at encouraging problemsolving, rather than fault-finding
discussion?
•
Does s/he have a substantial amount
of humility? Is s/he willing to give the
group credit for solving particularly
difficult issues? Praise is important,
even for having solved lesser issues.
•
Does the facilitator create an
atmosphere of informality and
encourage activities that over time
generate trust among those in the
group?
The Applegate Partnership, which brought
together a potentially volatile mixture of
logging interests, environmentalists, and
3-4
government agency people, had outside
facilitators for the first two years of its
existence (see case study on page 5-18).
Once trust had been built and a group
identity established, the outside facilitator
was no longer needed. The facilitator role
was then rotated among the members of
the Partnership. In many projects, once
trust has been developed and the group is
working well together, the facilitator can
turn his/her responsibilities over to
members of the group.
When is the facilitator’s role completed?
The outside facilitator is no longer needed when there is sufficient trust within the group
that various members of the group can be relied upon to guide the group in an
evenhanded way. Ways of testing whether the group has reached that point include the
following:
•
Basic conflicts have been dealt with; that is, either they have been resolved or, while
differences of perspective remain, those holding differing views respect one
another’s positions and recognize each other’s integrity.
•
Informal interaction at social events and prior to and following meetings is no longer
within a particular faction or group but includes cross-group interaction.
•
It is no longer necessary to remind people of the basic rules of behavior during a
meeting.
•
The group has come to agreement on a course of action regarding at least one issue
that was earlier in contention.
•
The facilitator feels that the group is sufficiently solid to transition to internal
leadership. The facilitator may sense that the group is ready to govern itself before
the group itself comes to that realization.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
3-5
How does the group transition from outside facilitation to their own
leadership?
There are a number of useful components or aspects of a successful transition to
internal leadership:
•
The group will have discussed the transition process and agreed on an appropriate
leadership structure and mechanisms for choosing that leadership.
•
Have people representing different points of view or different interests facilitate a
couple of meetings. Then the outside facilitator could lead a discussion as to
whether the group is ready.
•
In situations of sharp divergence of interests as often occurs among stakeholders in
watersheds, the issue of shared or balance leadership needs to be discussed. It may
turn out that shared leadership is not appropriate, but important stakeholder groups
must not feel that they are in a permanently secondary position within the
organization. Again, these questions are best worked out while the outside facilitator
is still involved.
•
Concentrating most of the power in the hands on one person, even if that person has
a reputation for fairness, is not recommended. That is likely to lead to others looking
to this person to solve problems, rather than seeking participatory approaches to
those problems.
Sources
Sturtevant, Victoria E. and Jonathan I. Lange. Applegate Partnership Case Study: Group
Dynamics and Community Context. Seattle: U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research
Station, 1995.
Tropman, John E. Successful Community Leadership: A Skills Guide for Volunteers and
Professionals. Washington, DC: National Association of Social Workers Press, 1997, pp. 51
and 53.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
3-6
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Section 4: Conducting the first
community watershed meeting
Goals for the first community
meeting
The first community meeting of landowners and residents in the watershed is
an important opportunity for connecting
people and laying the groundwork for
identifying common goals. People come
to a first watershed meeting for many
reasons. Some may be curious. Some may
be committed. Most will not be sure what
to expect. This first meeting is about
making the case for why local residents
should become more involved in
watershed management decisions.
The planning committee’s goal is to
engage them in:
1) learning more about
their watershed, and 2)
encouraging them to
commit time and
resources to protecting
their watershed. For a
variety of reasons, a
large number of people
who come will not be
willing or able to
commit to the group the
level of activity
necessary to move
watershed management
forward. There will be a core of individuals who want to be actively engaged in
working with others to solve watershed
problems. Many others will be interested
in doing something in their own backyard
that helps water quality even if they don’t
become active in the community group.
It is important to keep all individuals
involved in some way. So think about
those who attend as potentially fitting into
four distinct groups:
1. Believers: people who are already
excited about the project and know
they want to be engaged in this
important community effort.
Community meeting small group discussions.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Photo by Peggy Murdock
4-1
2. Curious: people who don’t want to be
actively involved but want to know
what’s going on.
3. Uncommitted: people who need more
information to decide how committed
they want to be.
4. Convince me: people who have had
bad experiences and don’t want or
don’t believe a local group should be
formed.
The planning committee’s challenge will
be to give each group a significant nudge
toward working together on water issues.
After the first meeting, these are the
minimum outcomes you want from each
group:
1. Believers: You want to encourage and
increase the excitement of this group
by giving them some tangible activities
they can participate in (e.g., become a
member of a community group, form a
subcommittee or task force, volunteer
to monitor a water site). Use sign-up
sheets to gather names, addresses, and
specific interests of this group.
2. Curious: You want this group to learn
something new about their watershed
and to go away feeling more connected
to watershed issues and to others in the
watershed. At minimum, this group
should go away knowing their
watershed address and with a feeling
that what this group could do is
important. Even without their ongoing
formal engagement in the group, the
“silent” support of these members will
be important as the watershed group
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
forms and begins to represent resident
interests.
3. Uncommitted: You want this group to
move from their neutral information
collecting stage (what’s going on?) into
an excitement for the possibilities (gee,
this is something I really care about and
could have an impact on). Indicators of
success as to whether you’ve captured
the attention of this group is their
request to be notified of future
meetings, comments that they will do
something different on their own land
(e.g., plantings, conservation practices,
water and septic testing), and a
willingness to talk to neighbors and
friends about the newly forming group.
4. Convince me: You want this group to
know that they have been heard, their
complaints are noted, and their right to
voice concerns is respected. However,
this group needs to be challenged to
move beyond being an obstacle to the
process and to join in being part of the
solution. This will likely not happen in
the first meeting.
The role of the facilitator is to take the
brunt of the negative feelings expressed
and redirect them into a productive
discussion. The facilitator must not
take this personally. S/he must be
careful to be respectful of strong
divisive expressions of discontent and
yet remain in control of the group. If
one person attempts to disrupt and
abort the group process, the facilitator’s
goal is to keep the group focused on
the issues and not on personalities.
4-2
The watershed as community
To build the capacity of a community to
solve water issues, all residents of the
watershed must know they are invited to
this first community meeting. The goal is
to construct a watershed community group
bounded by the physical flow of their
common streams, rivers, or lakes.
A watershed is a region or area of land that
drains into a body of water such as a
stream, river, wetland, or lake. The system
of streams that transport water, sediment,
and other materials from one watershed
into another is called a drainage system.
The drainage system channels water and
sediment to a common outlet. The outlet is
the mouth of the drainage system or
watershed. The mouth is the place where
water and the substances it carries flow
into another stream, river, lake, or ocean.
As an example, the Mississippi River
watershed is made up of many smaller
watersheds. These smaller watersheds
contain even smaller watersheds down to
the run-off areas of the smallest tributary
creeks and streams. Thus, the watershed in
your region is part of a larger watershed
and at the same time may consist of
smaller watersheds. Ultimately, in Iowa, all
watersheds flow into the Mississippi
watershed. Some first flow into the
Missouri watershed and then into the
Mississippi.
In Iowa (and the rest of the U.S.), the HUC
system is used to uniquely subdivide larger
watersheds into smaller watersheds. The
smallest sub-watershed level currently
delineated in Iowa is the 14-digit HUC.
These sub-watersheds consist of 15-62
square miles.
To obtain a picture of the watershed you
are targeting, go to: http://www.epa.gov/
surf3/locate or http:/ortho.gis.iastate.edu/
drg24/drg24.html. Make an enlarged copy
of the watershed map for the meeting. Ask
all attendees to place a sticker or pin where
they live in the watershed.
A watershed address
The first meeting serves to get individual
buy-in that forming a local group is a
“good thing” for the community (even if
they don’t participate themselves) and to
build on their existing knowledge about
their watershed.
The U.S. Geological Society identifies
different scales of watersheds by
hydrologic unit code numbers (HUCs).
Photo by Peggy Murdock
Community residents find their watershed address.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-3
The minimum behavior change you want
from all persons who come to the first
community meeting is increased
knowledge about their watershed.
Everyone knows their postal address; they
should also know their watershed address.
A watershed address includes the closest
stream that the land where a resident lives
drains to (e.g., Clear Creek), the tributary
their stream runs into (e.g., Indian Creek),
the larger river (e.g., South Skunk), and the
largest body it runs into (e.g., Mississippi
River).
In this example, a watershed address is:
Clear Creek
(into)
Indian Creek
(into)
South Skunk River
(into)
Mississippi River
This will be one question the facilitator
can ask the group at the end of the meeting
either rhetorically (and have someone in
the audience give the answer) and/or in an
evaluation form.
Goals for Watershed Meeting #1
Goals
1. Bring together landowners, residents, and stakeholders in the watershed to address
water issues.
2. Form a community watershed management group that works to develop an overall
vision, goals, action strategies, and activities for improving water quality and
reducing soil erosion and main stem flooding.
3. If the watershed is large, form groups around two or more of the sub-watersheds in
order to implement site specific activities such as demonstration projects, water
monitoring, and other practices.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-4
Facilitator’s Working Sample Agenda
(Plan 1 hour 45 minutes for meeting.)
Coffee/Registration: Ask people to locate where they live on an enlarged watershed
map posted near the meeting area. (Push pins or stickers can be
used to designate locations.) Prepare a poster with Rules of
Mutual Respect (Section 6-8). Refer to prior to group
discussions.
(5 minutes)
Welcome by Soil and Water Commission District chairperson
or core planning member
(5 minutes)
Getting to Know Our Watershed
§ Geographical Map
§ Historical
(20 minutes)
How Has the Watershed Changed? (facilitated discussion)
Handout #1
§ Get the conversation started: “Who is the oldest person in the
room?”
“Tell us one of your memories about the watershed as a kid.”
1. Small group discussion at tables; list responses on
newsprint or summary sheet on the table
2. Report back to larger group
3. Facilitator summarizes main points
(15 minutes)
Current Uses of the Water
§ Map of land use (county engineers/conservation district
commissioner/county planner/water utility agency)
§ “How do you use the waters in our watershed?”
(facilitated discussion)
(20 minutes)
What Are Your Present Concerns About Our Watershed?
Handout #2: Current Uses and Concensus About Our Watershed
1. Small group discussion; list responses on newsprint or
summary sheet on the table
2. Report back to larger group, facilitator makes a group list
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-5
(15 minutes)
What are the Documented Water Quality and Quantity Issues?
(SWCD commissioner, district conservationist, water utility
agency, ISU Extension)
§ Erosion, sediment
§ Flooding
§ N, P, nutrient excess
§ Septic systems
§ Urban runoff
§ Development pressures
§ EPA impaired water body list
§ Other
(20 minutes)
How Can We As Citizens Construct Local Solutions? (facilitator)
§ What are the roles residents can play in managing their
watershed? (Form action-oriented sub-watershed groups;
form an umbrella community watershed group)
Handout #3: Watershed Discussions
Handout #4: Benefits and Barriers to Cooperating and
Coordinating
(5 minutes)
What Happens Next?
§ Group response and discussion (facilitator) “What is the
interest in forming a community watershed group?”
§ Timeline
§ Fact finding, information gathering needs
§ Sources of assistance, expertise
Handout #5: Watershed Interest Form
Handout #6: Watershed Meeting Evaluation Form
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-6
Checklist
(Handouts and Materials)
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Agenda
Map of watershed
Rules of Mutual Respect (Section 6-8)
Data sheet about watershed (acres, population, feeder tributaries, environmental
concerns, current land use)
ISU bulletin (PM 1869): Resident-led Watershed Management (ISU Extension
Publications Distribution Center)
List of possible projects/activities that can be locally implemented (camera
ready copy is available at the end of Section 6)
Other publications from natural resource agencies or other groups
Handouts for group facilitation *
o
Handout #1: How has our watershed changed?
o
Handout #2: Current uses and concerns about the waters in our watershed
o
Handout #3: Watershed discussions
o
Handout #4: Benefits and barriers to cooperating and coordinating our
watershed efforts
o
Handout #5: Forms for name, address, interest in being part of a watershed
group
o
Handout #6: Evaluation: What would you like to see happen next? How would
you like to be involved?
* Note: Handouts 1 - 4 can be condensed to one handout if the group is large or time
is short; handouts 5 and 6 can be combined into one form also.
Visuals
o
Enlarged map of the watershed (to put on wall or easel) so people can locate
exactly where they live – use push pins or round stickers
o
Slides/pictures of the watershed
Optional for community meeting
o
projector
o
microphone
o
tables for group discussion (7-9 chairs at each table)
o
nametags
o
sign-in sheet
o
refreshments
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-7
Handout 1
Watershed Community Meeting
Sample Agenda
(Date, Time, Location)
Registration and Coffee
Getting to Know Our Watershed: Sharing Local Knowledge
How Have Our Streams, Rivers, and Lakes Changed? (Handout #1)
Current Uses of Our Streams, Rivers, and Lakes
How Do You Use the Waters in Our Watershed?
What Are Your Present Concerns about the Watershed? (Handout #2)
What are the Documented Water Quality and Quantity Issues?
How Can We As Residents Construct Local Solutions? (Handout #3; Handout #4)
A Vision of Cooperation and Coordination (summary of what people have discussed)
What Happens Next? (Handout #5; Handout #6)
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-8
Example of Map of Watershed
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-9
Handout 1
How Has Our Watershed Changed?
Group discussion.
Ask someone in the group to record your discussion.
1. How long have you lived in the watershed area?
2. Ask the oldest person at your table to start the discussion. What were the waters in
the watershed like when you were younger? What kinds of animals, birds, and
plants do you remember? What were the waters and areas next to the stream like?
Ask others at the table. What do you remember about the creek, river, or lake?
What kinds of things have you and your family done in the creek, river, or lake
over the years?
3. Thinking about our water bodies today, what changes have you seen? How have
plant and animal wildlife changed? Are the water levels different?
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-10
Recorder Sheet 1
How Has Our Watershed Changed?
(Recorder Sheet)
Group discussion.
Ask someone in the group to record your discussion.
1. How long have you lived in the watershed area?
2. Ask the oldest person at your table to start the discussion. What were the waters in
the watershed like when you were younger? What kinds of animals, birds, and plants
do you remember? What were the waters and areas next to the stream like? Ask
others at the table. What do you remember about the creek, river, or lake? What
kinds of things have you and your family done in the creek, river, or lake over the
years?
3. Thinking about our water bodies today, what changes have you seen? How have
plant and animal wildlife changes? Are the water levels different?
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-11
Handout 2
Current Uses and Concerns
About the Waters in Our Watershed
Answer the questions below individually, and then discuss your answers with the
group. Ask someone in the group to record your discussion.
1. How do you currently use the streams, rivers, and lakes in our watershed?
2. What are watershed assets and resources that need to be protected and preserved?
3. What are your present concerns about our watershed?
4. What should be done to improve the watershed and water quality?
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-12
Recorder Sheet 2
Current Uses and Concerns
About the Waters in Our Watershed
(Recorder Sheet)
Answer the questions below individually, and then discuss your answers with the
group. Ask someone in the group to record your discussion.
1. How do you currently use the streams, rivers, and lakes in our watershed?
2. What are watershed assets and resources that need to be protected and preserved?
3. What are your present concerns about our watershed?
4. What should be done to improve the watershed and water quality?
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-13
Handout 3
Watershed Discussions
Look at the watershed map and find where you live and/or work. Can you find the
nearest stream or lake and see where it flows?
Meet in small groups. First, answer the questions below individually, then discuss as a
group. Ask someone to take notes.
1. What would you like to see happen as a result of this watershed meeting?
2. What are some activities you are interested in doing?
3. What kind of resources do we need to do these activities?
4. Who else isn’t here that ought to be involved in this discussion?
Please complete your Watershed Interest form. Thank you.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-14
Recorder Sheet 3
Watershed Discussions
(Recorder Sheet)
Look at the watershed map and find where you live and/or work. Can you find
the streams and water bodies that your stream flows into? Can you find the
nearest stream or lake and see where it flows?
Meet in small groups. First, answer the questions below individually, then discuss
as a group. Ask someone to take notes.
1. What would you like to see happen as a result of this watershed meeting?
2. What are some activities you are interested in doing?
3. What kind of resources do we need to do these activities?
4. Who else isn’t here that ought to be involved in this discussion?
Please complete your Watershed Interest form. Thank you.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-15
Handout 4
Benefits and Barriers to Cooperating and Coordinating Our
Watershed Efforts
Complete this sheet individually, then discuss each point as a group.
1. How important is it that local people actively engage in group efforts that
coordinate actions to protect and manage our watershed?
Not
Important
1
Very
Important
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2. Benefits: Some of the benefits of cooperating and coordinating our efforts
in our watershed are (write below):
3. Barriers: Some of the barriers to cooperating and coordinating our efforts
in our watershed are (write below):
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-16
Handout 5
Watershed Interest Form
Please check as many as apply.
___
I am interested in participating in activities on my land
or at other points in the watershed to protect and manage
our waters.
___
I am interested in participating as a member of a
watershed group. Please let me know when the
first organization meeting will be held.
Name:
Address:
County of residence:
Telephone:
Email:
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-17
Handout 6
Watershed Meeting Evaluation Form
1. My watershed address is:
Please circle one response:
a. I knew my watershed address before I came to this meeting.
b. I knew part of my watershed address before I came to this meeting.
c. I didn’t know my watershed address before this meeting.
d. I don’t know my watershed address now.
2. As a result of this meeting I learned more about my watershed.
Strongly
Disagree
1
Strongly
Agree
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
3. The main reason I came to this meeting was:
4. I would like to see a community watershed group focus on the following
things:
5. As a result of this meeting, I will (what will you do?):
Thanks for coming!
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
4-18
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Section 5: Community
watershed group formation
A community watershed group helps
the whole community create a vision
for their watershed and works to
keep the community focused on the
important issues related to their
watershed. After the community
meeting, the core planning team will
want to convene a meeting of people
who expressed interest in developing
a local group. The main question
for discussion is “Are we ready to
form a local watershed group?”
To answer this question, those
attending will want to understand
what’s involved in forming a
watershed group. A “yes” to the
question means they will have to do
the following things:
1. Develop a clear intent or mission
for the group.
2. Agree on what the group will do
to accomplish its intent.
3. Practice listening, observing,
and learning about the watershed
to gain knowledge from nature,
people, agencies, and
organizations.
4. Frequently and systematically
bring people together to learn
about the watershed and discuss
alternatives and plans for making
a difference.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Vision and Mission
Vision. The vision statement clearly states the
common dream or ideal that the community
has for their watershed. The vision guides diverse
citizens, organizations, and agencies in mobilizing
their groups to achieve the dream. Without the vision,
these groups can carry out their missions
but may engage in actions that are at cross purposes
with other community organizations’ actions. The
vision offers broad unity while allowing groups to
make their own unique and distinct contributions.
Parts of the community watershed vision may already
be defined by city and county planning,
Soil and Water Conservation Districts, and regional
Resource Conservation & Development agencies.
The general public, however, may not be aware of
or committed to this vision. One role of the watershed
community group could be to encourage discussions
and help to develop a common vision that
incorporates the thinking of citizens, business and
industry, not-for-profit organizations, natural
resource agencies, elected officials, and regulatory
agencies. For more on the vision process, see
Section 6.
Mission. The mission statement defines the intent
of the group and its reasons for existing. The mission
statement should offer a clear message
that can keep the watershed group focused and be
used to gather public support for watershed activities.
A mission statement has three parts:
target audience, reasons and goals that drive group
actions, and a list of objectives that the group will
undertake to accomplish their goals.
Objectives. The group objectives are specific
actions that are planned to accomplish the stated
reasons that the group was formed.
Examples of watershed mission statements and
objectives are provided at the end of this section.
5-1
Follow-up from the community
meeting
To prepare for this next meeting, you will
need:
l
a facilitator that will work with the group
during the start-up phase (several
months),
l
the list of people from the community
meeting who indicated they wanted to be
notified of the first group meeting
(Handout 5, pp. 4-17),
l
a list of others who may not have attended
the community meeting but expressed an
interest in being involved,
l
a list of those not attending the
community meeting but who ought to be
involved in the discussion (from
Recorder Sheet 3 - pp. 4-15),
l
a summary of participants’ evaluation of
the community meeting, and
l
publicity about the meeting and
invitations for community residents to
become involved.
Facilitation
Seek out someone who can facilitate this
first group meeting and future meetings
until the group is ready for a more formal
structure. This could be the facilitator used
for the community meeting or another
person. This person will need to have skills
for managing meetings (start and end on
time), be able to keep the group on task, be
open minded and sensitive to allowing
everyone to voice their opinions, and have
authority (consent of the group) to manage
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
differences of opinions. Most importantly,
this person must be perceived as a neutral
person that will not use this group as a
platform to advance his own agenda. A
good facilitator will move the group
forward by allowing the group members to
determine the direction and scope of the
meeting.
Cooperative Extension regional community
development specialists and extension
education directors located in every county
are potential facilitators. In addition, Iowa
has other skilled community development
facilitators that you may wish to invite or
your community may have a local leader
who could meet this need. (See Section 3
for guidance on selecting a facilitator.)
When the planning team meets with the
facilitator to prepare for the first group
meeting, the facilitator will want to know
what outcomes the team expects. Possible
outcomes are:
l
a clear sense of “Are we ready to form a
local watershed group?”
l
if yes, the facilitator will guide the group
in deciding how they want to proceed (are
we ready to work on our intent and
mission statement or do we need more
information about the watershed?)
Preparing for the first
watershed group meeting
The planning team should set a date for the
first watershed group meeting. Use the list
of people who signed up at the community
meeting as the start-up group. Welcome
others to attend. Evenings are usually best
since many people work during the day.
5-2
Saturdays are also a possibility. Plan 1 to 1½
hours for the meeting. A newspaper article
could summarize the results of the
community meeting and give the date of the
first watershed group meeting. A summary of
the community meeting evaluation form
(Section 4, Handout 6) will give the group an
understanding of what community residents
would like to see a watershed group focus on.
A Working Agenda
The working agenda is a rough outline for the
watershed group meeting. The planning team
should review the agenda (see box) to decide
which items are appropriate for their
community and the order. The basic decisions
that the newly forming group must make over
the next few meetings are:
Are we ready to form a local watershed
group?
If yes:
What should be the intent and mission of
a watershed group; how does the intent of
the group relate to the larger community
vision for the watershed; what information do we need to make educated
decisions about:
Who we are
What we want to do
How we want to do it
If no:
Attendees may lack interest or
enthusiasm for forming a group. Future
meetings will not be planned. The
community is not yet “ready” to form a
group.
Group Process of the First Watershed Meeting
1. WELCOME. The planning team will introduce themselves and the facilitator and his/her
purpose (to help us decide if we should form a watershed group and then to assist in
group formation). The facilitator is asked to conduct the rest of the meeting.
The facilitator will first ask someone to temporarily take minutes.
The facilitator will also note that the group will operate under this temporary structure
for the next few meetings. Eventually the group will need to organize into a structure
with leadership from the group itself.
2. CONNECTING PEOPLE AND BUILDING TRUST. Everyone present should introduce
themselves, tell where they live in the watershed, and why they came to this meeting.
(Note: People should introduce themselves at every meeting so new people feel
connected.) The temporary recorder should send around a sheet of paper for people to
write their names, addresses, telephone number, and email address.
3. AGENDA. The facilitator will review the agenda for the meeting and ask if anyone has
additions. This task should happen at every meeting to help the participants determine
the group’s direction.
-continued-
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
5-3
4. GOAL OF THIS MEETING. Are we ready to form a local watershed group? To answer
this question, the group will want to talk about the community’s readiness (see Section
2-2) and the results of the community meeting.
Discussion of the Community Meeting
•
Summary of the evaluation from the community meeting
•
Individual comments about the community meeting
General discussion to answer the question about readiness (use questions from
Section 2-2). If the answer is “no,” the group will decide not to meet again. If the
answer is “yes,” the group will plan for future meetings.
5. READINESS. If the group seems to be ready, discuss which decisions they would like
to tackle first from the “Getting Organized” handout (see the following page). The
group may want to talk about who else they should invite to the meeting before
developing a clear group mission and intent. (Review names generated from Handout
3, Question 4, “Who else isn’t here who ought to be involved in this discussion?” from
pp. 4-15.) Or they may want to talk about their watershed vision that guides the
development of the group’s intent. It doesn’t matter which they start with. The group
intent can be refined later and others can always be welcomed to the group. Some
people will feel they don’t know who to invite unless they know the group’s intent;
others will feel that they need broader representation to develop clear intent. A third
option is for the group to first focus on learning about the watershed, its history, and
present condition. Any one of these topics is a good place to start. The most important
thing is that the group decides what should happen next.
6. NEXT MEETING AGENDA. The facilitator will guide the group to set the next
meeting’s agenda as a result of the group discussion.
7. WHEN and WHERE to meet. The group should decide when and where to meet next
time. The meeting location should be accessible and a neutral location. The group may
also be ready to discuss setting a regular meeting date.
Note: This first group meeting is exploratory. It can seem a little disorganized and
maybe even chaotic. This is normal when a new group is forming. If people don’t
know each other it will take a couple of meetings to build a level of comfort and
trust. Encourage agency staff who attend to listen and offer informational
comments rather than actively participate in order to allow citizens to gain
knowledge about the watershed and to express themselves. There will be
opportunities to develop partners after the citizen group has formed.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
5-4
Handout
GETTING ORGANIZED
The basic decisions the newly formed watershed group must make during the
first few months are:
INTENT
What is the intent and mission of the group? How
does that fit into the community vision for the
watershed?
WHO
Who should we include in a citizen-led watershed
group? Who should we include as watershed group
partners?
AWARENESS
What is the history and present condition of
our watershed?
What information do we need to make educated
decisions about: who we are, what we want to
do, and how we want to do it?
WHERE
Where do we want to regularly meet? Is there a
neutral place for all participants?
WHEN
Do we want to set a regular meeting date?
STRUCTURE
How will the group make decisions? What kind of
leadership will provide group stability, continuity, and
accomplish the group intent?
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
5-5
Across the United States, community
watershed groups have selected
different names such as :
“council,” “association,” “watershed
watchers,” “friends of the watershed,”
“streamkeepers,” “riverkeepers,”
“alliance,” “network,” “partners,” “forum”
and “coalition.”
All of these terms convey a sense of
people working together on behalf of
their watershed.
Future group meetings
The group will have to work its way through
four key areas in order develop into a group
capable of influencing their community:
intent, group members and partners,
awareness, and structure.
INTENT AND MISSION. What is the
community vision for our watershed? How
does this watershed group contribute to that
vision and what is our mission or intent?
The community meeting provides the
framework for the larger vision. The local
Soil and Water Conservation District
commission and city/county planning
boards may already have comprehensive
plans that set out a vision for watersheds in
their county. The watershed group may use
these frameworks and move directly to
crafting a group mission and intent. Or they
may want to further articulate the
community vision for the watershed. The
community development facilitator will
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
have the skills to help clarify the
community vision if the group wants to
pursue that further.
The intent and mission are necessary to
keep the group focused and able to
effectively influence others. The mission
statement offers a clear description of 1)
who and what the group wants to affect
(citizens and their watershed), 2) their
reasons for focusing on their watershed, and
3) a set of objectives that direct action in
support of the group’s reasons for existing.
Members may want to start with a draft or
working version. Then, as they understand
the watershed better, the draft mission can
be reworked. The whole group can develop
the mission statement or a committee of 23 persons can be assigned to draw up a draft
for the larger group to discuss.
GROUP MEMBERS AND PARTNERS.
Who should be included in the community
watershed group? Residents? Landowners?
Businesses? Local government? Educational
organizations? Civic organizations,
environmental groups, local government
agencies, state and federal agencies? Figure
5.1, Community Watershed Management,
offers one way to think about the
relationships within the local community
and with extra-local agencies and
organizations. Local, state, and federal
agencies are important partners with citizen
groups. Section 7 offers more information
on potential agency partners. A newly
forming citizen group will want to connect
to but not be dominated by public agencies.
5-6
Business, Industry
power/communications
utilities, agriculture, forestry
Non-Profit
Organizations
Local Gov’t. Agencies
youth/adult clubs,
elected officials,
Watershed
service groups, faith
water/sewer utilities,
organizations,
Community
public health,
neighborhood
planning, parks,
Residents &
organizations,
councils of
Primary
environmental groups
government,
Stakeholders
conservation districts
Education
Federal Agencies
State Agencies & Groups
Support
Organizations
& Groups
Organizations
Agencies
County Extension, K-12
financial institutions,
schools, post
Department of Agriculture
Agencies
foundations, trade
secondary schools,
& Land Stewardship
U.S. EPA and regional EPA
associations,
commodity
museums, nature centers
Economic Development
offices, Department of
groups, professional
Education
Agriculture, Department of
associations, media
Environmental Protection
Education, Department of Interior,
Health, Natural Resources
Department of Transportation,
Tourism, Transportation
National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministraState Offices for Federal Agencies:
tion, U.S. Geological Survey,
USGS, NRCS, Sea Grant
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Education
National Education Networks
State or Land Grant Universities, Technical
USDA Cooperative Extension Service
Colleges,
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
Private Colleges
NOAA Sea Grant
Non-Profit Organizations
Non-Profit Organizations
foundations, associations, service organizations,
foundations, association, service organizations,
Groups with environmental mission, water utilities
groups with environmental mission
Figure 5.1. Community Watershed Management*
* An adaptation of Community Environmental Management Model. Pp. 9 in Partnership to Support Community
Based Education. 1998. EPA 910-R-98-008.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
5-7
Figure 5.2, Watershed Group Spidergram, is
an example of community sectors that could
be part of the watershed group. One of the
criteria for thinking about “who” is part
of the group could be watershed residents
who have an interest or who are
financially affected by what happens in
the watershed. The planning team will want
to review some of the basic demographics
of the area to understand who lives and
works in the watershed. Figure 5.3 offers an
example of potential watershed partners and
advisors. The group will want to discuss who
is part of the watershed group and who are
the partners and how they relate.
should be included. The facilitator (or
another member of the group) can use large
newsprint (a blackboard or whiteboard) to
build a spidergram for all to see. After all
suggestions have been made, the group
should go back over those sectors where
disagreement occurred (e.g., some may see
different sectors as partners and advisors
rather than group members.) A second
spidergram exercise to identify partners and
advisors can help clarify how the group is
thinking about participation.
The facilitator can begin the discussion
process by giving everyone a blank copy of
the watershed group spidergram and asking
them to individually fill in the sectors they
see as part of the watershed group. (Blank
spidergram forms can be found at the end of
this section.) Then, the facilitator will ask
each person to suggest one sector that
The next step is for the current watershed
group to compare who’s coming to
watershed meetings and the spidergram that
they just created. What sectors are missing?
What actions could be taken to involve
these sectors in the group? The facilitator
will ask current members to take
responsibility for inviting additional
participants.
Analysis of current watershed
group
Partners. After the group has examined
their own make-up, they should discuss
their partners and advisors. The
facilitator will lead the group through
these two questions:
A spidergram diagram helps the group identify missing sectors that should
be invited to work with the watershed group.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
l
What roles are we expecting from
our partners?
l
What is our plan to involve them?
Section 7, Local and State Partners,
provides a listing and summary of roles
and responsibilities of public and private
agencies engaged in water issues.
5-8
al
idu s
v
i
n
ind itize rban
c &u
al
rur
farm
operat
ors
ners
w
o
d
ban
lan
& ur
l
a
r
ru
en
v
c o iron
ns m
e
e
g r r v a nta
o u t i o l/
ps n
busi
ne
i n d u ss /
stry
dity
mo
com roups
g
o
me
dia
s
ic
civ ation
z
i
n
rga
schools,
education
groups
recreation
groups
Local
Watershed
Group
org
lth
hea u p s / s
n
g r o izatio
an
youth
sen
citi ior
zen
s
Figure 5.2. Watershed group spidergram - watershed residents who have an interest or who are
financially affected by what happens
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
5-9
ISU sion
ten
Ex
A
USD a l
r
u
t
N a rces
o u ion
s
e
R
at
serv
CS)
C o n es (NR
c
i
v
Ser
IDALS
- Di
of Soil v.
Conse
rvatio
n
Co S W
mm C D
iss
ion
EPA
te
sta d
cte
ele cial
i
off
national/state
environmental
groups
state/federal
elected
officials
Local
Watershed
Group Partners
and Advisors
S.
U. gical ce
o l o ffi
G e ey O
rv
Su
me
d
n ia (r
e
w
spa adio,
TV per,
)
R
DN
RC&D
Resources
Conservation
& Development
Co D i s t
nse r i c t
rv
& S ation
t a f f ist
Figure 5.3. Watershed group partners and advisors
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
5-10
Watershed group spidergram
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
5-11
AWARENESS. Each person who attends
these meetings will bring their own unique
occupational and personal skills, relationships with others, and understandings of
their watershed. Some will know a lot about
the ecological systems of the watershed;
others will bring an intense desire to learn
but very little current knowledge. In order to
develop clear intent and what could be
accomplished by the group, members must
begin to build personal knowledge. This
knowledge will include the natural cycles of
the watershed, the history and present
condition of the watershed, soil and climate
relationships, development patterns, land
use policies and practices, symptoms and
scientifically established thresholds of
health and safety. Some information is
necessary background data; other
information will need to be
sought out to specifically answer questions
that the group raises about a situation.
The learning process will be continuous and
dynamic. The group will want to begin to
identify the kinds of information they need
individually and as a group in order to set
goals and priorities, evaluate a current
situation, or carry out specific activities.
Learning can occur in multiple ways:
l
experts share what is known about the
watershed
l
local citizens share their personal
knowledge and experiences
l
group members gather data themselves
(pictures, water monitoring, GPS
mapping of drain outlets, and other
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Lee Burras at Bjorkboda Swamp talks about soil and plants.
assets and problem areas) [see Section 9
for ways to gather local information]
l
group members tour the watershed
l
group members engage in activities
(streambed clean-up; water monitoring
training, field demonstrations and trials)
l
individuals seek out information from
libraries, websites, and other public
references
(See Section 6 handout, Ways for Residents
to Get Involved, for additional learning
opportunities and ideas.)
STRUCTURE. There is no one structure that
assures watershed group success. Watershed
organizations vary in membership
composition, voting rights, organizational
leadership, decision making processes, and
5-12
tax status. The group will begin as an informal
group that meets regularly to carry out the
activities they think are important. Regular
meeting dates and one or two people that are
committed and organized can serve as
centralized information sources that keep the
group connected and moving toward their
goals. However, at some point, the group will
need to move from third party facilitation to
developing their own leadership structure.
This does not mean the group must become a
not-for-profit 501(c) organization. They may
choose to remain an informal group and use
their partners (e.g., SWCD or RC&D) as
fiscal organizations for accepting grants and
fund raising. Regardless of the group tax
status, members must agree on how they will
make decisions and how the leadership team
will be selected. A temporary subcommittee
charged with proposing a set of bylaws can
offer the group a draft structure to discuss
and modify. Many community organizations
have bylaws and the subcommittee members
can explore how these groups are organized
and think about which aspects would benefit
their watershed group. As the group
undertakes fund raising, extensive grant
writing, and more complex activities, they
will want to consider tax-exempt status. River
Network, a national organization of river and
watershed organizations
(www.rivernetwork.org) has a number of
publications on bylaws, recruiting boards of
directors, drafting bylaws, filing articles of
incorporation and tax-exempt status, and
fundraising strategies.
Shared Leadership
At minimum, the watershed group should
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Temporary Committees offer an
important way for the watershed group
to get to know each other better and to
accomplish specific tasks. The more
people that are involved in the activities
of the group, the greater the capacity of
the group to influence others. Further,
these committees are places where
people develop and practice leadership
skills.
Watershed group leadership often
emerges from those who are
committed to doing the everyday work
of the group. Potential general
committees are: mission; public
relations; education; water monitoring;
funding; data collection. Some
committees will be unique to the local
watershed. For example, a watershed
group could develop a short-term
committee assigned to examine and
recommend land use and development
practices. Other committees could
focus on watershed tours, septic
systems, farm practices, water quality
monitoring, development proposals, or
work with schools and youth.
select a meeting convenor (chairperson), a
recorder of the group discussion (secretary),
and a back-up convenor when the chair is
unavailable (vice chair). In addition,
subcommittee chairs and other advisory
persons may be added to the core leadership
team to provide stability, continuity, and
develop future leaders of the group. The
primary task of the leadership team is to
assure that the organization has a clear
image of itself and is able to convey that to
its members and the community. Although
5-13
one person may be elected to convene the
watershed group meetings and activities and
act as spokesperson for the group, the group
will have more capacity if:
• information is widely distributed in the
watershed within and beyond the group,
• decisions and tasks are shared by multiple
people beyond the leadership team, and
• all residents are encouraged to self-
organize and take initiative for activities
in the watershed that matter to them.
The leadership team should think of
themselves as developing webs of influence
rather than the source of a chain of command.
This will mean that not everything that
happens in the watershed has to be
coordinated, approved, or cleared through the
group (a time consuming, burdensome
structure that becomes an obstacle to all
citizens participating and being a part of the
transformations in the watershed). A watershed group interactive website or listserv via
email can offer informal information
exchanges and allow the exchange of ideas
and actions among citizens.
Summary
The process of group formation, Figure 5.4,
summarizes the steps in developing a
watershed group. Group formation involves
interactions and trust building among many
different kinds of people with diverse
opinions, knowledge levels and skills. While
these steps may seem clear on paper, the
group will have ups and downs that will
challenge the group’s efforts to stick together
and make a difference in their watershed.
Section 6 offers strategies for sustaining the
group; Section 8, Troubleshooting, suggests
potential problems that groups may face as
they mature into effective and influential
organizations. Professional facilitators are
familiar with these problems and have
strategies to help groups solve them.
Change is a constant in the watershed. Nothing stays the same. Don’t let the
organizational structure get in the way of accomplishing the group intent and mission.
Organizational structures are often modified over time to meet new needs and
activities. Let your mission and intent guide the development of your group structure.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
5-14
1. One person who is passionate about the watershed and willing to talk to others
about it acts as a catalyst. The actions of this one person (it could be
a Soil and Water Conservation District commissioner, your neighbor, a school
teacher, a student, you or me) connect others who care about local water issues.
2. As a result, a core planning group develops to prepare a community-wide
information meeting. This community meeting is not just called in “crisis” situations
but when-ever citizens want to get together to improve their watershed or see
symptoms that could lead to water quality or quantity problems.
3. A community-wide meeting is held for people to exchange with each other
what they know about their watershed and how they view it.
4. A voluntary watershed group of self-selected citizens meet regularly around a
growing vision of their watershed. This vision is created through building personal
knowledge of their watershed and reflectively thinking about its past, present and
future.
5. Experts are invited to share the science of the ecological system and technical
responses so that the watershed group and community at large can build personal
knowledge for evaluating problems, proposing alternatives and solutions.
6. The watershed group develops a clear mission statement with objectives to guide
action and puts in place a leadership structure for guiding group activities.
7. The group frequently communicates to the whole watershed community what the
group is learning and doing as well as continually extends invitations for others to
join and participate.
8. Watershed citizens undertake activities that support the community vision and the
watershed group intent and mission.
9. The group continually engages their environment, strengthening relationships and
knowledge about: social (schools, developers, land use rules and regulations);
political (elected commissioners, supervisors-taxation, rules and regulations);
environment (flooding, excessive bacteria counts, high nitrogen levels) and works
with the community to seek solutions. The group negotiates, leverages, cajoles, and
cooperates with others to achieve the community watershed vision.
Figure 5.4 The process of group formation
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
5-15
Examples of Watershed Group Mission and Objectives
Mission: To provide leadership in protecting and improving the environmental health of the Squaw
Creek Watershed by facilitating cooperative involvement of urban and rural residents in raising
public awareness and promoting educational programs and targeted actions.
Objectives: 1) Engage in water monitoring and other assessments of the watershed. 2) Build a
coalition among rural and urban interests. 3) Undertake 2-3 projects yearly that involve the
watershed community in education, service, and/or data gathering.
Squaw Creek Watershed Council
http://www.prrcd.org/
The Des Plaines River Watershed Alliance is a coalition of organizations and individuals that live,
work, study, own property, and play along the river and in the watershed acting together to
preserve, protect, and restore its land, water, and life.
Mission: As a coalition of individuals, organizations, and agencies that live, work, study, own
property, and play in the Des Plaines River, we will act together to preserve, protect, and restore its
land, water, and life.
Objectives/Goals: 1) to build an awareness of the watershed and its natural systems; 2) to provide
channels of communication that integrate the plans and efforts of people and organizations working
to benefit the watershed; 3) to sponsor projects and events that bring positive attention to the
watershed and river; 4) to advocate for and review official policies and ordinances that affect the
natural systems of the river and watershed; and 5) to enhance the recreational uses of the Des
Plaines River.
The Des Plaines River Watershed Alliance
http://www.desplaineswatershed.org/
The Applegate Partnership is a community-based non-profit organization involving industry,
conservation groups, natural resource agencies, and residents cooperating to encourage and
facilitate the use of natural resource principles that promote ecosystem health and diversity. Through
community involvement and education, this partnership supports management of all land within the
watershed in a manner that sustains natural resources and that will, in turn, contribute to economic
and community well-being and resilience.
Applegate Partnership, Southwest Oregon & Northern California
http://www.rvi.net/~arwc/Applegate%20Partership.htm
-continuedRenewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
5-16
Examples of Watershed Group Mission and Objectives
Project Objective: To maintain, enhance, and restore anadromous and resident fish habitat, while
also achieving and maintaining a balance between resource protection and resource use on a holistic
watershed management basis.
Vision: To provide a basis of coordination and cooperation between local, private, state, tribal, and
federal fish and land managers, land users, land owners, and other affected entities to manage the
biological, social and economic resources to protect, restore and enhance anadromous and resident
fish habitat.
Model Watershed Project of the Lemhi River, Pahsimeroi River,
& the East Fork of the Salmon River, Idaho
http://www.modelwatershed.org/index.html
The prime objective of Alliance programs is to improve the ability of local citizens, schools, and
governmental organizations to create partnerships and pursue effective watershed education and
implemention of projects in their communities.
Kentucky Waterways Alliance
http://www.members.iglou.com/kwanews/kwaprog.htm
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
5-17
Example of the Group Formation Process
The Applegate Partnership. In 1992, a pair of unlikely collaborators, Jack Shipley (an avid
environmentalist) and Jim Neal (a long-time logger), were fed up. They were tired of the
gridlock, fighting about “lizards and logs,” and figured it was worth trying a different approach.
Shipley and Neal began discussing the idea of managing the half-million acre Applegate
watershed in an entirely different way - one based in collaboration between private land
owners and land-managing agencies. Located in southwest Oregon and northern California,
the Applegate watershed includes Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), state,
county, and private lands. About 3,000 people live in southwest Grants Pass which is part of
the watershed; the other 9,000 or so people live in mostly rural areas with no incorporated
towns.
Shipley and Neal talked informally with neighbors, loggers, environmentalists and natural
resource agency personnel for months. These grass roots discussions reinforced their belief
that they had more common ground than differences. People wanted “healthy forests and
healthy critters” as well as healthy humans. Shared interests included maintaining the longterm health of the watershed and stability of local economics. With cautious but hopeful
interest from diverse individuals, a coalition of people formed a “Board of Directors” and
soon agreed on a vision, goals, and objectives. The Applegate Partnership now includes
community residents, people affiliated with environmental groups, timber, farming, and
ranching interests, schools, natural resource agencies, and anyone else interested in the
Applegate watershed. The vision developed in 1992 still provides inspiration.
The group has been meeting nearly once a week for years with regularly scheduled meetings
open to all people. Initially, volunteer facilitators assisted in conflict resolution which was
particularly important, given the long history of animosity. Ground rules for communication
were developed by the group; attention to group process issues is still needed. The motto is
“Practice trust — them is Us.” Though people are aligned with various constituencies, the
meeting dynamics encourage them to come together more as caring individuals, respectful
of differing values, rather than representatives of interest groups. Positions and agendas are
“checked at the door.” Jack Shipley is recognized as the charismatic leader of the Applegate
Partnership, but his style is such that leadership and responsibility are shared equally among
participants. All people have equal access to power, information, and action. Decisions are
made through consensus. A common question asked is “Who else needs to be at the table?”
Especially important to the Applegate Partnership is the community focus. Each person
brings genuine and powerful feelings about this common place and for the people who live
-continued-
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
5-18
Example of the Group Formation Process, continued
in the Applegate watershed. This strong attachment is a significant factor in their ability to
unite and re-create community despite conflicting interests (Sturtevant and Lange,1995).
Being out on the land through field trips is essential to resolving issues and creating what
people want to see. The merging of maps across all ownership through Geographic
Information System (GIS) has reinforced the perspective that this place is unique and
merits a comprehensive integrated approach. Most of the Applegate Partnership’s focus
for projects is restoration while also creating opportunities for local employment. Examples
include riparian planting on private lands, installation of fish screens, fencing off streams,
putting roads to bed, and reducing the risk of wildfire. Individuals in the Partnership work
actively with the natural resource agencies to encourage landscape projects which will
improve the overall health of the watershed. A newsletter is published and distributed to all
households in the watershed about resource and community issues.
http://www.rvi.net/!arwc/Applegate%20Partnership.htm
January 3, 2002
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
5-19
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Section 6: Sustaining local
interest
“Information must actively be sought from everywhere, from places and sources people
never thought to look before. And then it must circulate freely so that many people can
interpret it” (Wheatley 1999:83).
The community meeting and initial
watershed group discussions provide
stimulating forums for idea and opinion
exchanges. This start-up phase is a high
point that is difficult to sustain over time.
As a community watershed group begins to
meet regularly and sort through local water
issues, their challenge will be to harness the
initial passion and excitement into sustained
actions that make a difference. Sustaining a
group’s interest requires considerable
attention to group development and group
processes (including the tasks and
maintenance functions and the skills group
members use in interacting with one
another).
Research suggests that groups go through a
number of developmental stages. The
process by which groups move through
these stages may determine the level of
productivity and hence the degree of
interest sustained by the group.
This section provides the basics in
understanding group developmental stages
and how to select appropriate group building
strategies for sustaining members’ interests.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Stages of group development
Social science research identifies various
patterns of how groups form and function.
The most commonly used model is
Tuckman’s (1977) “Stages of Group
Development.” He suggests that groups
progress through the following stages:
Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing,
and Dissolution. Transforming is often used
to replace “Dissolution” to account for the
various ways groups spin off into subgroups
or otherwise assume new roles and/or
challenges (Figure 6.1).
It is important to note the five stages are
continuous, blending into one another. All
groups do not necessarily go through the
stages in sequence. For example, a group
that has just moved into “Norming” may
suddenly find itself back in stage two,
“Storming” rather than progressing to
“Performing.” Some groups come together
with a history of working together or may
have a well defined task and structure. This
will help them move through the initial
stages more quickly.
6-1
Overall, as groups progress through the
stages, these are the types of questions
members can ask themselves:
S What group processes can we engage in
to become more effective?
S What stage is our group currently in?
The visual below (Figure 6.1) depicts a
typology of the group cycle and illustrates
the shifting morale and work output that
occurs across the five stages. The key
element for each stage is highlighted at the
bottom of the graph. The time line indicates
progression from beginning to end of the
group developmental cycle. Each stage is
defined in more detail following the graph.
A one-page summary table of Stages of
Team Development can be found at the end
of this section.
S Which tasks and processes can we focus
on to progress to the next stage?
S What tasks do we need to complete in
order to achieve our goals?
S What tasks are we not focusing on that
we need to?
S What group processes are occurring that
are blocking us?
Stages
Forming
Storming
Norming
Power/Conflict
Cooperation
Sustainability
Performing
Transforming
High
Morale
Amount
of Work
Low
Orientation
Monitoring
Phases
Time
Begin
Retooling/Take-off
End
Adapted from Tuckman’s Model of Group Development Stages, 1972, by
Beverlyn Lundy Allen, Iowa State University Extension to Communities, June 14, 2001
Figure 6.1. Coalition climate monitor: Group stages and phases
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
6-2
Characteristics of the five stages
Forming
This first stage involves a simple yet highly
critical aspect of the group’s actual
formation. The first major task is to form a
group identity. To achieve this first
developmental task, groups must clarify
their goals and expectations and also
establish some rules for group membership.
The expected outcome of stage 1,
“Forming,” is commitment to the
group. Trust and communication
among members and agreement to
basic rules of group participation are
essential for commitment to occur.
Storming
Elements of conflict, competition, and
transition characterize the “Storming” stage.
As individuals get more comfortable in their
group, the politeness exhibited earlier tends
to fade away and members reveal more of
their personalities. Members may also
challenge one another in power struggles
vying for informal leadership. Also, because
the first set of rules were agreed on out of
politeness, they may now be challenged.
Members may also begin to rethink
objectives and activities for achieving the
goals they previously agreed upon.
The expected outcome of stage 2,
“Storming,” is clarification. Conflict
and power issues must be resolved
for the group to move forward.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
While the group may become tense, it is
important that the conflict be recognized and
worked through. This is partly because
ignoring the conflict takes away precious
energy from the group. The process of
working through this conflict is an important
step in continuing to build on the trust started
in the first phase. Successful conflict
resolution at this stage can lead to better
goals and increased performance.
One thing is for sure: how this stage is
resolved will determine if the group
continues to progress or remains deadlocked
in conflict.
Norming
As a group successfully firms up its rules
and decides how it will function, cohesion
and action are expected in the “Norming”
stage of development. While some testing
and conflict will be evident, and in fact is
beneficial, the group develops a solid
structure and sense of community in this
stage. Group identity is based upon the
positive interpersonal relationships between
members. Members are able to share their
ideas and feelings, recognize each other’s
strengths, and give and receive feedback in a
positive and productive manner.
The important outcome of stage 3,
“Norming,” is increased commitment
and cooperation. Members identify
the responsibilities and roles of the
group and establish agreement on
its purpose as well as how it will
function.
6-3
Performing
At the “Performing” stage, the group is now
at an optimal performance level. There is
alignment towards achieving goals and
producing results. The structure and
processes of the group are well known and
followed as a matter of habit. Strong trust
relationships among members have
developed, enabling shared decision making
and more interdependence with less anxiety.
The expected outcome for stage 4,
“Performing,” is high productivity:
collective decision making and
problem solving for achieving stated
goals.
Members effectively listen to each other,
engage in dialogue, challenge their own
assumptions, and change their opinions in
this stage. While “performing” is seen as
the highest stage of development, it is
important to recognize that not all groups
attain peak performance. Strong leadership
and attention to tasks and behaviors in the
previous stages will help guide the group
through the “Performing” stage. Also, the
group may have set out goals that were not
achievable in the short to midterm. A
reassessment of goals or of means of
achieving the existing goals may now be in
order.
Transforming
When high performing teams wind down
after a period of accomplishments, the
transformation period sets in. This stage of
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
group development is referred to as
“transforming” because all groups do not
dissolve or disband. For most groups, it is a
time for celebrating group achievements
and considering next steps. Some groups
may change members or renew the team to
take on new challenges. The group may
develop new relationships with other groups
and transform into a network, coalition, or
collaborative in order to accomplish other
goals. When a group goes through the
process of renewal, it is a good idea to
redefine group goals and roles.
The expected outcome for stage 5,
“Transforming,” is sustained interest
for renewal and/or redirection.
Watershed groups and stages of
development
These five group stages can usefully be
applied to the development of citizen-led
watershed groups.
The basic foundation for sustaining local
interest in a watershed group is a clearly
defined vision, mission, and objectives.
For a new group to successfully form,
members must view the group as doing
meaningful work and want to be a part of
that effort. Once the intent and objectives of
the group are evident, then other
organizational practices can be applied to
support development and sustainability:
? Mutual respect. Watershed
organizations will include individuals
6-4
who have contrasting views. Rules of
interaction in meetings that foster
mutual respect must be put in place
(forming stage).
? Team building. Team building can be
accomplished in at least two ways: a) by
members getting to know each other as
whole persons (rather than as “that crazy
environmentalist” or “that chemical
polluting farmer”), and b) by working
together on common activities or
projects and accomplishing them.
Groups in their early stages of
development need a quick victory with
broad participation to strengthen bonds
among members of the group (initiated
in the forming stage, but is an ongoing
process).
? Broad participation. Collaboration and
trust within the organization should be
encouraged. Participatory approaches in
gathering information, in analyzing
situations, and in pursuing objectives
strengthen the group. Even when not all
suggestions are acted on, members need
to feel their comments were given a fair
hearing. Then they are more willing to
accept the chosen approach and support
it wholeheartedly. This is a critical point
in the storming stage. Broad
participation should be a principle
established in the forming stage, and
should be validated and institutionalized
in the norming stage.
? Building alliances. External groups can
be allies on particular issues. Members
should learn about the missions and
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
activities of other local and regional
groups, organizations, and agencies. In
addition, they should seek other groups
that have goals that intersect with the
watershed group’s mission and build
collaborative arrangements. Bridging
common interests occurs in the
performing and transforming stages.
These points are treated in greater detail
below.
Defined vision, mission, and objectives.
Groups and organizations are sustained
because they accomplish what they set out
to do (see Figure 6.2, The visioning
process). The group should be clear about
its mission and objectives. The activities in
which it engages must support those
objectives. Many groups focus on activities
without ever asking themselves whether
those activities lead toward or away from
the group’s objectives and mission. It is
equally important for the watershed group
to evaluate where their group mission fits
into the overall community vision for their
watershed.
Many communities have already undertaken
planning or visioning processes.
Conservation districts may have developed
plans for watersheds within their district.
Municipal water agencies, city and county
planning agencies, farm organizations,
environmental groups and other
organizations may have also engaged in a
visioning process and developed a priority
list of what needs to be done. In some
communities a watershed study group may
have already worked with others in a
6-5
The Visioning Process
A number of community leaders and development specialists* have training in community
visioning. You will want to seek one out to help in this process. The graphic below shows how
the planning and implementation process might occur. Planning should begin with establishing
desired results for your watershed. Members of the community should be asked, “What
characteristics of this watershed would you like your children and future generations to
enjoy?” or “How would you like this watershed to be like in 5 (10, 20) years?” Starting
with desired results builds a logical planning process and allows community members who may
believe they have very different views about the watershed to discover that in fact they agree on
some things.
Activities
Implementation
Assets/
Capacities/
Resources
4
Desired
Futures/
Results
5
4
6
3
2
Projects
1
Planning
Figureresults,
6.2. The
visioning
processask themselves, “What
Once consensus is reached on desired
then
people should
intermediate projects would lead to change?” Once possible projects are defined, it is useful to do
a reality check: “What assets and human capabilities are necessary to carry out these projects?”
If the needed assets or resources are not available, projects might then have to be adjusted. Or
such knowledge may aid in prioritizing projects—not in terms of importance, but the availability of
resources may help in establishing timing of projects: “We should do the projects for which we
have resources first.” Once it is clear to the group what projects are both feasible and will aid in
bringing out the desired change, then the group is ready to plan the precise activities that need to
occur to accomplish a particular project, who will carry out which activities, and how coordination
and supervision will occur. This is the essence of a planning process. Once a group’s activities,
projects, and results are documented, then arrows can be drawn from activities, to projects, to
results. One rule of thumb is to prioritize those projects that contribute to multiple outcomes and
activities that support several projects.
Figure 6.2. The visioning process
*Your local ISU Cooperative Extension Director can help you find someone skilled in community visioning.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
6-6
visioning process. The watershed group
needs to assemble prior visioning and
planning documents and work with other
groups in the community to make known the
vision and update it as necessary.
There are different techniques for
developing a vision and defining results that
will lead the community toward that vision.
Understanding the vision will help the
watershed group refine its mission and
develop projects and activities that
contribute to the desired future results. It
will also help the group build partnerships
with other organizations and agencies.
SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses,
Opportunities, and Threats) analysis is a
commonly used strategy, but unless
conducted by a very skilled facilitator, can
result in much time spent on weaknesses
and threats which is useful only if used to
prioritize the opportunities. A different
approach which alleviates “visioning
fatigue” and results in a plan of work where
activities contribute to outputs that lead to
desired change is based on community
assets. This process is summarized in the
inset, Figure 6.2. The visioning process.
An Example of the Initial Phase of the Visioning Process
Outputs
• Propose new
sustainable
regulations
• Sustainable forest
stewardship &
mgt. plan
• Less waste and
consumption;
more recycling
• Land use &
development
decisions promote
sustainability &
efficient use of
infrastructure.
Outcomes
1. Use of local skills and abilities
a. People will know how and want to live sustainably
b. High quality education provided
c. Healthy people
2. Networks and good communication
a. People empowered thru planning and decision-making
b. Cooperation, better communication and more trusting
relationships
3. Improved Community Initiative, Responsibility and
Adaptability
a. Fewer human, community & environmental stressors
b. Diversity, not bigness
c. Question assumptions; commit to innovations
4. Healthy ecosystems with multiple community benefits
a. Regenerating natural resources
b. Enjoying, using, appreciating natural resources
5. Diverse and healthy economy
a. Vibrant, healthy communities with character and culture
b. Quality jobs for people to live in dignity; no involuntary
poverty
c. Balanced exchange of goods with minimum nonsustainable transportation
d. Planned appropriate economic growth
Figure 6.3. Natural capital component of visioning process, regional rural development
partnership, Minnesota
1Cornelia
Butler Flora, Michael Kinsley, Vicki Luther, Milan Wall, Susan Odell, Shanna Ratner, and Janet Topolsky. Measuring
Community Success and Sustainability: An Interactive Workbook, RRD 180, August 1999. Available at: http://
www.ncrcrd.iastate.edu/Community_Success/about.html
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
6-7
Figure 6.3 provides an example of a
visioning process conducted by a study
group that was looking into establishing a
Regional Sustainable Development
Partnership in a region of Minnesota. In
this case, the generalized categories of
community outcomes developed by an
Aspen Institute task force as part of the
Measuring Community Success and
Sustainability1 book (Flora et al. 1999)
was used to organize the outcomes
expressed in the initial visioning effort.
The same was done with projects and
activities. (The initial visioning document
that was used in the new planning effort had
not separated activities from products from
results.) This new set of objectives
organized as results and products was
presented to the board of the Partnership by
the facilitators for them to modify, expand,
or strike. Thus, they saved considerable
time in conducting the visioning process,
were able to take into consideration past
visions, see their strengths and
shortcomings, and make appropriate
modifications. Additional visioning
resources can be found at http://
www.mindtools.com.
Foster Mutual Respect. The interests and
opinions of those who live in a watershed
may be quite diverse. Controversy is likely
to be normal, and indeed, healthy. Overt
conflicts may break out from time to time.
If the watershed organization is to be
effective, it must embrace the diverse local
interests, and may need to partner with
certain non-local actors. Absence of
controversy within the watershed
organization may be an indicator that the
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
group has not reached out to include the
different interests. On the other hand,
conflict within the group, particularly if it
involves lack of respect and personal
attacks, will quickly reduce the
organization’s effectiveness. If the conflict
is prolonged, it may threaten the continued
existence of the group.
An outside facilitator, if carefully chosen to
have conflict management skills, can be
critical in ensuring that the organization is
not engulfed in conflict. However, if the
facilitator bears the burden of conflict
amelioration alone, the organization will
likely fail. The building of trust is central to
the effective functioning of any
organization. Civility allows for trust to be
built. Generally, a watershed organization
should not be characterized by too much
formality, but it may be useful to have a few
simple rules of behavior in meetings: show
respect to others although you may disagree
with the ideas they are presenting; dispute
another’s ideas, but do not attack the person;
Rules of Mutual Respect
•
Everyone participates.
•
No one person dominates.
•
Be open to new ideas.
•
Listen actively and carefully.
•
Be constructive.
•
No sidebar conversations.
•
It’s okay to disagree . . . respectfully.
•
Focus on ideas, not personalities.
6-8
allow others to speak without interruption.
If someone attempts to dominate the floor,
the facilitator or moderator has the
obligation to courteously limit that person’s
discussion so that others may speak. Each
group should discuss and make its own rules
of civility or mutual respect (see box on
previous page as an example).
Team building and quick victories. It is
important for team building that a newly
formed group have one or more quick
successes. The first project must be
chosen very carefully. It must be doable in a
short amount of time, but still contribute to
one or more objectives for which there is a
clear consensus. Ideally is should involve a
lot of participation. People like a
successful project, but they are even happier
if they participated in making it a success.
Photo by Jim Colbert
Community volunteers head downstream to pick up trash.
Other ways to build trust include having
meals together (potlucks are good) and
working together (cleanup days, planting
trees, prairie seedings and harvest).
Temporary committees or work clusters
around specific issues offer another way for
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
people to get to know each other. Be sure
everyone has a chance to be on a work
cluster and contribute. If the members of
the watershed have been on opposite sides
of the fence on certain issues, team building
is even more important. Activities should
be planned at every meeting that allow each
to see the humanity in the other. Each
person needs to view the other as a whole
person—not just ‘that environmentalist” or
“that chemical farmer.”
A quick icebreaker. A 5 minute
icebreaker at the beginning of a
meeting can help people get to know
each other better and build trust. This
can also make new people feel
welcome. Pair people up. Have them
interview each other and then introduce
the other person to the entire group.
They can be given a set of three or four
questions to ask or simply be instructed
to “find out the most interesting things”
about the other person.
Broad participation. Watershed groups
that encourage broad participation are more
likely to sustain themselves than those that
are not participatory. The watershed group
needs to communicate a continuing
invitation for community members to
participate. Newspaper articles and posters
remind the community about the work of
the group and should include opportunities
for others in the community to join in.
Watershed group activities can be planned
that involve school children, elderly
persons, business people, farmers, local
industries, homeowners and renters,
6-9
employers and employees. New people that
show up at regular meetings should be
acknowledged and welcomed.
Local people are able to discover and assess
information about the watershed because
they know local conditions and
interrelationships through experiences.
When they partner with technical water
resource experts, the political leadership,
and other citizens, science and local
knowledge can be integrated to create
solutions in the community interest.
Watershed management should be seen as
a process of negotiation among local and
outside interests regarding objectives,
activities, and measures of success, rather
than an agenda set by outsiders or one
special interest group.
watershed. Now they need to find partners
who have similar concerns and build
connections among groups with shared
desired futures. Partners can be private
sector firms, government agencies, and/or
civic, professional, and trade/commodity
organizations. Public agencies have specific
mandates; voluntary not-for-profit
organizations have missions that direct the
kinds of activities they undertake. Once one
or more groups have agreed they have a
common goal (even though their missions
and other goals are different) they are ready
to form a coalition that identifies specific
issues. This coalition may be temporary
(e.g. focusing on getting the vote out for a
local bond vote) or ongoing (e.g. developing
and implementing an educational program in
the school).
Building strategic alliances. After the
watershed group has a clear identity, has
built trust among its diverse members, and
some successes (and perhaps some
disappointments too) it is ready to build
strategic alliances. Watershed concerns are
big issues that no one group alone can solve.
As the group learns about and understands
their watershed, they will begin to identify
public policies and private practices that are
a threat to the community vision for the
Alliances, coalitions, and collaborations that
bridge interests consist of groups of
organizations that come together because of
commonly held values to achieve a
commonly desired change. They may
however, disagree on how to get there. The
intent of the alliance is to find supportive
ways to accomplish their common goal.
Each organization brings a particular
predisposition to accept information that is
supportive of its particular interests or
perspectives. Different organizational
actors are likely to be persuaded by
different types of information. Hence, for a
coalition to be built, the watershed group
needs to examine how each potential
member of the coalition is thinking about
the issue. For example, two groups may
want to preserve an endangered wetland.
One group believes that the best way is to
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
6-10
Too often the community is consulted
about the project after researchers or
project managers have established the
goals and objectives of the initiative—
often based on criteria other than local
advice.
Gasteyer et al. 2001
have stronger laws and enforcement
measures in place, while the other believes
that voluntary participation is the only way
to truly preserve the area. The challenge is
to find areas where the two groups can
agree, even if they have different ways of
thinking about the problem. For example,
they may agree that the boundaries of the
wetland were set very arbitrarily and need to
be revised. This is something they can work
on together to change. The mutual trust and
confidence that results from such a joint
effort can be used in a renewed effort by
alliance members to reach agreement on an
appropriate balance between regulation and
incentives.
than professionals, report back to the
watershed group on what they learned from
the interviews, other group members are
more likely to take the information to heart.
See the box on the next page (Figure 6.4)
that shows how alliances can be visually
represented. Section 9 offers a variety of
data collection methods and instruments for
assessing beliefs, values, and attitudes about
the watershed.
Conclusion
Watershed groups that attempt to build such
bridges will need to analyze documents
produced by potential partners related to the
issue in order to understand the other’s
perspective. Information from key
organizational leaders can be obtained
through personal interviews that seek the
history of the issue, the role of their
organizations and others in that process, and
other people and groups that are involved.
From these data, watershed groups can
determine if they have a common vision
with the potential partner but are just
thinking about how to do it differently—or
to confirm that indeed they really don’t have
a common vision. This exchange increases
understanding among groups and helps them
to find partners that share common vision
for the watershed. Involving watershed
group members in these interviews may also
help them see the issue through the eyes of
organizations with a different approach to
the issue. Also, when group members, rather
Ups and downs in organizations are
inevitable. There will be times when it
seems like the group can’t possibility hold
together. Unresolved dissension and apathy
are two threats to maintaining the group.
These are morale issues that can undermine
the group’s effectiveness. Group members
must build a level of trust among
themselves and create some normative
expectations about how members will
interact and treat each other. Members must
feel they can voice their differences and yet
be considered valuable contributors to
group discussions and actions. Activities
that members can do together, such as river
bed clean up, water monitoring, nature
mapping and tree and prairie plantings offer
opportunities for people to work side-byside and get to know each other. These
activities can accomplish the watershed
group mission while building trust among
members and community residents. The
handout, Ways for Residents to Get
Involved in Local Watershed Projects, at the
end of this section provides a list of some
of the activities and partnerships watershed
groups can engage in.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
6-11
Displaying Alliances Using a Bubble Chart
NATION
STATE
National
Environmental
Organizations
State
Environmental
Organizations
EPA
Dept. of
Natural
Resources
REGION
Watershed
Group
COUNTY
County
Tourism
Committee
COMMUNITY
Municipal
Water
Authorities
Cities
Market
U.S. Dept. of
Agriculture
State Dept.
of Agriculture
Animal/Bird Orgs
(e.g., Ducks
Unlimited)
County Econ..
Dvlp. Group
Chambers
of
Commerce
Civil Society
State-level
Commodity
Organizations
County
Commodity
& Farm
Organizations
Farmers
State
Farmer
Coops
Agribusiness
Firms
Figure 6.4. Advocacy coalitions around nitrate runoff and water quality
A visual way of seeing how alliances might be constructed around a particular issue is by making a
“bubble” chart from information gathered by interviewing government, market-oriented, and civilsociety stakeholders on that particular issue. The bubble chart above shows the coming together of
various organized groups around two core entities—one a voluntary watershed group and the other a
county-level commodity organization, over a hypothetical issue of water quality and nitrate runoff into
local streams and then into a recreational lake.1 The diagram is organized to reflect existing ties among
state, market, and civil society entities as well as potential ties based on similar desired futures.2 The
diagram shows that the various organizations can be part of an actual alliance or an alliance in process
of formation (based on common desired futures). Besides defining two coalitions in the making, the
diagram also highlights the entities that have ties to both sides or are presently neutral (those that are
inside the rectangle in the center of the diagram). That there are several entities in that rectangle is a
hopeful sign because these organizations, agencies, and firms have the potential to form a bridge for
eventual compromise between those with environmental concerns and the agricultural interests. They
might serve as honest brokers or mediators in bringing opposing groups together. By constructing such
diagrams, community groups and other stakeholders can better define strategies for either strengthening
the alliance of which they are a part, assessing what entity(ies) might best bring about a compromise, or
both. Compromise can be more readily brought about if a common desired future can be identified that
allows the groups to put away some of their differences in favor of the greater good for the community.
1 The
general structure of the diagram is taken from a research project involving a real locally based natural resource issue
in Ecuador, but the issue and organizational names are changed to fit a U.S Midwestern situation.
2 The information for constructing it would come from the key informant interviews of stakeholder organizations, agencies,
and firms carried out by local residents and collaborating professionals.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
6-12
Stages of Team Development
1. Forming
2. Storming
3. Norming
Cohesion, harmony
Balanced influence
Open-minded
Trust builds
Comfortable with relationships
Cliques dissolved
Focus and energy on tasks
Planning how to work as a team
Confidence and creativity high
Team fully functional
Roles clear
Interdependent
Team able to organize itself
Flexible
Members function well
individually, in subgroups,
or as a team
Empathy for one another
Internal or external forces bring
about renewal, change, or
dissolution.
Momentum slows down
Activities mark the ending or
renewal of team efforts
Team identity emerges
Team identity strong
Coach/Sponsor
Give feedback and support
Plan celebrations
Allow for less structure
Continue to focus on building
strong relationships
Less involvement
Consultant/Sponsor
Give positive reinforcement
and support
Offer consultation
Keep channels of
communication open
Share new information
Allow team to organize itself
and to test new procedures
Keep goals in mind
Maintain flexibility
Continue consensus process
Complete action items
Provide information to team
Support and verify team norms
Keep momentum going
Team identity dissolves or
renews, transforms
Facilitator/Visionary
Help team develop options for
renewing or disbanding
Guide the process
Help team design its “rituals”
for renewal or ending
Offer sincere appreciation for
team’s accomplishments
Adequate comfort level
Struggles over purpose and
goals
Vying for leadership
Differences in points of view
and personal style become
evident
Lack of role clarity
Reliance on voting, arbitration,
leader-made decisions
Team organizing itself and its
work
Individual identity still strong;
team identity begins to build
Facilitator/Teacher
Acknowledge conflict
Guide toward consensus
Get members to assume more
task responsibility
Teach conflict resolution
methods
Offer support and praise
Active involvement
Consider all views
Initiate ideas
Aim for synergy
Help team reach consensus on
goals, purpose, roles
Build solutions from
everyone’s needs
Accept conflict as natural
Respect diversity of team
members
Lack of conflict resolution
skills
No one to facilitate conflict
resolution
Individuals stuck on own
agendas
“Turf wars” and “tree hugging”
Collective “win”
“Groupthink”
Comfort
Focus too much on
relationships, ignore tasks
Unwilling to take risk
External change which may
alter team’s purpose
Confidence, risk-taking
Conflict
Low
High
Low
Output
Low
Low
Low—Medium
Characteristics
Politeness
Tentative joining
Membership may be unstable
Orienting personally
and professionally
Gathering impressions
Avoiding controversy
Hidden agendas
Cliques may form
Need for safety and approval
Team Identity
Individual identity prevails
Leader’s Role
Visionary/Director
Provide structure and clear task
direction
Allow get-acquainted time
Create atmosphere of
confidence, optimism
Active involvement
Team Members’ Role
Ask questions to get clear about
team’s initial tasks
Avoid cliques
Get to know each member
Have patience with the process
Listen
Suspend judgment
Pitfalls (ways to get
stuck in this stage)
Staying too polite
Lack of clear direction
Bridge to Next Stage
Take responsibility to influence
how team works
Keep a realistic outlook
Avoid harmony for sake of
harmony
Be flexible
Support efforts to build “team
spirit”
Initiate and consider new ideas
4. Performing
5. Transforming
Accept need for team to “move
on”
Participate fully in efforts to
end or renew team
Help evaluate team’s success
Carry forth learning to next
team effort
“Burnout”
Team not evaluating and/or
correcting itself
Lack of training
OK to stay here if productive
Failing to renew when it’s time
Renewing too soon
Unwilling to disband team
when its work is done
Not honoring the process of
transforming
Reflection, evaluation
A definite ending, change or
renewal
Low
Healthy conflict (team has
learned ways to resolve
differences
High
Temporarily tapers off or ends
WAYS FOR RESIDENTS TO GET INVOLVED
IN LOCAL WATERSHED PROJECTS
Photo by E.C. Stanley
There are many opportunities for watershed residents to partner with public and private organizations and agencies
on watershed projects. Below is a sample list with some potential partners identified.
WATER MONITORING
STUDENT PROJECTS
(school and community
service projects)
Private wells (county sanitarian)
Volunteer water quality monitoring (IOWATER;
Izaak Walton League, Stream Doctor)
Screeks, main stem, mouth
Sabove and below – landfill, towns
Stile lines, buffer strip farm, pasture
Shigh flow vs. low flow
Stream ecology – macroinvertegrates, etc.
(Izaak Walton League "Save Our Streams Program")
Photographs – historical vs. current (journalism
teacher or photo club)
Interview residents – fish, wildlife, habitats (4-H,
Boy Scouts, FFA project)
Fish Iowa
Stream flow, concentrations, load (math teacher)
Data management, GIS (computer teacher)
Report writing (English teacher)
Soil testing and stalk NO3 testing (FFA, science
teacher)
Development of its area and its people (history
teacher)
Nature mapping program
(ISU Dept. of Animal Ecology, Ames, IA 50011)
Iowa Envirothon (Conservation Districts of Iowa)
http://www.iowater.net
http://www.iwla.org/sos/monitoring.html
http://www.iwla.org/sos/
http://www.keepersoftheland.org
http://www.ag.iastate.edu/departments/aecl/
http://www.ia.nrcs.usda.gov/Programs/envirothon.htm
CONSERVATION
PLANNING AND
PRACTICES
Iowa Dept. of Agriculture & Land Stewardship,
Soil Conservation Division (IDALS-SCD)
Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCD)
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Services
(NRCS)
SPrograms and services to protect natural
resources in Iowa (NRCS)
SCitizen action to encourage municipal
conservation planning (NRCS, SWCD)
SStreambank stabilization demonstrations
(NRCS, SWCD)
STerraces (NRCS, SWCD)
SContour buffers (NRCS, SWCD, ISU Forestry,
IDALS-SCD)
SRiparian buffers (NRCS, SWCD, ISU Forestry)
SFilter strips (NRCS, SWCD)
SWaterways (NRCS, SWCD)
SWetlands (NRCS, SWCD, Ducks Unlimited,
Better Wetlands)
SPrairie plantings (Pheasants Forever,
Iowa Department of Natural Resources,
Iowa Prairie Network
SLandforms and geology
(IDNR Geological Survey Bureau)
SBackyard Conservation
FORESTRY PRACTICES
Iowa Department of Natural Resource (IDNR)
STimber stand improvement & marketing timber
(ISU Master Woodland Program)
• Tree planting – seedlings and direct seeding
• Urban trees
Trees Forever
Iowa Community Tree Steward Program
• National Arbor Day
SAgroforestry (National Agroforestry Center)
http://www.agriculture.state.ia.us/soilconservation.html
http://www.agriculture.state.ia.us/soilwatercons.htm
http://www.ia.nrcs.usda.gov/
http://www.ia.nrcs.usda.gov/programs.htm
http://www.buffer.forestry.iastate.edu/
http://www.agriculture.state.ia.us/bufferinitiative.htm
http://www.buffer.forestry.iastate.edu/
http://www.ducksunlimited.org
http://www.ia.nrcs.usda.gov/Programs/wetlandsreservepr
ogram.htm
http://www.pheasantsforever.org
http://www.state.ia.us/dnr/organiza/forest/prairies.htm;
http://www.iowaprairienetwork.org/
http://www.igsb.uiowa.edu
http://www.nhq.nrcs.usda.gov/CCS/Backyard.html
http://www.state.ia.us/dnr/
http://www.state.ia.us/dnr/organiza/forest/index.htm
http://www.ag.iastate.edu/departments/forestry/ext/
mwm.html
http://www.state.ia.us/dnr/organiza/forest/index.htm
http://www.treesforever.org/
http://www.ag.iastate.edu/departments/forestry/ext/icts.html
http://www.arborday.org/
http://www.unl.edu/nac/
PASTURE MANAGEMENT
SWCD; local farmers; ISU Extension
SIntensive grazing management demonstration
SStream corridor fencing and off-site watering
demonstration
SPasture forages renovation demo (seed company)
SGrazing for profit (Practical Farmers of Iowa;
NRCS)
SCattle vs. sheep stream use (field trials)
FISH & WILDLIFE HABITAT
SURVEYS
SBird populations (Audubon Society)
SBackyard habitat (county naturalist)
SGame birds (Pheasants Forever)
SHunting (archery club)
STrapping
SWildlife habitats (IDNR; ISU Extension;
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)
SFish populations – Fishing Day (IDNR Fisheries)
SConservation easements (Iowa Natural Heritage
Foundation)
SMaster Conservation
SHelp-a-Habitat in Iowa
SBackyard Conservation
SBackyard Wildlife Habitat Program
SWildlife Habitat Council
SBat Conservation International
NRCS, ISU Extension; DNR
SGIS -- land cover (Geological Survey Bureau)
land use, land capability, landscape position,
soil slope range
SSurvey of livestock numbers and production
practices
SSurvey of producer attitudes
SHome*A*Syst (Iowa Farm Bureau EPA 319 Project)
SFarm*A*Syst (Iowa Farm Bureau EPA 319 Project)
SAsset Mapping (ISU Extension to Community
Field Specialists)
SData for Decision Makers
http://offices.usda.gov/scripts/ndISAPI.dll/oip_public/U
SA_map
http://www.extension.iastate.edu/Counties/state.html
http://www.pfi.iastate.edu/PFIhomenew.htm
http://www.ia.nrcs.usda.gov/Programs/grazeland.htm
http://www.audubon.org; http://birdsource.cornell.edu
http://www.pheasantsforever.org
http://www.fws.gov/r3pao/maps/iowa.htm
http://www.state.ia.us/dnr/organiza/fwb/fish/fish.htm
http://www.inhf.org; email: info@inhf.org
http://www.extension.iastate.edu/wildlife
http://www.helpahabitat.org
http://www.nhq.nrcs.usda.gov/CCS/Backyard.html
http://www.nwf.org/backyardwildlifehabitat/
http://www.wildlifehc.org
http://www.batcon.org
http://www.igsb.uiowa.edu
http://extension.agron.iastate.edu/soils/
http://ia.profiles.iastate.edu/agcensus/
http://www.ifbf.org
http://www.ifbf.org
http://www.extension.iastate.edu/communities) – click on
"Faculty and Staff” to find specialist in your area
http://www.extension.iastate.edu/communities/communit
ydata.html
NUTRIENT & MANURE
MANAGEMENT
INFORMATION &
EDUCATION
OTHER
SNutrient management and correspondence course
(ISU Extension)
SManure management and nutrient calibrations
(ISU Extension, IMMAG)
SManure, N, P on-farm field demonstrations
(ISU Extension)
S
ISU Extension, IDNR, SWCD, NRCS, IDALS-DCS
SNewsletters, posters, education campaign
development (NRCS, RC&D)
SIntegrated Pest Management
SWater Quality Projects (ISU Extension)
SSoil (Iowa Cooperative Soil Survey)
SCenter for Energy & Environmental Education
(University of Northern Iowa)
SAdopt-A-Stream (4-H, Boy Scouts, church youth,
school class, environmental club, DNR)
SWell closing demonstration (county sanitarian)
SToxic Clean-up Day and household hazardous
materials (IDNR Waste Management; University of
Northern Iowa)
SHelp senior citizens and disabled deliver recyclables
SRecycle – newspapers, cans, plastic, eyeglasses,
glass, phonebooks (IDNR)
STires – turn in – may be used for playground
equipment (IDNR)
STour of watershed
STour of landfill
SLawn and garden nutrient and pest management
(Master Gardener Program, ISU Extension)
SIowa Master Conservationist Program
(ISU Extension)
SEnvironmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP)
Priority Watershed (NRCS;
Farm Service Agency (FSA)
SGrants and programs for local groups (Farm
Bureau, IDALS-DCS – water protection funds)
SUrban problems (Center for Watershed Protection)
http://extension.agron.iastate.edu/NPKnowledge/
http://extension.agron.iastate.edu/immag
http://www.ipm.iastate.edu/ipm
http://extension.agron.iastate.edu/waterquality
http://icss.agron.iastate.edu/
http://www.uni.edu/ceee/
http://www.state.ia.us/parks/adopt.htm
http://www.state.ia.us/dnr/organiza/wmad/index.html
http://www.iwrc.org/
http://www.state.ia.us/dnr/organiza/wmad/wmabureau
/recycling/index.htm
http://www.state.ia.us/dnr/organiza/wmad/wmabureau
/Tires/index.htm
http://www.hort.iastate.edu/pages/conshort/c_frame.
Html
http://www.extension.iastate.edu/wildlife
http://www.ia.nrcs.usda.gov/eqip/97_eqip.html
http://www.fsa.usda.gov/dafp/cepd/crpinfo.htm
http://www.ifbf.org/govt_action/enviro.asp
http://www2.state.ia.us/agriculture/waterprojdev.htm
http://www.cwp.org
Compiled by John Rodecap, Iowa State University, Maquoketa Watershed Project, Fayette, Iowa, and Lois Wright Morton, Department of Sociology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, March 2001.
. . and justice for all
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited
bases apply to all programs.) Many materials can be made available in alternative formats for ADA clients. To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW,
Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call 202-720-5964. Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work. Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Stanley R. Johnson, director, Cooperative Extension Service,
Iowa State University of Science and Technology, Ames, Iowa.
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Section 7: Local, state, and
federal partners
Community watershed groups must partner
with other agencies, groups, and
organizations to effectively solve watershed
issues. There are many public and private
groups that are concerned about water
quality and quantity. Some have a legislative
mandate, specific regulations, and
guidelines that define their programs.
Others are conservation and environmental
groups that voluntarily have made water
issues a part of their group mission and
activities. Still others, such as private firms,
are affected by water concerns and its
impact on their business. Local, regional,
state, and national organizations, agencies,
and groups bring unique skills, perspectives
and expectations that frame how they view
water problems and what solutions they
seek.
Partnerships are built on the personal
relations members of different groups have
with each other. Thus, a local citizen
watershed council works with other groups
and agencies such as SWCD commissioners, DNR, Division of Soil Conservation,
NRCS, municipal water authorities, Farm
Bureau Federation, and Sierra Club as
groups and through personal connections.
This means that although partnerships may
begin as two to three groups getting
together because of water, they can only
work together to solve watershed
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
concerns if the people in these groups
trust each other. Just as the watershed
group members must trust each other for
the group to form and effectively undertake
action, so members of different agencies
and groups must have confidence that they
are valued and respected.
In partnerships, the expertise of different
individuals, professions, and groups can be
pooled, allowing a more complete
understanding of issues, needs, and
resources, improving the capacity to plan
and evaluate, and allowing for the
development of more comprehensive
strategies. Further, division of responsibility
allows each partner to specialize—doing
what it does best. Because partners share
responsibility, they are more likely to be
creative as they become involved in new and
broader issues.
Partnerships also provide access to and
permit development of talents, skills, and
approaches not possible in any single
organization. Further, partnerships bring
together larger and more diverse
constituencies than single organizations. By
including diverse perspectives, partnerships
can develop a more comprehensive vision,
increase accountability, and achieve a wider
base of support for their efforts. By
demonstrating widespread support and
Revised May 2006
7-1
taking joint action, partnerships can
maximize their members’ power and
increase access to policy makers, the media
and the public.
By coordinating services, partnerships can
eliminate duplication, link and integrate
partners’ activities, and ensure consistency.
Thus, partnerships can make better use of
limited resources, increase flexibility, and
enhance the ability to leverage resources.
Many partnerships are initiated through
funding mandates or budget imperatives to
increase coordination of services. However,
joint relationships cannot be sustained by
mandates alone. While partnerships can be
influenced through incentives, they cannot
be coerced. Successful partnerships must
work beyond initial mandates of funding
sources.
Five essential elements form the basic
ingredients or building blocks for
successful partnerships. These include
communication, coordination, cooperation,
contribution and commitment.
Communication in community
partnerships are the conversations that
establish common understandings.
Communication has to be open and frequent
and both formal and informal. Information
exchanged needs to be presented in
different ways, at different levels of
complexity, and more than once, with time
for processing to accommodate different
cultural and individual styles and capacities.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Coordination is the linking of resources to
match needs and limits duplication of
services and/or activities. Local watershed
management has a history of cooperative
relations among government agencies such
as Iowa State University Cooperative
Extension, Soil and Water Conservation
District (SWCD), USDA Natural Resource
Conservation Service (NRCS), Iowa
Department of Natural Resources (DNR),
and Iowa Department of Agriculture and
Land Stewardship-Division of Soil
Conservation (IDALS/DSC). Citizen groups
contribute to this local partnership through
activities which help citizens learn and put
in place practices that support good
watershed management. Groups may share a
common vision for their watershed but
differ greatly on how to get there.
Cooperation requires that groups and
organizations respect differences in visions
and actions. The underlining value on which
partnerships are built and strengthened is
trust. Trust cannot be infused onto the
relationship by merely discussing it. Trust
must grow over time by people being and
working together. Sometimes partners have
to agree to disagree.
Contributions by partners will happen only
when the talents, skills, and resources they
bring to the partnership are appreciated and
valued.
Commitment is based on congruence with
organizational mission and belief that
working together is more effective than
working as a single organization.
Revised May 2006
7-2
Index to Watershed Partners
Local, State, and Federal Agencies
Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship/Soil Conservation Division ............. 7-5
Iowa Watershed Improvement Review Board .................................................................. 7-7
Soil and Water Conservation District Offices ................................................................. 7-8
Iowa Department of Natural Resources .............................................................................. 7-15
Fisheries Program ......................................................................................................... 7-19
Iowa Geological Survey ................................................................................................ 7-20
Iowa Geological Survey: Water Monitoring Section ..................................................... 7-21
IOWATER ..................................................................................................................... 7-22
Keepers of the Land ...................................................................................................... 7-23
Resources Enhancement and Protection Program (REAP) ........................................... 7-24
Water Quality Bureau .................................................................................................... 7-27
Iowa State University
College of Agriculture ................................................................................................. 7-28
Agriculture and Natural Resources [Extension] ............................................................ 7-29
Community and Economic Development [Extension] ................................................... 7-30
Extension Distribution Center ...................................................................................... 7-31
Extension Sociology ..................................................................................................... 7-32
Heartland Water Coordination Initiative........................................................................ 7-33
Iowa NatureMapping ..................................................................................................... 7-35
Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture .................................................................. 7-36
Skunk River Navy .......................................................................................................... 7-37
Water Resources Research Institute (ISWRRI) ............................................................ 7-38
United States Army Corps of Engineers-Rock Island District ............................................ 7-39
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
National Extension Water Outreach Education ............................................................. 7-40
Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) ....................................................... 7-41
Resource, Conservation and Development (USDA RC&D) .......................................... 7-42
Resource, Conservation and Development (Iowa RC&D) ............................................. 7-44
Iowa RC&D Areas and Contacts .................................................................................... 7-47
United States Department of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service .............................................................................................. 7-52
United States Environmental Protection Agency-Region 7 ................................................ 7-53
Watershed Academy ...................................................................................................... 7-54
Voluntary Not-for-Profit Organizations
CDI (Conservation Districts of Iowa) ................................................................................. 7-56
Ducks Unlimited ................................................................................................................ 7-57
Iowa Environmental Council ............................................................................................... 7-61
Iowa Farm Bureau Federation ............................................................................................. 7-62
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-3
Iowa Native Plant Society ................................................................................................... 7-64
Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation ...................................................................................... 7-65
Iowa Prairie Network ......................................................................................................... 7-66
Iowa Watersheds, Inc. ......................................................................................................... 7-67
The Izaak Walton League of America .................................................................................. 7-69
Pheasants Forever............................................................................................................... 7-74
Soil and Water Conservation Society ................................................................................. 7-76
The Nature Conservancy ..................................................................................................... 7-77
The Adopt-a-Stream Foundation ......................................................................................... 7-78
Trees Forever ..................................................................................................................... 7-79
Wallace House Foundation ................................................................................................. 7-80
Water Environment Federation ........................................................................................... 7-81
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-4
http://www.agriculture.state.ia.us/soilconservation.html
502 E. 9th Street, Wallace State Office Bldg
Des Moines, IA 50319-0050
Phone: 515-281-5851; Fax: 515-281-6170
Kenneth R. Tow, Director
ken.tow@idals.state.ia.us
Mission/goals: The Division of Soil Conservation (DSC) is established within the Iowa Department of
Agriculture and Land Stewardship (DALS) with the responsibility for state leadership in the protection and
management of soil, water and mineral resources; assisting soil and water conservation districts and private
landowners to achieve their agricultural and environmental objectives.
As authorized in Iowa Code Chapter 161A, the Division is administered in accordance with policies established by the State Soil Conservation Committee. It is operated under the administrative authority of the
Secretary of Agriculture. The Division, following approval by the State Soil Conservation Committee,
adopts administrative rules.
Programs/activities:
The Division provides financial assistance and administrative support to Iowa’s 100 soil and water conservation districts, and is responsible to secure the cooperation and assistance of state and federal agencies in
the work of districts. Principle partners of the Division in this work include the Conservation Districts of
Iowa, the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, and Iowa State University Cooperative Extension Service.
Iowa’s 100 Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs) are responsible for carrying out soil conservation and water quality protection programs at the local level. Each SWCD is governed by a board of five
elected commissioners who identify resource protection needs, set priorities, and coordinate and apply the
resources of federal, state and local agencies and organizations to address soil conservation and water
quality needs.
Types of program activities conducted by soil and water conservation districts, with support from the
Division of Soil Conservation and other conservation partners, include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Implementation of Iowa financial incentive programs
Development soil and water resource conservation plans
Development and implementation of water quality protection projects
Development and implementation of watershed projects
Establishing soil loss limits
Administering soil loss complaints
Carrying out conservation education programs in schools
Conducting demonstrations and field days
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-5
Water Quality and Watershed Programs: The Division works to preserve and protect the quality and
quantity of surface and groundwater resources of the state. The goal is to encourage the voluntary adoption
of agricultural and urban best management practices, through education, demonstration and financial incentives. Cooperation with local, state, and federal agencies, and other groups is essential to effective watershed and water quality protection efforts.
•
Soil and water conservation districts protect the state’s surface and groundwater resources from point
and non-point sources of contamination through water quality projects across the state. The Division
provides administrative support and funding for these projects, and interfaces with the Department of
Natural Resources and the Environmental Protection Agency to bring EPA Section 319 funding to
districts. Authorized in Iowa Code Chapter 161C, projects are developed through a locally-led process
initiated by soil and water conservation districts. State funding has been approximately $1 million
appropriated annually. Applications for project funding consider the importance of the resource to be
protected, the nature and extent of the water quality problem, proposed solutions, landowner interest,
and the overall cost-effectiveness of the project.
•
The Iowa Legislature established the Iowa Watershed Protection Program in 1999 to accelerate
watershed protection efforts in the state. Initially funded at $1.25 million, the support level was increased to $2.7 million in fiscal year 2001 which has been maintained at that level since. The program
encourages an integrated, multi-objective approach to water quality protection, flood control, erosion
control, and protection of other natural resources on a watershed scale.
Water quality protection projects commonly use a comprehensive watershed planning approach to address
resource conservation concerns. Three specific elements must be balanced in the process: 1) Planning
begins with scientific/technical assessments that lead to technical solutions, 2) Informed social-political
activism engaged through an efficient information and education campaign, and 3) Regard for funding
opportunities and limitations and the understanding that watershed projects require funds from multiple
sources.
Watershed and water quality projects funded through SWCD and DSC programs combine thorough
technical assessments and inventories, develop a high level of landowner and community support while
working in the legislatively defined program parameters. Additional funding options usually feature partnerships with federal, state and local agencies and other organizations. Soil and water conservation districts
have a respected tradition of coordinating the resources and programs for a variety of organizations to
achieve local resource objectives.
Citizens and groups interested in learning more about local, state, and federal conservation partners and
their role in watershed and water quality protection may do so by visiting the IDALS webpage at: http://
www.agriculture.state.ia.us
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-6
The Board is administered by the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship—Division of Soil
Conservation. The Board can be contacted at:
Watershed Improvement Review Board
Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship
Wallace State Office Building
502 E. 9th St.
Des Moines, IA 50319
http://www.agricutlure.state.ia.us/IWIRB.htm
The Watershed Improvement Review Board (WIRB) was established in 2005 by the Iowa Legislature to
provide grants to watershed and water quality projects. The Board is comprised of representatives from
agriculture, drinking water and wastewater utilities, environmental organizations, agribusiness, the conservation community along with two state senators and two state representatives.
Staff contact for the Board is:
Jerry Neppel
Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship
Division of Soil Conservation
Wallace State Office Building
502 E. 9th St.
Des Moines, IA 50319
Ph: 515-281-3599
Fax: 515-281-6170
Jerry.neppel@idals.state.ia.us
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-7
Soil and Water Conservation District Offices
http://www.agriculture.state.ia.us/swcdnm.asp
Adair SWCD
705 NE 6th St., Ste. E, Greenfield, IA 50849-9549; Tel. (641) 743-6124; FAX (641) 743-2017
Adams SWCD
2243 Loomis Ave., Ste. 2, Corning, IA 50841-8008 ; Tel. (641) 322-3116; FAX (641) 322-3593
Allamakee SWCD
635 - 9th St. NW, Waukon, IA 52172-1448; Tel. (563) 568-2246; FAX (563) 568-3322
Appanoose SWCD
12th & Washington, Ag. Bldg., Centerville, IA 52544; Tel. (641) 856-3893; FAX (641) 856-6048
Audubon SWCD
900 Fourth Ave., Ste. 1, Audubon, IA 50025-1481; Tel. (712) 563-4248; FAX (712) 563-4809
Benton SWCD
1705 West D St., Vinton, IA 52349-2505; Tel. (319) 472-2161; FAX (319) 472-4649
Black Hawk SWCD
29590 Southland Dr., Ste. 2, Waterloo, IA 50701; Tel. (319) 296-3262; FAX (319) 296-1557
Boone SWCD
1327 SE Marshall St., Ste. 4, Boone, IA 50036-7519; Tel. (515) 432-2316;
FAX (515) 432-6864
Bremer SWCD
1510 - 3rd Street SW, Waverly, IA 50677-0179; Tel. (319) 352-4037; FAX (319) 352-5846
Buchanan SWCD
503 - 17th St. SE, Independence, IA 50644-9874; Tel. (319) 334-4105; FAX (319) 334-6995
Buena Vista SWCD
1617 North Lake Ave., Storm Lake, IA 50588-1913; Tel. (712) 732-3096; FAX (712) 732-6059
Butler SWCD
310 Allan St., Box 324, Allison, IA 50602-0324; Tel. (319) 267-2756; FAX (319) 267-2123
Calhoun SWCD
905 High St., Ste. 1, Rockwell City, IA 50579; Tel. (712) 297-7824; FAX (712) 297-5509
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-8
Carroll SWCD
1917 Hwy. 71 N., Ste. 1, Carroll, IA 51401-3340; Tel. (712) 792-1212; FAX (712) 792-5785
Cass SWCD
503 W. 7th St., Ste. 1, Atlantic, IA 50022; Tel. (712) 243-3180; FAX (712) 243-1688
Cedar SWCD
205 W. South, Ste. 2, Tipton, IA 52772-1658; Tel. (563) 886-6214; FAX (563) 886-2254
Cerro Gordo SWCD
1415 S. Monroe, Suite B, Mason City, IA 50401; Tel. (641) 424-4452; FAX (641) 423-8779
Cherokee SWCD
314 Lake St., Cherokee, IA 51012; Tel. (712) 225-3769; FAX (712) 225-6090
Chickasaw SWCD
420 W. Milwaukee St., New Hampton, IA 50659-1104; Tel. (641) 394-2513; FAX (641) 394-3906
Clarke SWCD
709 Furnas Dr., Suite 3, Box 425, Osceola, IA 50213-0425; Tel. (641) 342-2917; FAX (641) 342-2278
Clay SWCD
306 - 11th St., SW Plaza, Spencer, IA 51301; Tel. (712) 262-3432; FAX (712) 262-7127
Clayton SWCD
500 Gunder Rd. NE, Box 547, Elkader, IA 52043-0547; Tel. (563) 245-1048; FAX (563) 245-2634
Clinton SWCD
1212 - 17th Ave., De Witt, IA 52742-1083; Tel. (563) 659-3456; FAX (563) 659-2288
Crawford SWCD
3707 Timberline Dr., Ste. 1, Denison, IA 51442; Tel. (712) 263-4123; FAX (712) 263-5918
Dallas SWCD
1918 Greene, Suite 2, Adel, IA 50003; Tel. (515) 993-3413; FAX (515) 993-4713
Davis SWCD
106 N. Dodge St., Ste. 3, Bloomfield, IA 52537-1463; Tel. (641) 664-2600; FAX (641) 664-3425
Decatur SWCD
303 SW Lorraine St., Box 27, Leon, IA 50144; Tel. (641) 446-4135; FAX (641) 446-3360
Delaware SWCD
200 S. 12th St., Manchester, IA 52057; Tel. (563) 927-4590; FAX (563) 927-4535
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-9
Des Moines SWCD
3625 Flint Ridge Drive, Burlington, IA 52601-9403; Tel. (319) 753-6221; FAX (319) 752-7397
Dickinson SWCD
2412 - 17th St., Spirit Lake, IA 51360; Tel. (712) 336-3782; FAX (712) 336-4278
Dubuque SWCD
210 Bierman, Epworth, IA 52045-9529; Tel. (563) 876-3418; FAX (563) 876-3653
Emmet SWCD
2109 Murray Rd., Estherville, IA 51334; Tel. (712) 362-2883; FAX (712) 362-7243
Fayette SWCD
120 N. Industrial Parkway #2, West Union, IA 52175-1612; Tel. (563) 422-3868; FAX (563) 422-3961
Floyd SWCD
623 Beck St., Charles City, IA 50616 ; Tel. (641) 228-2725; FAX (641) 228-7378
Franklin SWCD
1019 - 4th St. SE, Hampton, IA 50441; Tel. (641) 456-2157; FAX (641) 456-3762
Fremont SWCD
301 Main St., Box 490, Sidney, IA 51652; Tel. (712) 374-2014; FAX (712) 374-2563
Greene SWCD
1703 N. Elm, Ste. 2, Jefferson, IA 50129; Tel. (515) 386-3817; FAX (515) 386-4328
Grundy SWCD
805 W. 4th St., Ste. 2, Grundy Center, IA 50638-1069; Tel. (319) 824-3634; FAX (319) 824-6333
Guthrie SWCD
1000 School St., Guthrie Center, IA 50115; Tel. (641) 332-2812; FAX (641) 332-2644
Hamilton SWCD
1921 Superior St., Webster City, IA 50595; Tel. (515) 832-2916; FAX (515) 832-1113
Hancock SWCD
255 US Hwy. 69, Ste. 1, Garner, IA 50438; Tel. (641) 923-2837; FAX (641) 923-3660
Hardin SWCD
840 Brooks Rd., Iowa Falls, IA 50126-8008; Tel. (641) 648-3463; FAX (641) 648-9227
Harrison SWCD
2710 Hwy. 127, Logan, IA 51546-0202; Tel. (712) 644-2210; FAX (712) 644-3247
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-10
Henry SWCD
2205 E. Washington St. Ste. 101, Mt. Pleasant, IA 52641; Tel. (319) 385-2824; FAX (319) 385-0173
Howard SWCD
311 - 7th St. SW, Ste. 2, Cresco, IA 52136-1865; Tel. (563) 547-3040; FAX (563) 547-3701
Humboldt SWCD
1301 - 6th Ave., Ste. #2, Humboldt, IA 50548; Tel. (515) 332-3337; FAX (515) 332-3961
Ida SWCD
5973 State Hwy. 175, Box 210, Ida Grove, IA 51445; Tel. (712) 364-2124; FAX (712) 364-4173
Iowa SWCD
435 N. Highland, Williamsburg, IA 52361; Tel. (319) 668-2359; FAX (319) 668-9004
Jackson SWCD
603 1/2 E. Platt, Maquoketa, IA 52060; Tel. (563) 652-2337; FAX (563) 652-4889
Jasper SWCD
709 - 1st Ave. W., Newton, IA 50208; Tel. (641) 792-4116; FAX (641) 792-8252
Jefferson SWCD
605 S. 23rd St., Fairfield, IA 52556-4212; Tel. (641) 472-4356; FAX (641) 469-6264
Johnson SWCD
51 Escort Ln., Iowa City, IA 52240; Tel. (319) 337-2322; FAX (319) 358-9521
Jones SWCD
300 Chamber Dr., Anamosa, IA 52205; Tel. (319) 462-3196; FAX (319) 462-3099
Keokuk SWCD
607 E. Jackson, Sigourney, IA 52591; Tel. (641) 622-3380; FAX (641) 622-2040
Kossuth SWCD
605 E. State St., Ste. 2, Algona, IA 50511-2839; Tel. (515) 295-5156; FAX (515) 295-9059
Lee SWCD
507 Elm St., Box 57, Donnellson, IA 52625; Tel. (319) 835-5313; FAX (319) 835-5310
Linn SWCD
3025 - 7th Ave., Marion, IA 52302; Tel. (319) 377-5960; FAX (319) 377-3117
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-11
Louisa SWCD
514 Isett St., Wapello, IA 52653; Tel. (319) 523-6411; FAX (319) 523-3605
Lucas SWCD
21792 - 490th St., Chariton, IA 50049-8529; Tel. (641) 774-2512; FAX (641) 774-2700
Lyon SWCD
710 N. 2nd Ave. E, Ste. 102, Rock Rapids, IA 51246-0326; Tel. (712) 472-4021; FAX (712) 472-3270
Madison SWCD
815 E. Hwy 92, Box 267, Winterset, IA 50273-0267; Tel. (515) 462-2961; FAX (515) 462-4569
Mahaska SWCD
2503 Todd St., Box 85, Oskaloosa, IA 52577-0085; Tel. (641) 673-3476; FAX (641) 673-9305
Marion SWCD
1445 Lake Dr., Ste. 1, Box 47, Knoxville, IA 50138-0047; Tel. (641) 842-5314; FAX (641) 842-2219
Marshall SWCD
2608 S. 2nd St., Ste. B, Marshalltown, IA 50158-4548; Tel. (641) 753-8677; FAX (641) 753-7946
Mills SWCD
204 W. 5th St., Box 190, Malvern, IA 51551; Tel. (712) 624-8606; FAX (712) 624-8587
Mitchell SWCD
1529 Main St., Osage, I1A 50461-1824; Tel. (641) 732-5504; FAX (641) 732-5518
Monona SWCD
2631 Iowa Ave., Onawa, IA 51040; Tel. (712) 423-2624; FAX (712) 423-3385
Monroe SWCD
1701 S. B Street, Ste. 100, Albia, IA 52531; Tel. (641) 932-5144; FAX (641) 932-2746
Montgomery SWCD
2505 N. Broadway, Ste. 2, Red Oak, IA 51566-1077; Tel. (712) 623-9680; FAX (712) 623-4318
Muscatine SWCD
109 Lake Park Blvd., Muscatine, IA 52761; Tel. (563) 263-7944; FAX (563) 263-9048
O’Brien SWCD
315 S. Rerick Ave., Primghar, IA 51245; Tel. (712) 757-4855; FAX (712) 757-8500
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-12
Osceola SWCD
1672 Hwy. 60 Blvd., Box 155, Sibley, IA 51249-0155; Tel. (712) 754-2111; FAX (712) 754-3995
Page SWCD
1003 S. 8th St., Clarinda, IA 51632-2800; Tel. (712) 542-5484; FAX (712) 542-3612
Palo Alto SWCD
3302 Main, Emmetsburg, IA 50536; Tel. (712) 852-3386; FAX (712) 852-4906
Plymouth SWCD
1100A - 12th St. SW, LeMars, IA 51031; Tel. (712) 546-8858; FAX (712) 546-5187
Pocahontas SWCD
600 W. Elm St., Pocahontas, IA 50574-1858; Tel. (712) 335-4790; FAX (712) 335-3125
Polk SWCD
1513 N. Ankeny Blvd., Suite 3, Ankeny, IA 50021; Tel. (515) 964-1883; FAX (515) 964-8613
East Pottawattamie SWCD
321 Oakland Ave., Box 429, Oakland, IA 51560; Tel. (712) 482-6408; FAX (712) 482-3561
West Pottawattamie SWCD
305 McKenzie Ave., Suite 1, Council Bluffs, IA 51503; Tel. (712) 328-2489; FAX (712) 322-2987
Poweshiek SWCD
I80 & Hwy. 63 N., Box 216, Malcom, IA 50157; Tel. (641) 528-2065; FAX (641) 528-2602
Ringgold SWCD
1201 E. South, Box 592, Mount Ayr, IA 50854; Tel. (641) 464-2201; FAX (641) 464-3630
Sac SWCD
404 Morningside Drive, Box 276, Sac City, IA 50583; Tel. (712) 662-7773; FAX (712) 662-4205
Scott SWCD
8370 Hillandale Rd., Davenport, IA 52806; Tel. (563) 391-1403; FAX (563) 388-0682
Shelby SWCD
2519 Southwest Ave., Harlan, IA 51537-2331; Tel. (712) 755-2417; FAX (712) 755-2381
Sioux SWCD
716 - 8th St. SE, Orange City, IA 51041-9673; Tel. (712) 737-2253; FAX (712) 737-4654
Story SWCD
510 - 11th St. S., Nevada, IA 50201; Tel. (515) 382-2217; FAX (515) 382-5708
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-13
Tama SWCD
203 W. High St., Toledo, IA 52342; Tel. (641) 484-2702; FAX (641) 484-5289
Taylor SWCD
1506 Oak St., Bedford, IA 50833-9100; Tel. (712) 523-3631; FAX (712) 523-3591
Union SWCD
904 E. Taylor, Box 326, Creston, IA 50801-2302; Tel. (641) 782-4218; FAX (641) 782-5957
Van Buren SWCD
1016 Franklin St. - East Wing, Keosauqua, IA 52565; Tel. (319) 293-3523; FAX (319) 293-3192
Wapello SWCD
2938 Oak Meadow Dr., Ste. 2, Ottumwa, IA 52501-1952; Tel. (641) 682-0752; FAX (641) 684-2237
Warren SWCD
909 E. 2nd Ave., Ste. B, Indianola, IA 50125-2812; Tel. (515) 961-5264; FAX (515) 961-5738
Washington SWCD
1621 E. Washington St., Washington, IA 52353; Tel. (319) 653-6654; FAX (319) 653-2700
Wayne SWCD
300 S. Lafayette St., Corydon, IA 50060; Tel. (641) 872-1350; FAX (641) 872-1631
Webster SWCD
1200 1/2 - 3rd Ave. NW, Fort Dodge, IA 50501; Tel. (515) 573-4411; FAX (515) 573-5539
Winnebago SWCD
163 First Ave., Box 85, Thompson, IA 50478; Tel. (641) 584-2211; FAX (641) 584-2215
Winneshiek SWCD
2296 Oil Well Rd., Box 228, Decorah, IA 52101; Tel. (563) 382-4352; FAX (563) 382-6382
Woodbury SWCD
206 First St., PO Box 725, Sergeant Bluff, IA 51054-0725; Tel. (712) 943-6727; FAX (712) 943-6729
Worth SWCD
1004 - 10th St. S, Ste. B, Northwood, IA 50459-1600; Tel. (641) 324-1819; FAX (641) 324-3140
Wright SWCD
121 First Ave. NE, Clarion, IA 50525; Tel. (515) 532-2165; FAX (515) 532-3506
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-14
502 E. 9th Street, Wallace State Office Building
Des Moines, IA 50319-0034
Phone: (515) 281-IDNR (5918)
http://www.iowadnr.com
Mission/Goals: The department’s mission is to manage, protect, conserve, and develop Iowa’s
natural resources in cooperation with other public and private organizations and individuals, so
that the quality of life for Iowans is significantly enhanced by the use, enjoyment and understanding of those resources.
Major Programs:
The mission of the Department of Natural Resources involves broad and interwoven programs,
many of which overlap with the responsibilities of federal and other state agencies, local
governments and the private sector. Building and maintaining effective partnerships and
coalitions are essential in achieving the appropriate levels of commitment and support to
manage, protect, conserve, develop, and understand Iowa’s natural resources.
Facility maintenance of existing park and recreation facilties; open spaces acquisition and
development; environmental/conservation ethic, energy efficiency and alternative energy
resources, waste management, water quality, environmental program funding.
On the following pages you will find a list of programs administered by the Iowa Department
of Natural Resources.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-15
Abandoned Sites
Abandoned Wells
Administrative Orders/Administrative Procedures Act/
Administrative Rules
Agricultural Drainage Wells
Agricultural Energy Efficiency
Air Emission Assistance
Air Quality Operating Permits and Title V
All-Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) Programs and Trail Grants
Alternative Transportation Fuels
Animal Feeding Operations/Animal Waste
Aquatic Education
Aquaculture Unit License
Aquifers
Asbestos
Auto Emissions/Fuel Economy
Awards (Big Deer, Big Fish, Energy Awards, Governor’s
Waste Reduction Awards)
Bait Dealers License
Banding or Marking (Birds of other animals)
Barge Fleeting
Batteries
Big Creek Shooting Range
Big Creek Demonstration Project
Big Tree Program
Biomass
Biosolids
Boating (Laws, General Information, Resistration, Access)
Boating Education
Bottle Bill, Deposit Brochures
Building Energy Management Programs (BEMP)
By-product and Waste Search Service (BAWSS)
Cabins/Camping
Capitol Complex Recycling
Center for Global and Regional Environmental Research
Center for Health Effects of Environmental Contamination
(CHEEC)
Chemical Spills
Chickadee Checkoff
Chlorinated Fluorocarbons (CFCs)
Clean Lakes Program (in conjunction with EPA)
Commercial Fishing Composting
Conservation Education
Conservationist Construction Project Information
Deer Hunting
Des Moines Recreational River and Greenbelt Committee
Dock Management Areas
Dredging Duck Fee
Earth Day
Earth Resources Observation System (EROS)
Earthquakes
Emergency Response
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Employment: EPD
Encroachments
Endangered Species
Energy Data and Statistics
Energy Efficient Lighting
Energy Emergency Planning
Energy Fund Disbursement Council
Energy Planning
Engineering Qualifications for Energy Programs
Environmental Education
Environmental Management Program (EMP)
Environmental Protection Commission (EPC)
Falconry
Feedlots
Field Trials
Fire Prevention and Protection
Firewood from Public Lands
Fish Hatcheries
Fish Iowa
Fish Management
Fish Research Stations
Fishing
Fishing Clinics/News
Fishing License
Flood Insurance
Flood Plain Development and Management
Forest and Fruit Tree Reservation
Foresters/Forests
Forestry Aid to Private Landowners
Fossils
401 Water Quality Certification
Fur Dealers License
Game Breeders License
Geographic Information System (GIS)
Ginseng
Global Climate Change
Grants
Groundwater Hazard Statement
Groundwater Vulnerability
Habitat Stamp
Handicapped Accessibility
Handicapped Permits
Hazardous Waste
Health Issues (Dept. of Public Health)
Hide Holding
Highway Plantings
Household Hazardous Materials (HHM)
Hunter Education Program
Hunting Areas
Hunting License
Hunting Seasons
Hydrology
Revised May 2006
7-16
Industrial Minerals
Industrial Pretreatment Permit
Inert Ingredients
Infectious Waste
Institutional Conservation Program
Iowa Energy Bureau
Iowa Global Warming Center
Iowa Hospital Energy Bank Program
Iowa Local Government Energy Bank Program
Iowa Private College Energy Bank Program
Iowa School Energy Bank Program
Iowa Waste Reduction Center (IWRC)
Laboratory Certification (EPD)
Land Acquisition
Land Applied Biosolids (sludge)
Land and Water Conservation Fund Grants (LAWCON)
Landfill Alternatives Financial Assistance
Lead Paint Removal
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Legislative Liaison
Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture
Licenses
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Management Agreements
Marine Fuel Tax Fund Grants and Projects
Meandered Streams
Medical Waste
Milldams
Minerals
Mine Reclamation
Mississippi River Topics
Missouri River Basin Association
Municipal Sludge Land Application
Mussel License
Natural Areas Inventory
Natural Resource Commission (NRC)
Newsletters and News Releases (DNR/EPD)
Nongame Wildlife
Nonpermanent Structures
Nonpoint Source Water
Nonresident Fishing and Hunting Licenses
North American Waterfowl Management Plan
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Oil/Gas and Metallic Minerals Exploration
Oil Overcharge Funds
Open Burning
Operator Certification Parks and Recreation Areas
Park Lodges (Enclosed)
Permits
Pesticides
Pipelines
Prairie Pothole Joint Venture (PPJV)
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Preserves/Preserves Advisory Board
Private School Energy Bank Program
Private Water Well Program
Project WILD
Protected Water Areas Publications (DNR/EPD)
Public Land Management
Public Service Announcements
Radon
Radioactive Waste
Records
Recreational Trails
Recycle Iowa (WMAD)
Regional Collection Centers
Registration (Camping)
Remote Sensing
Renewable Resources
Reservations (Parks)
Resource Enhancement and Protection (REAP)
Roadside Vegetation
Rocks
Rules
Rural Community Fire Protection Program Grants
Sand and Gravel Removal
Sanitary Disposal Projects
Sanitary Landfills
Scientific Collector’s License
Septic Tanks
Sewage Treatment
Shelterbelt Program
Shooting Preserve
Slough Bill
Sludge
Snowmobile programs
Solid Waste
Sovereign Lands
Spills
Springbrook Conservation Education Center
State Energy Conservation Program
State Fair
State Revolving Fund (SRF)
State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP)
State Forests
State of Iowa Facilities Improvement Corporation (SIFIC)
Storm Water
Superfund
Surface Water Monitoring
Taxidermy License
Toxic Cleanup Days
Timber Buyer Bonding
Tires
Topographic Maps
Toxic Waste
Revised May 2006
7-17
Trails
Transportation Efficiency
Trapping
Trout Fee
Turn in Poachers (TIP)
Uncontrolled Sites
University Hygienic Laboratory
Underground Storage Tanks (UST)
Unit-Based Pricing Programs
Urban Forestry
Used Oil
Video Assistance
Waste Management
Waste Reduction Assistance Program (WRAP)
Wastewater
Water Allocation and use
Water Quality Monitoring and Standards
Water Supply
Water Testing
Water Treatment Plant Operator Certification
Water Wells
Waterfowl Stamp
Weatherization
Well Closures and Grants
Well Drilling
Well Permits
Wetlands
White Goods
Wildlife
Wind Energy
Yard Waste
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-18
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Fisheries Program
Marion Conover, Bureau Chief
Wallace Building - 502 E 9th St.
Des Moines, IA 50319-0034
Phone: (515) 281-5208; Fax: (515) 281-6794
http://www.iowadnr.com/fish
Mission/Goals: Protect and enhance fish environments, habitats, populations and other forms
of aquatic life for the benefit, welfare and enjoyment of the citizens of this state and its visitors.
Major Programs:
• Management—Fifteen management teams conduct lake and stream surveys, angler surveys
and fish kill investigations. Other work includes fisheries renovation and population
manipulation projects, habitat improvement projects, permit reviews, and watershed issues.
• Research—Six research teams help solve fisheries problems identified by resource managers
and the public. Findings help to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of fisheries
management efforts.
• Fish Culture—One hundred thirty million fish are reared and stocked each year from Iowa’s
eight fish hatcheries to restore native populations and improve fishing opportunities.
• Aquatic Education—The thrust of this program is providing teacher training in aquatic
education dealing with resource stewardship and fishing skill issues.
• Aquatic Nuisance Species—Annually this team monitors waters of the state for aquatic
nuisance species (ANS) and takes steps to eradicate populations or limit the spread.
• Lake and Stream Restoration—The bureau works with intra and inter-agency groups, academia
and public to diagnose problems and develop and implement measures for water quality
improvement.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-19
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Iowa Geological Survey
109 Trowbridge Hall, Iowa City, IA 52242-1319
Phone: (319) 335-1575; Fax: (319) 335-2754
Email: Jim.Giglierano@dnr.state.ia.us
http://www.igsb.uiowa.edu
Mission/Goals: The Iowa Geological Survey plans and implements programs that result in the
acquisition of comprehensive information on the geologic mineral and water resources of the
State of Iowa, with emphasis on water supply developments and monitoring the effects of
environmental impacts on water quality.
Major Programs: Cooperative agreements are developed with federal and other state agencies
to collect geologic and hydrologic data in order to maximize the benefits derived from
resource assessments and to expand educational and technology transfer programs. Natural
resources information is thoroughly analyzed, interpreted and made available to users through
publications, consultant services, and the library of databases that comprise the Department’s
Natural Resources Geographic Information System.
If you have an interest in Iowa’s geology, if you are a teacher looking for earth-science
information for your class, if you are a researcher looking for detailed stratigraphic
information on Iowa, if you want to know if that is a geode you found in your back yard, if
you’re planning to visit Devonian Fossil Gorge and want to learn more about it, you can find
information on these topics and others on the Internet through the Iowa Geological Survey
(IGS) World Wide Web site at www.igsb.uiowa.edu.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-20
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Iowa Geological and Land Quality Survey:
Water Monitoring Section
109 Trowbridge Hall, Iowa City, IA 52242-1319
Phone: (515) 335-1575; Fax: (319) 335-2754
Email: mskopec@igsb.uiowa.ed
The Water Monitoring Section of the Iowa Department of Natural Resources-Geological
Survey Bureau is responsible for the design, implementation and management of Iowa’s
Ambient Water Monitoring Program. The purpose of the program is to develop and deliver
consistent, unbiased information about the condition of Iowa’s surface and groundwater
resources so that decisions regarding the development, management and protection of these
resources may be improved. Since 1999, Governor Vilsack and the Iowa Legislature have shown
tremendous support, and have appropriated $2.5 million for the program in the 2002 fiscal year.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-21
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
IOWATER
Brian Soenen, Coordinator
Wallace State Office Building
502 E. 9th St., Des Moines, IA 50319
Phone: (515) 281-6640; Fax: (515) 281-8895
brian.soener@dnr.state.ia.us
http://www.iowater.net
Mission/Goals: To protect and improve Iowa’s water quality by establishing and supporting a
statewide volunteer water monitoring program; to expand citizen volunteer water monitoring in
Iowa; to provide a balanced approach for citizens to become involved in protecting and
improving water resources; to develop opportunities for citizens to experience and discover the
influence of watersheds on water quality; to develop a user-friendly process for data collection
and interpretation to increase accurate information on the state’s water resources.
Major Programs:
• Establish training programs around the state that will improve the quality and quantity of
•
•
•
•
•
•
water data collected by providing citizens standard methods of data collection among
volunteers.
Support existing volunteer water monitoring efforts; establish outreach programs to increase
citizen awareness of and responsibility for local water resources.
Provide information for citizen groups to use in actively promoting responsible decision
making in protecting local water quality.
Assist new partnerships and alliances throughout Iowa in designing and implementing water
monitoring projects.
Facilitate communication among volunteer groups, local landowners, and government
agencies, to promote sharing of data and resources.
Develop a statewide volunteer database, available to all, for the collection of baseline water
quality information and establishing long-term water quality trends.
Integrate IOWATER into conservation education programs in Iowa.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-22
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Keepers of the Land
Phone: 515-281-0878
Merry Rankin, Coordinator
Wallace State Office Building
502 E. 9th Street
Des Moines, IA 50319
Fax: 515-281-6794
Mission/Goals: The purpose of the DNR Keepers of the Land program is to provide support for
successful natural resource related volunteer programs, and to develop new opportunities for
volunteers.
Major Programs: Adopt-a-Stream, Adopt-a-Park, Hunter and Recreation Vehicle Safety,
IOWATER Citizen Water Quality Monitoring, Trees for Kids/Teens, Springbrook Outdoor Skills
Programs, Campground Hosts, State Parks Friends Groups, Fish Iowa, and many more!
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-23
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Resources Enhancement and Protection Program
Order a REAP brochure: (515) 281-5918
Ross Harrison, Coordinator
Wallace State Office Building
502 E. 9th Street
Des Moines, IA 50319
Telephone: 515-281-5973
Fax: 515-281-6795
How to buy . . .
Iowa’s most beautiful license plate, the REAP plate, can be purchased several ways. The most direct route
is to take your existing plates and vehicle registration to your county treasurer’s office and tell them you
want to buy the REAP plate, or the natural resources plate (same plate). The regular REAP plate, right off
the stack and not personalized will cost an additional $35, then $10 a year to renew, on your registration
renewal date.
If you want a personalized REAP plate, you first must fill out an application form, available at any DOT
motor vehicle division office and at most county treasurers. It may take several weeks for DOT approval of
your personalization. It is limited to 5 characters.
The personalized plate is $80 for the initial purchase, then $15 a year thereafter for renewal.
You can buy a gift certificate for the $35 or the $80 plate at your county treasurer’s office. The gift receiver
will have to follow through with the treasure’s office by bringing in their old plates and registration.
You may be able to buy the regular REAP plate by mail, if your county treasurer agrees to do it that way.
Call your treasurer’s office to see if this is available in your county.
Why to buy.....
100% of the price you pay ($35) for the regular REAP plate, and 100% of the $10 renewal fee is deposited
directly into the REAP fund. $35 of the $80 cost of the personalized plate, and $10 of the $15 renewal for
the personalized plate goes into the REAP fund.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-24
REAP is Iowa’s most famous conservation funding program — the Resources Enhancement And Protection
program. It became law in 1989. In 1990 REAP received the nation’s highest award for the best state
conservation program in the nation. Here’s how it works.
Since REAP began, nearly $100 million have been devoted to it by the Iowa Legislature and Governor.
REAP divides that money into several programs based on a formula:
$350,000 Conservation Education
1% DNR for administration of REAP
9% DNR for land management (parks, mostly)
28% DNR for land acquisition and development (open spaces)
20% County conservation boards
20% Soil and water enhancement
15% City parks and open spaces
5% Historical resources
3% Roadside vegetation
For the past several years, REAP has been funded at around $10 million a year. About $1 million of that
comes from the sale of REAP license plates. The rest is from General Fund appropriations and interest on
the balance the REAP funds in the Treasury.
For more information on REAP and what it has done in your local area, check with your county
conservation board and your city park and recreation department. The REAP “Grants to Counties”
program provides funds for well water testing. Check with your county sanitarian for details. You can also
call the DNR to order a REAP brochure by calling 515-281-5918.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-25
Water Protection Projects
The State of Iowa receives funds from the Resource Enhancement and Protection Account (REAP) to carry
out soil and water enhancement programs including reforestation, woodland protection and enhancement,
wildlife habitat preservation and enhancement, protection of highly erodible soils, and clean water programs.
The Soil and Water Enhancement Account receives 20 percent of the REAP appropriation. Soil and Water
Conservation Districts (SWCDs) are the only eligible applicants for the Soil and Water Enhancement
Project Funds. The districts make application to the State Soil Conservation Committee and the DSC. The
DSC works closely with DNR and other state and federal resource agencies in selecting the projects to be
funded. Fifty percent of the annual allocation to the Soil and Water Enhancement Account up to a maximum
of $1 million is directed to water quality protection projects.
In 1989, prior to REAP, the DSC funded eight water quality projects out of 38 applications through the oil
overcharge account. These project costs totaled $481,298. Since 1990, funding for Water Protection
Projects has been provided through the REAP Program. For state fiscal years 1990-1993, $2.58 million in
funding for water protection projects has been provided through the REAP Program. For SFY 1994, REAP
funding provided $944,000 for 20 water protection projects, and for SFY 1995 REAP provided $685,000
for 23 projects. The projects are designated to protect both surface and groundwater. Rules for
administering the water protection fund projects are found in the administrative rules of the State of Iowa.
The balance of the Soil and Water Enhancement Account allocation is directed to water protection
practices. The water protection practice allotment is then further divided for forestry and native vegetation
practices (25 percent) and land treatment practices (75 percent).
Rules for administering the Water Protection Practices Program were adopted by DSC in early 1990.
Major provisions of the approved rules include the following:
1. Districts must designate the high priority watersheds or water quality problems that funding
will be used for and the State Conservation Committee must approve the districts priority
designations.
2. Some practices which have had little or no support in previous cost-share programs will
be encouraged. Cost-share at the 75 percent level will be available for critical area planting,
grass strips, field borders, filter strips, and pasture and hayland planting.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-26
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Water Quality Bureau
Chuck Corell, Bureau Chief
Wallace State Office Building; 502 E. 9th Street
Des Moines, IA 50319
Phone: (515) 281-4582; Fax 515-281-6794
chuck.corell@dnr.state.ia.us
http://www.iowadnr.com
Mission/Goals: The Water Quality Bureau is responsible for a diverse group of surface and
groundwater programs. Many of the following programs are based upon federal law administered by the US EPA. In these cases the federal government has delegated program responsibility to the DNR. In each case, permits and review of technical proposals are supplemented by
assistance from staff to help local governments, businesses and individuals meet the requirements of state and federal law.
Major Programs:
Water Supply Section
· Water Supply Staff Roster
· Water Supply Program Links
· Drinking Water Annual Compliance Reports
· Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Program
Wastewater Section
· Wastewater Staff Roster
· Wastewater Program Links
· Wastewater Design Standards
· Storm Water Program
· Pretreatment Program
· Animal Feeding Operations
· Onsite Wastewater Treatment (Septic)
Water Resources Section
· Water Resources Staff Roster
· TMDLs/Iowa’s Impaired Waters
· 2000 Water Quality in Iowa (305(b) Report)
· Nonpoint Source Information
Water Monitoring Data (Iowa STORET)
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-27
College of Agriculture
138 Curtiss Hall
Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-1050
Phone: (515) 294-2518; Fax: (515) 294-6800
http://www.ag.iastate.edu
Dean Wendy K. Wintersteen
MISSION
The college of Agriculture’s
mission is to:
•
•
•
discover and share science-based
knowledge for the development of
socially beneficial, economically
successful and environmentally
sound systems for food and other
renewable resources
engage communities for enhancing
the quality of life
and prepare students to become
future leaders in agriculture and
society
FOR
Students
Alumni
Ag Professionals
Employers
Faculty/Staff
News Media
Ag Web Surfers
ABOUT
The College
Academic Departments
Research Programs
Extension & Outreach
Centers & Institutes
Diversity
Global Ag Programs
VISION
The College of Agriculture will enrich
the lives of people in Iowa, the nation
and the world thorugh excellence in
education, scholarship, service and
leadership in food, agricutlural, environmental and social sciences.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-28
Agriculture and Natural Resources Extension
132 Curtiss Hall
Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-1050
Phone: (515) 294-4333; Fax: (515) 294-5745
http://www.extension.iastate.edu/ag/
Gerald Miller, Director
soil@iastate.edu
Paul Brown, Assistant Director
109 Curtiss Hall
Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-1050
Phone: (515) 294-7801; Fax: (515) 294-5099
pwbrown@iastate.edu
Topics
Ag Energy - Risk Management, Energy and Grain Issues
Agricultural and Homeland Security
Animal Agriculture and Air Quality
Animal Waste Management
Aquaculture
Crops and Soils
Services and Information
Farm Business Management
Farm Safety
Flood Cleanup Information
Food Safety
Forestry
Grants and Contracts
Iowa Nature Mapping
Lawn & Garden and Horticulture
Livestock
Newsletters
Orchard/Vineyard GIS/IMS Map
Value-Added Agriculture
Water Quality and Watersheds
Wildlife Extension
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-29
Community and Economic Development Extension
126 College of Design
Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-3091
Phone: (515) 294-8397; Fax: (515) 294-5156
http://www.extension.iastate.edu/communities/
Tim Borich, Director
borich@iastate.edu
Mission
Iowa State University Extension to Communities helps
organizations and local governments develop and build their
capacity to make Iowa communities better places to live and
work.
Vision
To assist the people of Iowa to search for understanding and
answers that will lead to productive, healthy, and sustainable communities.
Values
• We value our opportunities to educate and inform, to question and facilitate; it is not our
role to dictate answers and strategies to the client.
• We value ongoing relationships with clients to help them see their way to success.
• We value cooperation with others as we carry out our unique educational role in the
community. development process.
Programs and Resources
• Leadership and Training Institutes
• Programs for Communities
• Community Data
• Tools for Developing Communities
• Publications
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-30
ISU Extension Distribution Center
119 Printing and Publications Bldg.
Ames, IA 50011
Phone: 515-294-5247
Fax: 515-294-2945
E-mail: pubdist@iastate.edu
Water Resources and Water Quality Publications
http://www.extension.iastate.edu/store/ListItems.aspx?CategoryID=100
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-31
Extension Sociology
www.soc.iastate.edu/extension.html
&
hip al
ers on t
ad ati
Le aniz pmen
g
Or velo
De
Agriculture
in
Transition
B
Na uildi
tur ng
Co al R Food
mm eso
&
un urc
itie es
s
Community
Vitality
Tracking
the Pulse
of Iowa
Communities
in
Transition
Partnerships in
Community
Building
Building the relationships of social life
Extension sociology engages the people and communities of Iowa by applying science and
scholarship to the issues of public concern and daily life. Our core research, extension, and
outreach programs focus on:
Ć
Ć
Ć
Ć
OHDGHUVKLSDQGRUJDQL]DWLRQDOGHYHORSPHQW
EXLOGLQJIRRGDQGQDWXUDOUHVRXUFHFRPPXQLWLHV
SDUWQHUVKLSVLQFRPPXQLW\EXLOGLQJDQG
WUDFNLQJWKHSXOVHRI,RZD
Extension sociology is aligned with ISU Extension to Communities and ISU Extension to
Agriculture and Natural Resources.
Visit http://www.soc.iastate.edu/extension/publications.html for the following publications:
Ć Renewing Local Watersheds
Ć Resident-led Watershed Management
Ć 3HUIRUPDQFHEDVHG(QYLURQPHQWDO0DQDJHPHQW
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-32
Regional Water Coordination Initiative
http://www.heartlandwq.iastate.edu
Project Leadership
IOWA
Gerald Miller
132 Curtiss Hall
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011-1050
515-294-4333
FAX 515-294-5745
soil@iastate.edu
REGIONAL LIAISON
Susan Brown
132 Curtiss Hall
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011-1050
515-294-4333
ssbrown@iastate.edu
Program Assistant:
Linda Schultz
lschultz@iastate.edu
KANSAS
John Lawrence
468F Heady Hall
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011-1070
515-294-6290
FAX 515-294-1700
jdlaw@iastate.edu
Daniel Devlin
2014 Throckmorton Plant Sciences Center
Kansas State University
Manhattan, KS 66506-5501
785-532-5776
FAX 785-532-6315
ddevlin@oznet.ksu.edu
Lois Wright Morton
317C East Hall
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011-1050
515 294-2843
lwmorton@iastate.edu
Charles Barden
2021 Throckmorton-HFRR
Kansas State University
Forestry Division
Manhattan, KS 66506-5507
785-532-1444
FAX 785-532-5780
cbarden@oznet.ksu.edu
Program Assistant:
Joe Lally
465 Heady Hall
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011-1070
515-294-1496
lally@iastate.edu
Amanda Schielke
2014 Throckmorton Plant Sciences Center
Kansas State University
Manhattan, KS 66506-5501
785-532-0124
FAX 785-532-6315
aschielk@oznet.ksu.edu
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-33
MISSOURI
Bob Broz
205 Agricultural Engineering Building
Columbia, MO 65211
573-882-0085
FAX 573-884-5650
brozR@missouri.edu
Sandra Hodge
230 Gentry Hall
University of Missouri
Columbia, MO 65211
573 882-4435
573 882-5127
hodges@missouri.edu
John Tharp
205 Ag Engineering
Columbia, MO 65211
Phone: (573) 882-0085
Fax: (573) 884-5650
TharpJ@Missouri.edu
NEBRASKA
Richard Koelsch
218 L.W. Chase Hall
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Lincoln, NE 68583-0726
402-472-4051
FAX 402-472-6338
rkoelsch1@unl.edu
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Charles S. Wortmann
279 Plant Science
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
PO Box 830915
Lincoln, NE 68583-0915
402-472-2909
FAX 402-472-7904
cwortmann2@unl.edu
Jamie Benning
465 Heady Hall
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011-1070
515-294-1496
jboehm2@unl.edu
EPA REGION 7
Damon Frizzell
EPA Region 7
WWPD/GPCB
901 N. 5th Street
Kansas City, Kansas 66101
913-551-7560
FAX 913-551-8723
frizzell.damon@epa.gov
Revised May 2006
7-34
Jason P. O’Brien, NatureMapping Coordinator
Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management
339 Science II
Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011-3221
Phone: (515) 294-6440; FAX: (515) 294-2995
jpobrien@iastate.edu
http://www.extension.iastate.edu/naturemapping
Dr. James L. Pease, Extension Wildlife Specialist
Phone: 515-294-7429
jlpease@iastate.edu
NatureMapping is an Iowa State University Extension Wildlife Program that trains people just
like you how to monitor and report the wildlife they observe and the habitats they observe them
in. This can include wildlife at a backyard feeder, on a woodland or prairie hike, in a school yard,
or at your place of employment... anywhere you observe wildlife. The data you collect is
reported to us via this website so that it can be used and viewed by you or anyone else that has
an interest in Iowa’s wildlife and habitats.
Why NatureMapping? People observe wildlife everyday.
•
•
•
•
Individuals
Schools
Community organizations
Businesses
NatureMapping allows humans to learn more about fellow living beings with whom we share
this Earth. It helps us find out “who’s out there” and where they live. NatureMapping is a perfect
way to use your appreciation of nature and contribute much needed information about Iowa’s
common wildlife species.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-35
www.leopold.iastate.edu
Iowa State University, 209 Curtiss Hall
Ames IA 50011-1050
leocenter@iastate.edu
LEOPOLD CENTER FOR
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE
MISSION AND VISION
The Leopold Center is a research and education center with statewide programs to develop sustainable agricultural
practices that are both profitable and conserve natural resources. It was established under the Groundwater
Protection Act of 1987 with a three-fold mission: (1) to conduct research into the negative impacts of agricultural
practices; (2) to assist in developing alternative practices; and (3) to work with ISU Extension to inform the public
of Leopold Center findings. The Center is administered through the Agriculture and Home Economics Experiment
Station at Iowa State University.
In 2002, a vision statement was adopted: The Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture explores and cultivates
alternatives that secure healthier people and landscapes in Iowa and the nation. Three focused research initiatives
have replaced the more general competitive grants research program. Each of the three research programs — marketing
and food systems, ecology and policy — will be responsible for its own projects and educational events.
ORGANIZATION
The Center has joint leadership from an interim director, Dr. Jerry DeWitt, and Dr. Frederick Kirschenmann, who
became the Center's Distinguished Fellow in November 2005. Staff members include an ecological systems research
program leader, a marketing and food systems research program leader, technical editor, communications specialist and a
secretary.
A 17-member advisory board, established in the 1987 legislation, advises the director on funding of research proposals, policies and procedures, budget development and program review. Members represent Iowa State University,
University of Iowa, University of Northern Iowa, private colleges and universities, Iowa Department of Agriculture
and Land Stewardship, and the Iowa Department of Natural Resources. In 1994, four ex-officio members active in
farming and agribusiness communities were added to the board. They received full voting privileges in 1999.
State fees on nitrogen fertilizer and pesticides provide an estimated $1,100,000 annually to support research,
education, and administration of Center programs. A state appropriation of approximately $450,000 supports many
of the Center’s competitive grants.
RESEARCH PROGRAMS
The Leopold Center has awarded more than 300 competitive grants totaling more than $10 million. Leopold Center
competitive grants are available to researchers and educators at all Iowa colleges and universities, and to investigators at private, nonprofit agencies and foundations in the state. These awards often act as seed money to initiate
work for which other larger sources of funding then become available.
The Center’s mission includes an educational component of informing the agricultural community and the general
public about its research findings. The Center collaborates with ISU Extension and other university, state, and local
organizations to communicate research findings. It also supports conferences, seminars, and special events related to
the three research initiatives.
LEOPOLD CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE, IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY, 209 CURTISS HALL, AMES, IOWA 50011-1050
WEBSITE: www.leopold.iastate.edu
E-MAIL: leocenter@iastate.edu
(515) 294-3711
Iowa State University does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, age, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, sex, marital status, disability, or status as a U.S. Vietnam Era
Veteran. Any persons having inquiries concerning this may contact the Director of Affirmative Action, 318 Beardshear Hall, (515) 294-7612.
November 2005
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-36
SKUNK RIVER NAVY
Jim Colbert
Department of Ecology, Evolution and Organismal Biol-Las
113 Bessey Hall
Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011-1020
Phone: (515) 294-9330
jtcolber@iastate.edu
http://www.biology.iastate.edu/SRN/SRN.html
The “Skunk River Navy” (SRN) was formed as a community service activity for a freshman
learning community at Iowa State University. The learning community is designed for students
interested in biology and is called “BEST” (Biology Education Success Teams).
The SRN activity was initiated by Jim (“Admiral”) Colbert, who is an Associate Professor in the
Department of Botany and an instructor in introductory biology courses at ISU.
Other people who have helped develop the SRN include: Steve Lekwa, Jerry Keyes, and Carol
Williams from Story County Conservation, Dr. John Obrycki (ISU Department of Entomology),
Kelly Arbuckle (Iowa Department of Transportation), Audra McBride (ISU Outdoor Recreation
Services), Whitney Buchman (the webguy), and Dr. Warren Dolphin, Jim Holtz, and Jennifer
Owens of the ISU Biology Program. We also thank Wal-Mart for their generous environmental
grant.
The goals of the SRN are the following:
* Improve the aesthetic quality of the Skunk River in Story County by removal of trash from
the river corridor.
* Monitor populations of native fresh water mussels as these organisms are thought to be
endangered and good indicators of water quality. In addition, the river will be monitored for
the presence of the invasive zebra mussel.
* Perform IOWATER water quality assessments, including monitoring populations of benthic
macroinvertebrates.
* Investigate low-input methods of stabilizing stream banks to reduce siltation of the river.
* Provide Iowa State students who are interested in biology with the opportunity to learn about
the biology of Iowa in a context that also allows the students to make a positive contribution
to their local community.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-37
Rick Cruse, Director
1240 NSRIC, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011
Phone: (515) 294-1880; Fax: (515) 294-9573
http://www.water.iastate.edu/
rmc@iastate.edu
Vision
To be the recognized leader in research, education, and information transfer programs on
issues related to Iowa’s water resources.
Mission
The mission of ISWRRI is to:
•
Develop statewide interinstitutional linkages in bringing together interdisciplinary
research teams between faculty and staff from universities and private and public sectors
on water quality and quantity research.
•
Promote research, information transfer, and graduate and undergraduate education on
water resources and water quality issues in Iowa.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-38
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Richard T. Engstrom P.E.
Water Management Center
Clock Tower Building
Rock Island, IL 61204
Phone: (309) 794-5408; Fax: (309) 794-5584
Richard.T.Engstrom@usace.army.mil
http://www.RiverGages.com
Primarily a civil works district administering federal water resource development programs in
large portions of Iowa. Maintain the capability to support the military construction program
when necessary.
Missions
• navigation
• environmental preservation
• flood control
• regulatory functions
• recreation
• federal real estate management
• mobilization for both federal disaster response and national defense and emergency
operations
At the Rock Island District we pledge to:
• Provide our services in times of emergencies.
• Plan, design, and construct water resource and infrastructure projects.
• Manage and conserve natural resources consistent with ecosystem management principles
while providing quality outdoor recreation experiences.
• Operate and maintain lands and facilities under our jurisdiction.
• Implement regulatory authorities that protect our Nation’s resources.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-39
Elaine Andrews
Environmental Resources Center
UW-Madison College of Agricultural & Life Sciences
Room 210 Hiram Smith Hall
1545 Observatory Drive
Madison, WI 53706-1289
Phone: 608-262-0020
Email: wateroutreach@uwex.edu
Project Background
The Water Outreach Education - Facilitating Access to Resources and Best Practices (BEP) Project is a collaborative
effort of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension
Service (CSREES) and other public and private clean and safe water partners to:
·
·
·
Identify Best Education Practices (BEPs).
Promote the use of BEPs for water-management education.
Improve access to education resources and strategies.
The project is conducted by staff of the University of Wisconsin, Environmental Resources Center (ERC), under the
guidance of a project advisory team of natural resource management, outreach, and education professionals from
across the country. Project funds were provided by the USDA/CSREES National Program Office for Water Quality.
Project Description
The Water Outreach Education project works in collaboration with the federal agency clean and safe water partnership
and other networks to develop and promote best education practices (BEPs) for water education and to improve
access to education resources and strategies. Our goal is to increase public understanding and involvement in
community decision-making about water issues through improved education practices and improved access to
education resources. Project activities reflect advice provided by federal agency clean and safe water partners and a
national network of water education organizations created and supported by the work of several national organizations over the last decade.
Project Activities
To help natural resource professionals choose appropriate educational techniques and resources, familiar sources
must provide access. But, sources must also provide evidence that education is valued. BEP Project activities involve:
1)
Building the Case for Value
·
Best Education Practices: Study of Provider Needs
·
Model Education Techniques
·
Synthesis of Significant Research: The BEP Decision Tree
·
Literature Search for Audience-Specific BEPs
2)
Organizing a System for Access: BEP Pilot Web Site Development.
·
Knowledge Management Theory and Application
·
BEP Pilot Web Site Content and Design
·
Symposium, June 2-4, 2004 - Best Education Practices for Water Outreach Professionals
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-40
210 Walnut Street, Room 693
Des Moines, IA 50309-2180
Phone: (515) 284-4769; Fax: (515) 284-4394
http://www.ia.nrcs.usda.gov
Mission/Goals:The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) works through county
soil and water conservation districts to protect and improve natural resources across the state.
Major Programs:
• Conservation Technical Assistance—NRCS staff provide technical assistance to landowners,
farmers, communities, groups and other agencies to help them protect and conserve the
states natural resources including soil, water and wildlife habitat. Iowa NRCS employs many
specialists—from soil scientists to wildlife biologists—to ensure the state’s landowners
have access to reliable and proven technical information. Technical assistance includes
natural resource inventories and assessments, and assistance in developing and implementing
conservation plans for private lands.
• Conservation Compliance
• CORE 4—Core 4 is a common-sense approach that targets improvements to farm
profitability while addressing environmental concerns
• Wetlands—The NRCS administers the Wetland Reserve Program aimed at returning wetland
areas that have been cropped to wetland conditions
• Water Quality
• Resource Conservation and Development—Iowa NRCS has 14 RC&D areas. Resource
Conservation and Development (RC&D) projects are helping communities across the state
improve their economic base through training, pilot programs, seed money, and guidance.
NRCS funds one or two staff in an RC&D office, and the RC&D council, made up of local
representatives
• Soil Surveys
• Watershed Program
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-41
United States Department
of Agriculture
www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/rcd
USDA Resource Conservation and Development (RC&D)
Policy Advisory Board Mission Statement
Mission Statement
The mission of the USDA RC&D Policy Advisory Board (PAB) shall be to provide policy advice for the NRCS
Resource Conservation and Development (RC&D) Program, and to effectively and appropriately integrate the
RC&D Program into all relevant USDA community development activities. In carrying out this mission, the PAB
will:
•
Help ensure that policies are responsive to the needs of local RC&D Councils and USDA field personnel, and in so doing, meet local community development needs
•
Seek to assure that all relevant USDA Agencies, consistent with their missions and authorities, can
help the program add as much value as possible at the local level
•
Facilitate the interaction among RC&D Councils and Associations, USDA Agencies, and the Secretary
•
Stimulate interest among USDA Agencies
•
Support appropriate actions that coordinate and integrate programmatic activities, where appropriate
•
Provide advice and guidance to the Chief of NRCS as the final decision-maker for the RC&D Program
and as the official delegated responsibility for the program by the Secretary
Guiding Principles
The Policy Advisory Board will be guided by the following principles:
•
Many of the issues and opportunities faced by the RC&D Program involve both urban and rural communities and the interfaces between communities and rural lands.
•
It is important to support efforts to achieve sustainable communities, forging productive linkages
between environmental interests and development interests.
•
Our work must be based on the four guiding principles of empowerment: economic opportunity;
sustainable community development; community-based partnerships; and a strategic vision for
change.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-42
•
Our work must support creative and sustainable solutions to the environmental, social and economic
issues facing RC & D Councils.
•
Our work must support comprehensive community development efforts of RC&D Councils.
•
Our work must encourage appropriate linkages between RC&D Council strategic plans and other
natural resource and economic development goals for the State that were established through public
processes.
•
Our work must place real emphasis on using public/private partnerships.
•
Our work must encourage full local citizen awareness and participation in each RC&D Council.
•
Our work will help ensure that the RC&D Program will serve all segments of the population in support
of environmental justice.
USDA RC&D Working Group
Role and functions:
•
Prepares reports and proposals for the Policy Advisory Board, either at the Board’s request or the
Working Group’s own initiative.
•
Works closely with state, regional, and national associations of RC&D Councils and other allied groups
to address identified needs and concerns.
•
Conveys needs and concerns of the councils to the Policy Advisory Board.
•
Assists NRCS in the analysis and consideration of program implementation issues and details, at their
request.
•
Provides staff support for the RC&D Policy Advisory Board, as appropriate.
Assists in integration of relevant USDA programmatic activities (for example, Biomass or Alternative
Energy, Sustainable Development Council, others).
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-43
http://www.ia.nrcs.usda.gov/partnerships/rcandd.html
Iowa Resource Conservation and Development (RC&D)
Resource Conservation and Development (RC&D) councils across Iowa are working to create jobs, protect the
environment and improve the quality of life in rural communities. They have a great track record of accomplishments, but the challenges are still great. This is particularly true in rural counties that are still experiencing declines in population and economies impacted by low agricultural commodity prices.
•
Map of Iowa RC&D areas and a staff listing
•
RC&D Fact Sheets
The following is a sample of the work that RC&Ds are doing, along with some of the unmet needs that still
remain in rural communities across the state.
Local Food Products to Local Market Brokerage System -This system would facilitate the process with
several large consumers (hospitals, convention centers, hotels, colleges or food service companies) each year.
This would need to be a two to three year pilot program. After that, there should be enough markets established to use as models in the Sioux City Region of Iowa, South Dakota and Nebraska to show the way for
others. Project cost of $125,000 to $150,000 for the three-year program. Establish many direct marketing
systems from rural areas to the urban ones. Rural Entrepreneurs, include many people who are working to
develop a new business while already working full-time on the farm or off-farm. Many of these people receive
business development assistance from RC&Ds across Iowa. Projects currently receiving RC&D assistance
include an aquaculture and fish processing venture in west central Iowa. They also include work to re-establish
the wine grape industry in eastern, southern and western Iowa and a variety of business start-ups statewide.
These and many other ventures are focused at helping rural communities maintain a viable business and
employment base.
Rural Water and other utilities continue to be a focus of RC&D work in southern and eastern Iowa. Sewage
treatment is a particular challenge in Iowa’s smallest communities, as conventional technologies are becoming
too costly for these communities to maintain. Pathfinders RC&D is helping to develop the Rural Utilities Service
System (RUSS) to help fill this gap. $50,000 is needed in the next year to accelerate the development of the
RUSS program.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-44
Watershed Project Development – RC&D councils are currently working with local leaders to develop
watershed protection and development projects in the Raccoon River, Maquoketa River, Lake Rathbun,
Wapsipinicon River, Upper Iowa River, Fox River, Gooseberry Creek, and Whitebreast Creek and other watersheds. RC&D assistance is needed to help local leaders in these and other watersheds organize, coordinate
technical assistance, develop funding packages, and plan for long-term project installation and maintenance.
Assistance costs for these projects will range from $10,000-300,000. There are currently projects active in all
five congressional districts in Iowa.
Rural Tourism Development – Tourism based on unique aesthetic, cultural and historic resources is an
important opportunity for many Iowa communities. Strengthened RC&D assistance to local rural tourism
development work will benefit communities across Iowa. Communities along the Missouri River in Congressional Districts 4 and 5 have a particular need to make us of the unique opportunity presented by the Lewis
and Clark Bicentennial in 2003. Communities along the Mississippi River have also been approached about
providing assistance to local scenic byway systems along the river.
Computer Recycling – These projects recycle computers to go to low income families or other organizations.
They work by salvaging 486 speed or higher computers, fixing them up and redistributing them to needy
students that can not afford one for general word processing. Other programs in urban areas have recycled
thousands per year and can’t keep up. Project cost of $80,000 to $100,000 per year would easily provide
assistance to potentially thousands of kids and keep toxic battery/electrical components out of the landfills.
These projects also provide the opportunity to employ/teach hundreds of people on computer repair through a
hands-on teaching experience to get most computers repaired with volunteer labor. There is an active project
in the Iowa Great Lakes area, with another being explored in the Sioux City area.
Dry Hydrants, non-pressurized fire hydrants that make raw water from ponds, lakes and streams available
for rural fire fighting, are being installed across the state with technical and administrative assistance from
RC&Ds. These dry hydrants have already helped save rural buildings from fire, and are lowering fire insurance
premiums in some areas. While significant progress has been made, many areas of the state still have not
accessed this simple yet effective technology. Continued work will benefit rural residents statewide.
Urban Wood Recycling projects convert waste wood to lumber and firewood, and decrease material going
to the landfills. Projects are either underway or are being considered in the Des Moines area, north central
Iowa, and the Sioux City area. Each project offers the opportunity to create employment and reduce the
volume of wood waste going into landfills. Each regional project will require $500,000 to $750,000 to cover
start-up costs.
Construction Material Recycling. Reduce construction waste going to landfill by an estimated 50%-65%. A
small crew could go in ahead of the remodeling contractor and salvage usable items that are typically thrown
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-45
away that would save remodeling contractor demolition time. These items could be warehoused and sold on
the secondary market at very reduced prices to people that are doing projects that do not demand high
quality, unblemished materials. Items such as ceiling tiles and lights, framing materials doors, office equipment, electrical and plumbing components, leftover inventory and ductwork are usually disposed of in
dumpsters headed for the landfill. Program costs would be about $180,000 to $200,000 the first year, eventually employing 5-10 people. Could be self sustaining soon and affect primarily the tri-state area near Sioux
City.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-46
Iowa RC&D Areas and Contact Information
http://www.ia.nrcs.usda.gov/partnerships/rcanddlist.html
Iowa RC&Ds
RC&D Contact Information
Area
Staff
Counties
M&M Divide RC&D Office
Area 1
Rick Tafoya
Sac, Crawford,
(Coordinator)
Carroll, Greene,
1917 N. Hwy 71, Suite 3
Carroll, IA 51401
Fact Sheet
(1.2 MB)
Audubon, Guthrie
Phone: (712) 792-4415
Carolyn Christian
FAX: (712) 792-4239
(Office Assistant)
Email: mmrcd@ia.usda.gov
Iowa Lakes RC&D Office
14 West 21st Street, Suite 1
Area 1
Jeff Kestel
Dickinson, Emmet,
(Coordinator)
Clay, Palo Alto,
Post Office Box 265
(1.1 MB)
Buena Vista
Spencer, Iowa 51301
Bonnie Wichman
Phone: (712) 262-2083
(Office Assistant)
FAX: (712) 262-2690
Email: jeff.kestel@ia.usda.gov
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-47
RC&D Contact Information
Area
Staff
Counties
Sioux Rivers RC&D Office
Area 1
Darrell Geib
Plymouth, Cherokee, Woodbury,
(Coordinator)
Ida, Monona
Linda Appelgate
Dallas, Polk,
(Coordinator)
Jasper, Madison,
206 First Street
Fact Sheet
(1.3 MB)
P.O. Box 874
Sergeant Bluff, IA 51054-0874
Phone: (712) 943-7882
FAX: (712) 943-7884
Email: darrell.geib@ia.usda.gov
Iowa Heartland RC&D Office
Area 2
1513 North Ankeny Blvd., Suite 4
Ankeny, IA 50021
Warren, Marion
Phone: (515) 963-8654
Teresa Breuer
FAX: (515) 963-0910
Lauterbach
Email: linda.appelgate@ia.usda.gov
(Office Assistant)
Prairie Rivers of Iowa RC&D Office
(1.3 MB)
Area 2
510 South 11th Street
Jim Cooper
Webster, Hardin,
(Coordinator)
Hamilton, Boone,
(1.3 MB)
Story, Marshall
Post Office Box 572
Nevada, IA 50201
Phone: (515) 382-1512
FAX: (515) 382-5708
Email: james.cooper@ia.usda.gov
Prairie Winds RC&D Office
Area 2
255 Highway 69, Suite 2
Mark Schutt
Worth, Winnebago,
(Coordinator)
Hancock, Wright,
(1.3 MB)
Cerro Gordo, Franklin
Garner, IA 50438-1120
Phone: (641) 923-3606
FAX: (641) 923-3627
Email: mark.schutt@ia.usda.gov
Prairie Partners RC&D Office
1301 -6th Avenue North, Suite 2
Area 2
Bob Moser
Kossuth, Humboldt, Pocahontas,
(Coordinator)
Calhoun
(2.6 MB)
Humboldt, IA 50548-1150
Phone: (515) 332-3337
FAX: (515) 332-3961
Email: robert.moser@ia.usda.gov
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-48
RC&D Contact Information
Area
Staff
Counties
Cedar Valley RC&D Office
Area
Kurt Hoeft
Mitchell, Floyd,
619 Beck Street
3
(Coordinator)
Chickasaw, Butler,
Fact Sheet
(2.6 MB)
Bremer, Grundy, Black Hawk
Charles City, IA 50616-3722
Phone: (641) 257-1912
Kim Klinkel (Mon-
FAX: (641) 228-7378
Wed-Fri)
Email: kurt.hoeft@ia.usda.gov
(Secretary)
Limestone Bluffs RC&D Office
Area
Warren Johnson
Delaware, Jones,
1000 East Platt Street, Suite 4
3
(Coordinator)
Jackson, Cedar,
(1.4 MB)
Clinton, Dubuque
Maquoketa, Iowa 52060-2530
Phone: (563) 652-5104
Linda Swanson
FAX: (563) 652-5229
(Office Assistant)
Email: lbluffsrcd@ia.usda.gov
Northeast Iowa RC&D Office
Area
Lora Friest
Howard, Clayton,
101 East Greene Street
3
(Coordinator)
Winneshiek,
(1.4 MB)
Allamakee, Fayette, Buchanan
Post Office Box 916
Postville, Iowa 52162-0916
Teresa Steffens
Phone: (563) 864-7112
(Office Assistant)
FAX: (563) 864-7113
Email: lora.friest@ia.usda.gov
Southern Iowa RC&D
Area
Dennis Hilger
Adair, Adams, Union,
500 East Taylor
4
(Coordinator)
Clarke, Taylor,
(1.7 MB)
Ringgold, Decatur
Creston, Iowa 50801-4056
Phone: (641) 782-7058
Judy Weese
FAX: (641) 782-6483
(Office Assistant)
Email: sircd@ia.usda.gov
Golden Hills RC&D Office
Area
Shirley
Harrison, Cass,
712 South Highway 6 and 59
4
Frederiksen
Shelby, Mills,
(Coordinator)
Page, Fremont, Montgomery,
Post Office Box 189
(1.7 MB)
Pottawattamie
Oakland, Iowa 51560
Phone: (712) 482-3029
Gloria Lyman
FAX: (712) 482-5590
(Office Assistant)
Email:
shirley.frederiksen@goldenhillsrcd.org
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-49
RC&D Contact Information
Area
Staff
Counties
Chariton Valley RC&D Office
Area 5
Dora Guffey
Lucas, Monroe,
(Coordinator)
Wayne, Appanoose
Detra Dettmann
Mahaska, Keokuk,
(Coordinator)
Davis, Wapello,
19229 Highway 5
Fact Sheet
(1.3 MB)
Centerville, Iowa 52544-8922
Phone: (641) 437-4376
FAX: (641) 437-4638
Email: dora.guffey@ia.usda.gov
Email: cvrcd@cvrcd.org
Pathfinders RC&D Office
Area 5
1805 West Jefferson
(1.3 MB)
Jefferson, Van Buren
Fairfield, Iowa 52556-4235
Phone: (641) 472-6177
Kelly Lewiston
FAX: (641) 472-6211
(Office Assistant)
Email: detra.dettman@ia.usda.gov
Iowa Valley RC&D Office
Area 5
300 West Welsh Street
Christine Taliga
Tama, Benton,
(Coordinator)
Poweshiek, Iowa, Johnson, Linn
(1.1 MB)
Post Office Box 87
Williamsburg, Iowa 52361
Jean Koenighain
Phone: (319) 668-8110
(Office Assistant)
FAX: (319) 668-8202
Email: christine.taliga@ia.usda.gov
Geode RC&D Office
308 N. Third Street
Area 5
Christa Perkins
Louisa, Henry,
(Coordinator)
Lee, Des Moines, Washington
(1.1 MB)
Burlington, Iowa 52601-2060
Phone: (319) 752-6395
Rita Marshall
FAX: (319) 752-0106
(Office Assistant)
Email: cperkins@geodercd.org
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-50
RC&D Contact Information
Area
Staff
Counties
Interstate RC&D Office
Mark Jackson
Scott, Muscatine
3020 East 1st Avenue
(Coordinator)
in Iowa;
Fact Sheet
(104 k)
and Henry,
Airport Road
Milan, Illinois 61264
Jessica Engstrom
Rock Island, Mercer
Phone: (309) 764-1486
(Office Assistant)
in Illinois
Scott Osborn
Lyon, Osceola, Sioux, O'Brien
FAX: (309) 764-1830
Cell: (309) 368-6813
Email: mark.jackson@il.usda.gov
Northwest Prairies RC&D Office
(NOT YET APPROVED)
Area 1
(104 k)
(Lead DC)
315 South Rerick
Post Office Box 543
Primghar, Iowa 51245-0543
Phone: (712) 757-3835
FAX: (712) 757-8500
Email: scott.osborn@ia.usda.gov
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-51
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Rock Island Ecological Services Field Office
Richard C. Nelson, Field Supervisor
4469 48th Avenue Court, Rock Island, IL 61201
Phone: (309) 793-5800; Fax: (309) 793-5804
http://midwest.fws.gov/RockIsland/
RockIsland@fws.gov
MidwestNews@fws.gov
Station Facts
• Established in 1972
• The only Field Office in Region 3 that covers two states
• 24 Threatened or Endangered Species
Station Goals
• Preserve, protect, enhance and restore terrestrial and aquatic habitats for Service trust
resources
• Promote environmental education in the States of Iowa and Illinois
Services Provided To
• Private citizens
• Federal, state and local agencies
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-52
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 7
901 N. 5th St., Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone: Toll free (800) 223-0425 or (913) 551-7003
http://www.epa.gov/region07/
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Headquarters
Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvannia Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: (202) 272-0167
The mission of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is to protect human health and to
safeguard the natural environment—air, water, and land—upon which life depends.
EPA’s purpose is to ensure that:
• All Americans are protected from significant risks to human health and the environment
where they live, learn and work.
• National efforts to reduce environmental risk are based on the best available scientific
information.
• Federal laws protecting human health and the environment are enforced fairly and
effectively.
• Environmental protection is an integral consideration in U.S. policies concerning natural
resources, human health, economic growth, energy, transportation, agriculture, industry, and
international trade, and these factors are similarly considered in establishing environmental
policy.
• All parts of society—communities, individuals, business, state and local governments, tribal
governments—have access to accurate information sufficient to effectively participate in
managing human health and environmental risks.
• Environmental protection contributes to making our communities and ecosystems diverse,
sustainable and economically productive.
• The United States plays a leadership role in working with other nations to protect the global
environment.
What We Do
EPA provides leadership in the nation’s environmental science, research, education and
assessment efforts. EPA works closely with other federal agencies, state and local governments,
and Indian tribes to develop and enforce regulations under existing environmental laws. EPA is
responsible for researching and setting national standards for a variety of environmental
programs and delegates to states and tribes responsibility for issuing permits, and monitoring
and enforcing compliance. Where national standards are not met, EPA can issue sanctions and
take other steps to assist the states and tribes in reaching the desired levels of environmental
quality. The Agency also works with industries and all levels of government in a wide variety of
voluntary pollution prevention programs and energy conservation efforts.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-53
Watershed Academy
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Wetlands, Oceans
and Watersheds (4503T)
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington DC 20460
Phone: 202-566-1155
http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/wacademy
The Watershed Academy is a focal point in EPA’s Office of Water for providing training and information on
implementing watershed approaches.
•
Watershed Academy Web offers more than 50 free, self-paced training modules
•
Watershed Management Training Certificate awarded to those that complete 15 required modules and self-tests
•
Webcast Seminars sponsored monthly - See schedule for upcoming seminars and listen to audio version of
past seminars
•
Live watershed-related training courses
•
Information Transfer Series which includes key watershed documents
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-54
Voluntary and Not-for-Profit
Organizations
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-55
1711 Osceola Avenue, Suite 251
Chariton, IA 50049-0801
Phone: (641) 774-4461; Fax: (641) 774-5319
http://www.cdiowa.org
Deb Ryun, Executive Director
deb-ryun@cdiowa.org
Mission/Goals: To provide leadership and education through local districts to promote
conservation of natural resources.
Programs: Conservation Districts of Iowa (CDI) is a non-profit 501(c)3 organization devoted
to providing educational programs on the conservation of soil, water, and other natural
resources.
CDI was founded in 1947 to provide a unified voice for the individual county-based soil and
water conservation districts. Since that time, CDI has been working with the 100 soil and water
conservation districts in Iowa to promote sustainable agricultural practices for the protection of
soil and water resources. Today, work is also being done in urban settings, promoting
conservation practices for homeowners, developers, and communities. While each soil and
water conservation district maintains its own programs, CDI helps districts combine efforts to
address regional, state, and national issues.
For a listing of Soil and Water Conservation District offices in Iowa, see pp. 7-8.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-56
Ducks Unlimited
Great Plains Region
2525 River Road, Bismarck, ND 58503-9011
Phone: (701) 355-3500; Fax: (701) 355-3575
Land Protection: (701) 355-3500; Administration: (701) 355-3511
Biology: (701) 355-3533; Engineering: (701)355-3556
http://www.prairie.ducks.org
http://www.ducks.org/
info@ducks.org
Mission/Goals: To fulfill the annual life cycle needs of North American waterfowl by
protecting, enhancing, restoring, and managing important wetlands and associated uplands.
Rogert L. Pederson, Ph.D.
Manager, Conservation programs
Ducks Unlimited, INC
18654 Esquire Way
Farmington, MN 55024
Phone: (651) 460-2240
Fax: (651) 460-2240
rpederson@ducks.org
See the following pages for a list of Iowa chapters.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-57
Adel, Kevin Henter 515-987-4989
Cherokee, Ed Otto 712-225-5968
Algona, Brian Duroe 515-295-3106
Clarkville Ladies, Billie Buss 319-267-2147
Ames-Cyclones, Steve Helland 515-685-2842
Clear Lake, Julie Steinberg 641-228-1057
Ames-ISU, Jim Dinsmore 515-292-3152
Clinton, PJ Ledehoff 815-589-2436
Ankeny, Bob Jones 515-685-3249
Corning, Scott Akin 515-322-4713
Atlantic, Dave Frederiksen 712-243-6322
Council Bluffs, Rhonda Kirke 800-452-1523
Bellevue Area, Chris Roling 319-872-5645
Council Bluffs, Gene Dollen 712-488-2033
Belmond, Howard Dorman 515-444-4006
Council Bluffs-Loess Hills,
Todd Dinges 712-322-6344
Bettendorf-Buffalo Bill,
Shannon Musal 319-359-7020
Council Bluffs-Sponsor,
Gene Dollen 712-488-2033
Boone, Dave Phipps 515-275-4236
Creston, Dave Riley 515-782-6832
Burlington-Blackhawk Wild Wings,
Paula Moser 319-754-0060
Burlington-Burlington Area,
Dave Vanden Boom dwvboom@netins.net
Davenport, Eric James 319Decorah, Phil & Sarah Nowack 563-534-7662
Denver, Mark Widdel 319-279-3535
Camanche, Geraldine Weber 319-259-8695
Carlisle, Brian Keeney 515-989-3098
Des Moines-Arrowhead,
Rusty Russell 515-280-8436
Carroll, Leslie Hershberger 712-792-3675
Des Moines-Mid Iowa, John Werner 515-279-0940
Cedar Falls, Chris Harshbarger 800-373-3062
Des Moines-Mystic Mallards,
Kim Hawn 515-457-8223
Cedar Rapids, Kathy Rickertsen 319-390-4430
Dubuque, Jim McDonald 319-583-8966
Cedar Rapids-Eastern Iowa,
George Durin 319-366-8312
Cedar Rapids-Pin Oaks,
Mark Johnson 319-365-6049
Dyersville, Jim Singsank 319-875-2141
Eagle Grove, Kerry Amonson 515-448-4228
El Kader, Tom Paulin 319-245-2764
Center Point-Blue Creek,
Lloyd Hilleshiem 319-851-5701
Centerville-Chariton Valley,
Ed Shirley 515-437-4906
Chariton, Kim Francisco 515-766-6749
Cedar Valley Blue Wings,
Carman White 641-228-2835
Charles City, Steve Knowllton 641-228-1057
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Emmetsburg, Joel Horsley 712-852-3287
Estherville, Bruce Ring 712-362-5425
Evansdale
Everly, Todd Meyer 712-834-2153
Fairfield-Cedar Creek, Linda Vorhies
rlvorhies @kdsi.net
Forest City, David Ludej 641-581-3103
Revised May 2006
7-58
Fort Dodge/Webster Co.,
Curly Brand 515-573-2554
Fort Madison-Old Fort,
Richard Tebbs 319-372-5908
Manson, Brad Hanson 712-297-5716
Maquoketa-Mesquakie,
Mark Hansen 319-652-5581
Marshalltown, Brian Sowers 515-752-9674
Garden Grove, Scott Roberts 515-784-6035
Mason City, Matt Armour 641-423-5739
Grimes, John Koester 515-986-0954
Missouri Valley, Dan Hoffman 712-642-3645
Grinnell-Central Iowa, Tom Kriegel 515-236-3260
Grundy Center, Sammy Muller 319-824-3538
Monticello-Anamosa,
John Williams 319-465-5212
Guttenberg, Ed Dvorak 319-252-2181
Mount Ayr, Bill Armstrong 515-464-3411
Hamburg, Mike Michel 712-382-2793
Mt. Pleasant-Skunk River Valley,
Bryan White 319-865-4621
Hampton, Kreg Menning 515-456-3752
Harlan, Bruce Pfannkuch 712-744-3662
Humboldt, Tom Fuller 515-332-4218
Ida Grove, Jayson Lansink 712-364-2546
Independence-Buchanan County,
Robert Hearn 319-334-4936
Muscatine-Cinnamon Teal,
Kathy Jones 319-264-3490
Muscatine-Great River Bend,
Jeff Weikert 563-264-3910
Nevada, Dave Christy 515-382-4472
New Hampton, Brian Moore 515-394-3361
Indianola, Dave Nydegger 515-961-7567
Newton, Dan House 515-363-3215
Iowa City-Hawkeye Area, Dan Harbit 319-
Okoboji, Karen Halber 712-332-9683
Iowa Falls, Keith Haydon 515-859-7801
Okoboji Ladies, Judy Luhrs 712-338-2781
Iowa Falls-Iowa Select,
Jim Kutschat 515-648-4479
Onawa, Dave Richardson 712-423-3422
Osage, Brian Beaver 515-736-2424
Jefferson, Dr. Steve Karber 515-386-8216
Osceola, Marilyn Schneck 515-342-4188
Jesup-Jesup Area, Joseph Kopplin 319-827-1794
State Convention, Jon Kruse 712-732-2796
Keokuk Tri-State, Peggy Vigen 319-524-4133
Knoxville, Lowell Vande Norde 515-628-2021
Lake Mills, Lory Slattum 515-592-2772
Lake View, Don Herrig 712-657-2109
Le Mars, Ryan Snell 712-546-9674
Lime Springs, Russell Betsinger 507-346-7888
Manly, Mike Webb 515-696-5785
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Oskaloosa-Mahaska County,
Ralph Roberts 641-673-8511
Ottumwa-Wapello County,
Scott Jacobson 641-682-4516
Panora, Chad Paup 515-523-2356
Parkersburg, Dave Bonewitz 641-847-3109
Perry, Matt Leber 515-465-2661
Pocahontas, James Roetman 712-335-3501
Polk City, Joe Heintz 515-984-9221
Revised May 2006
7-59
Prairie City, Deb Petersen 515-994-3242
Red Oak, Randy Orme 712-623-2272
Rock Valley, Tom Anderson 712-439-2608
Sabula-Sabula Area, Don Thayer 319-687-2409
Shenandoah, Tim Asner 712-246-1745
Sibley, Jim Monier 712-754-3047
Washington-Iowa River Valley,
Brent Kelly 319-653-2313
Waterloo, Jeff Palmer 319-233-0199
Waterloo Ladies, Anita Lange 319-266-4192
Waukon, Dan Otting 319-568-4460
Waverly, Chris Lubben 319-885-6201
Webster City, Troy Sego 515-368-1368
Sigourney-N&S English Kiowa,
Sam Shephard 319-
West Union, Dave Tamling 319-422-3287
Sioux Center, Bob Rietema 712-722-2479
Williamsburg-Iowa County,
Joe Young 319-639-2090
Sioux City, Shawn Larison 712-239-0846
Spencer, Scott Merchant 712-262-8752
Spirit Lake, Brad Jones 712-336-1991
Spring Creek Widgeons,
Jan Pacovsky 641-394-4534
Storm Lake, Ray Team 712-732-4703
Story City, Mark Crawford 515-964-1229
Sumner, Darrin Paulus 319-578-3398
Swea City, Philip Albers 515-272-4112
Tama Toledo-Otter Creek,
Felix Castillo 641-484-8077
Thompson, Don Olson 515-584-2953
Tipton-Cedar County, Andy Mueller 319-732-3855
Tripoli-Sweet Marsh, Jim Beam
http//www.geocities.com/sweetmarshducks/
319-352-3705
Vinton-Benton County Flyway,
Rich Miracle 319-472-4922
Wapello-Lake Odessa, Tom Yakle 319-523-2106
Wapello-Ruffled Wings,
Traci McCleary 319-523-6307
Wapello-Southeast Iowa,
Phil Hubbard 319-394-9541
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-60
Iowa Environmental Council
711 East Locust Street
Des Moines, IA 50309
Phone: (515) 244-1194
Fax: (515) 244-7856
iecmail@earthweshare.org
http://www.iaenvironment.org
Mission/Goals: The Iowa Environmental Council is an alliance of diverse organizations and
individuals working with all Iowans to protect our natural environment. We seek a sustainable
future through: shaping public policy, research and education, coalition-building, and advocacy.
Major Programs: Livestock manure; water quality, human health, pesticides, ag drainage wells;
nutrient management; volunteer water monitoring; professional water monitoring; impaired
waters
The Iowa Environmental Indicators report measures progress in Iowa on habitat preservation,
soil conservation, solid waste, water quality, and energy. To obtain a copy, contact the Iowa
Environmental Council.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-61
Iowa Farm Bureau Federation
5400 University Ave., West Des Moines, IA 50266
Phone: (515) 225-5400; Fax: (515) 225-5419
http://ifbf.org
Mission/Goals: Farm Bureau is a voluntary organization dedicated to helping farm families
prosper and improve their quality of life.
Major Programs: Farm Bureau is an organization directed by its members. County officers and
boards of directors are farm men and women elected by members. They provide leadership at
the local level. This is further enhanced by participation of other farmer members on various
committees. At the state level, leadership is provided by farm men and women elected by voting
delegates as president, vice president, women’s committee chairmen, and district directors
(nine). Policy for the organization is developed through grassroots opinion gathering process in
which everyone can have input. Policy is finalized by county Farm Bureau voting delegates.
IFBF Environmental Program Highlights
Wetland Mitigation Banking: Wetland mitigation banking offers an attractive option for the
farmer and the environment. In this program, a bank sponsor restores a large wetland complex
and is responsible for coordinating with the regulatory agencies, acquiring land, developing the
site, managing the wetland and assuring its success. The Iowa Farm Bureau Federation is
sponsoring Iowa’s first agricultural wetland mitigation bank, working with the Iowa Department
of Natural Resources as a partner and Stanley Consultants, and with significant technical
assistance from the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Farm*A*Syst/Home*A*Syst: The goal of Farm*A*Syst in Iowa is to reduce the risk of water
pollution, particularly drinking water pollution, by providing a simple, totally confidential
assessment for farms and acreages. Farm*A*Syst also alerts rural residents if their current
practices violate Iowa law. The material is simple and easy to understand. The evaluation can be
completed by the acreage owner in private, or with the help of local technical specialists.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-62
Iowa Farm Bureau Federation, continued
Trees Forever Iowa Buffer Initiative: This five-year, $2 million initiative will establish 100
demonstration and project sites throughout the state of Iowa and showcase flexible approaches
to establishing and maintaining streamside buffers.
Nonpoint Source Pollution Information and Education County Grant Program: This program
provides up to 5, $2,500 grants to local projects that seek out and support innovative, local,
citizen-initiated projects that provide information and education materials and programs to
persons about non-point source (NPS) pollution. These funds can be used for local water
quality information projects, Total Maximum Daily Load education efforts, and promotion of
Farm*A*Syst materials.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-63
Iowa Native Plant Society
Thomas Rosburg
Department of Biology
Drake University
121 Olin Hall
Des Moines, IA 50311
thomas.rosburg@drake.edu
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~herbarium/inps/inpshome.htm
Purpose: The Iowa Native Plant Society is a forum where plant enthusiasts, gardeners and
professional botanists may exchange ideas and information. The INPS sponsors field trips,
workshops and restoration of natural areas. The goals are:
•
to promote conservation and ethical use of Iowa’s plants
•
to promote education about Iowa’s plants, their habitats and cultural habits, and the
preservation of these plants and their environment
•
to appreciate and enjoy Iowa’s native flora.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-64
505 Fifth Ave., Suite 444
Des Moines, IA 50309-2321
Telephone: (515) 288-1846
Fax: (515) 288-0137
Email: info@inhf.org
http://www.inhf.org/
Mission: The Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation builds partnerships and educates Iowans to
protect, preserve and enhance Iowa’s natural resources for future generations. In other words,
we protect Iowa’s land, water and wildlife “for those who follow.”
Major Programs: Permanent land protection, trail and greenway establishment, promotion of
improved land management.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-65
Iowa Prairie Network
Region V Contact: Inger Lamb
9188 NW Polk City Drive
Polk City, IA 50226
Telephone: (515) 963-7681
ingerlamb3@mchsi.com
http://www.iowaprairienetwork.org
Mission/Goals: To learn about, teach about, enjoy and protect Iowa’s prairie heritage.
Major Programs: Prairie walks, newsletter, web site, landowner assistance, prairie remnant and
planting signs, prairie seed exchange, small grant program, links to other prairie related
resources.
Prairie management: The management of the prairie is critically important for the survival of
the prairie ecosystem today. Vast landscape and ecological changes and cessation of natural
processes have made it necessary for humans to apply, to the best of their knowledge,
management practices that may have occurred naturally.
Today, people are trying to preserve the prairie remnants through protection efforts and proper
management. People are also trying to grow new prairies via prairie reconstructions. These two
are very different things. A remnant is an ecosystem of plants, animals, insects, soil, fungi, and
other living things that have formed a web of interdependence. A reconstruction is usually a
planting of a small number of prairie plants that once existed in a prairie. While important,
reconstructions are not the same as remnants because they most often do not contain the
diverse biological components existing in true prairies. They may in time, with the proper
management, develop those biological interactions, but initially they must be treated
differently.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-66
Iowa Watersheds, Inc.
P.O. Box 41518
Des Moines, IA 50311
Telephone: (515) 202-7772
Fax: (866) 869-2842
Email: iawatersheds@mchsi.com
Mission and Structure
Iowa Watersheds was formed in December 1995 by organized watershed groups concerned
about the environment. These groups realized that economic, environmental, and social
problems can best be solved by the people on the land.
There are a number of agencies and associations already in place that provide a variety of
educational, technical, and financial resources for watershed-related activities. Iowa
Watersheds is an “information clearing house” for these existing resources. Our goal is to be
able to connect you with the organization best suited to fill your immediate and long-term
needs.
Iowa Watersheds is a non-profit, non-partisan organization governed by a volunteer Executive
Board elected by the membership. Operating expenses are paid with dues and contributions.
The Volunteer Board is made up of representatives from Soil and Water District
Commissioners, County Board of Supervisors, and “At-Large” members.
Iowa Watersheds advocates that effective watershed management principles become imbedded
in state and federal programs, policies, and legislation. We offer a strong, unified voice for
watershed groups and support the exchange of specific information and assistance to those that
can benefit most from it.
With your moral and financial support, Iowa Watersheds can be a strong, viable organization
that works with you at all life stages of your local watershed organization. We can’t do it
without you.
Would you like to be involved?
If you have an interest in promoting watershed planning and implementation and have concerns
about the resources in your community, we invite you to get involved. Your opinions,
experience, and ideas are a valuable asset. Your influence counts only if you use it.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-67
QUESTIONS?
„ How does what I do affect my watershed?
„ How can a watershed project benefit me?
„ How can I have a voice in what work is done in my watershed?
„ We want to determine if work needs to be done in our watershed -- who do we call?
„ We have a community-based group that cares about their landscape -- now what do we do?
„ We’ve had an assessment, there’s work to be done, but where do we get the money?
„ How do we form a Watershed Board? How can they be useful?
„ I have technical questions -- who can I call?
„ Several different agencies need to be involved -- who should we call first?
Whether your questions are general, technical, organizational, or funding-related, Iowa
Watersheds is a good place to start!
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-68
The Izaak Walton League of America
Seth Davis, President, Iowa Division
517 N. 1st Street
Marshalltown, IA 50158
Telephone: 641-351-9484
http://www.iwla.org
Mission/Goals: To conserve, maintain, protect and restore the soil, forest, water and other
natural resources of the United States and other lands; to promote means and opportunities for
the education of the public with respect to such resources and their enjoyment and wholesome
utilization.
Major Programs: To accomplish its mission of conserving and properly managing the country’s
soil, air, woods, waters and wildlife, the League has a number of national conservation
programs. These include:
• Legislative Affairs—Track conservation and environmental legislation; propose and support
legislation and regulations that support our goals.
• Save Our Streams—Begun in 1969, the Save Our Streams (SOS) Program emphasizes
practical stream water quality monitoring techniques. In 1996, the League expanded the
program to include the American Wetlands Campaign, which informs citizen activists about
the importance of wetlands and how these areas can be protected and restored.
• Sustainability Education—Activities include researching sustainability issues; identifying
how these issues relate to environmental stewardship, social justice, economic security and
civic democracy; developing educational materials; and building a constituency to take action
on these issues.
• Energy Efficiency
• Upper Mississippi River—Efforts by the League to protect the river date back to 1924 with
passage of the Upper Mississippi River Wild Life and Game Fish Refuge Act championed by
the League. The IWLA and its members continue their efforts to ensure the Mississippi is
not further compromised by proposals such as plans by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to
expand commercial navigation on the river. The League and others fear that unless checked,
such expansion could cause the river’s biological collapse.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-69
Izaak Walton League of America, continued
• Agricultural Programs—Efforts by the League addressing soil erosion dates to 1937 when
the League adopted a resolution calling for a national program to retire fields in mountainous
areas from agricultural use. Today, League staff and members continue to be advocates for
implementing farming practices that sustain both natural resources and people, in part
through farm bill programs with high conservation and wildlife benefits. The League works to
protect water quality by reducing non-point source runoff pollution, particularly from
confined animal feeding operations. A Fish Kill Alert Network was established in 1999 to
track fish kills from farm pollution.
• Clean Air Campaigns
• Outdoor Ethics
Iowa Chapters
Ames, Brenda Lee Smith, 3837 Brickman Ave., Ames, IA, 50010-3930; Tel: 515-233-1629;
Email: twblsmith@aol.com; URL: www.amesikes.org
Anamosa, Adian Knuth, 103 N. Davis St., Anamosa, IA 52205; Tel: 319-462-2267
B F Carroll, Richard Boone, 209 E. Franklin St., Bloomfield, IA 52537; Tel: 641-664-1613
Email: boonebody@netins.net
Boone Valley, Ken Tabor, 703 Laura Lane, Webster City, IA 50595-3032; Tel: 515-832-2624
Burlington, Donald Swink, 2319 Sunnyside Ave., Burlington, IA 52601-2537; Tel: 319-752-1540
Chicaqua, Don Kline, 909 S. 12th Ave., Washington, IA 52353; Tel: 319-653-5395
Clinton County, Alan Murphy, 1013 - 23rd Ave., Camanche, IA 52730-1437; Tel: 563-259-8956
Davenport, Mary Crafton, 21800 - 279th Ave., LeClaire, IA 52753; Tel: 563-289-5942
Des Moines, Michael D. Lucas, Sr., 209 SW Linden St., Ankeny, IA 50021-2417
URL: www.desmoinesikes.com
Dickinson County, Linda Webber, 1020 28th St., Spirit Lake, IA 51360; Tel: 712-336-2202
Ding Darling, Gwen Ramsell, 4604 Beavercrest Dr., Des Moines, IA 50310; Tel: 515-277-0650
Dragoon Trail, Thomas M. Rodd, 1202 NW Greenwood St., Ankeny, IA 50021-1019; Tel: (515) 9648951; Email: iarodd@aol.com; URL: ankenyikes.home.mchsi.com
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-70
Dubuque, Mary Lou Zweibohmer, 282 Central Ave., Dubuque, IA 52001-1949; Tel: 563-582-9157
East Fork, Ben Strattan, 405 Country Club Rd., Algona, IA 50511; Tel: 515-295-5092
Emerson Hough, Dennis Stansbury, 227 Blair St., Kellogg, IA 50135; Tel: 641-526-8090
Emmet County, Clifford G. Roth, 308 N. 16th St., Estherville, IA 51334-1767; Tel: 712-362-2897
Floyd County, Vern Nieland, 910 Cedar St., Charles City, IA 50616-3526; Tel: 641-228-4166
Fort Dodge-Phil Fox, Joyce O’Connell, 2137 Richmill Road, Fort Dodge, IA 50501-8606;
Tel: 515-955-3258; Email: oojo@dodgenet.com; URL: www.geocities.com/ike50501/home.html
Green Bay, Shrri L. Hartson, 1715 48th St., Fort Madison, IA 52627; Tel: 319-372-1095
Email: sherri_hart@hotmail.com
Grundy-Tama, Jerry Smith, 614 Broad St., Reinbeck, IA 50669-1316; Tel: 319-345-2828;
Email: jjsmith@staroute.com
Humboldt Ox Bow, Lois Aukland, 111 1st Ave. N, Humboldt, IA 50548-2503; Tel: 515-332-5242
Indian Creek, Ed Fulk, PO Box 502, Slater, IA 50244-0502; Tel: 515-231-3556
Iowa All State, Linda A. Shuff, 1200 Herold Ave., Des Moines, IA 50315-3857; Tel: 641-285-0571
Iowa County, Tim Glotfelty, 305 5th St., Victor, IA 52347; Tel: 319-647-3738;
Email: jmtaglot@netins.net
Iowa River, Larry Severson, 2721 - 140th St., Belmond, IA 50421; Tel: 641-444-4540
Jefferson County, John Dahl, 308 E. Fillmore Ave., Fairfield, IA 52556-3830; Tel: 641-472-5762
Johnson County, Loren Forbes, 7 Arbury Drvie, Iowa City, IA 52246-4901; Tel: 319-338-5385;
Email: mrbusy1@aol.com
Jonco Jills, Dorothy Russell, 3185 Dubuque St. N.E., Iowa City, IA 52240; Tel: 319-351-7037
Keokuk County, Randy Weber, 24471 - 210th St., Harper, IA 52231; Tel: 641-622-2623;
URL: www-astro.physics.uiowa.edu/~rnw/ikes.html
Linn County, Robert Godlove, 4511 Topaz Ave. NW, Cedar Rapids, IA 52405;
Tel: 319-378-9857; Email: bcgodlove@mchsi.com; URL: www.izaak-walton.org
Louisa County, Bill Ohde, 9269 S Ave., Columbus Junction, IA 52738-9359; Tel: 319-257-6747
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-71
Mahaska County, Glenn Knox, 2358 Kirby Ave., Oskaloosa, IA 52577-8708; Tel: 641-673-9669
URL: www.mahaskacountyikes.org
Maquoketa Valley, Ken Bowman, 25451 81st St., Maquoketa, IA 52060-8868; Tel: 563-652-5406
Marshall County, Robert Backes, 1501 Brentwood Terrace, Marshalltown, IA 50158-3731;
Tel: 641-752-1355
Muscatine, Robert Buster, 305 W. 7th St., Muscatine, IA 52761-3244; Tel: 319-263-5201
Oakdale, Rod Oberhelman, 3275 - 110th St., Renwick, IA 50577-8820; Tel: 515-824-3491
Ottumwa, Ann Van Dorin, 1205 E. Main St., Ottumwa, IA 52501-7571; Tel: 641-682-9902
Email: CANDYLAND@prodigy.net
Palisades, Steve Matter, 501 Leif Erickson Dr., Decorah, IA 52101-1040; Tel: 563-382-3774
Email: stevematter@mchsi.com
Poweshiek County, Kenneth Tedrick, Sr., 4224 Porter Addition, Grinnell, IA 50112-8143;
Tel: 641-236-7058
Red Cedar, Irene Lewis, 609 2nd Ave., Vinton, IA 52349-1722; Tel: 319-472-4429
Rice Lake, David Brue, 136 Indian Ave., Forest City, IA 50436-2321; Tel: 641-582-4139
Rock Creek Ikettes, Patricia Drew, 1412 W. 4th Street N, Newton, IA 50208; Tel: 515-791-7634
Sabula, Charles Lane, 43834 - 58th St., Preston, IA 52069-9543; Tel: 319-689-6225
Scenic Waters, Gary Mensinger, 30908 Bellevue Cascade Rd., Bellevue, IA 52031-9414;
Tel: 563-872-3157; Email: jgmensinger@cis.net
Sioux Ikettes, Cleone Anderson, 2105 Roosevelt St., Sioux City, IA 51109-1247; Tel: 712-233-1513
Three Rivers, Donald Freeman, 106 Maple Circle, Waverly, IA 50677; Tel: 319-352-2435
Email: dnsfreeman1@aol.com; URL: www.waverlyia.com/Community/Izaaks/izaak_walton.htm
United Counties, Patricia Hampton, 411 West 2nd St., Storm Lake, IA 50588; Tel: 712-732-9272
Wapsi Valley, Leo Mullen, 508 5th St., De Witt, IA 52742; Tel: 563-659-8577
Wapsiketa, Phyllis Lerch, 9524 Highway 151, Anamosa, IA 52205; Tel: 319-482-7341
Warren County, Chevyn Howard, 8900 NE 25th St., Lot #115, Carlisle, IA 50047; Tel: 515-989-9056;
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-72
Waterloo, James McCarthy, 1229 Deloris Dr., Waterloo, IA 50701-3222; Tel: 319-234-3200
West Central, Michael Fritz, 408 Main St., Deloit, IA 51441-7542; Tel: 712-263-3740
Woodbury County, LeRoy Anderson, 2105 Roosevelt St., Sioux City, IA 51109-1247;
Tel: 712-233-1513
Worth County, Donna Larson, P.O. Box 31, Kensett, IA 50448-0031; Tel: 641-845-2339
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-73
1783 Buerkle Circle
St. Paul, MN 55110
Toll Free: 1-877-773-2070
Phone: (651) 773-2000; Fax: (651) 773-5500
http://pheasantsforever.org
Contact@pheasantsforever.org
Mission/Goals: Pheasants Forever is a non-profit conservation organization founded in 1982 in
response to the decline of the ringneck pheasant population.
Pheasants Forever is dedicated to the protection and enhancement of pheasant and other wildlife populations in North America through habitat improvement, land management, public
awareness, and education.
Major Programs: Protect, restore, and enhance wildlife habitat by establishing and maintaining
local and regional projects. Develop, distribute and foster conservation education. Introduce
and advance prudent conservation policy. Acquire and preserve critical habitat through public
land acquisition open to public hunting.
Iowa Pheasants Forever Staff:
Tim VandeNoord
Regional Biologist, Western Iowa
336 - 120th Street
Churdan, IA 50050
515-389-3665 (Telephone and fax)
712-210-4790 (Cell)
pf_tim@hotmail.com
Andrea Evelsizer
Regional Biologist, Eastern Iowa
45 Hawthorne Place
North Liberty, IA 52317
319-665-3841 (Telephone and fax)
319-325-4222 (Cell)
neiowapf@southslope.net
Dave VanWaus
Regional Biologist, Central Iowa
72408 - 270th Street
Colo, IA 50056
641-377-3480 (Telephone and fax)
515-231-2565 (Cell)
davwpf@netins.net
James Wooley
Field Operations Director, Quail Forever
1205 Ilion Avenue
Chariton, IA 50049
641-774-2238 (Telephone and fax)
641-203-1020 (Cell)
jwooley@quailforever.org
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-74
Matthew O’Connor
Habitat Team Coordinator
2880 Thunder Road
Hopkinton, IA 52237
563-926-2357 (Telephone and fax)
563-240-4075 (Cell)
niapfmatt@n-connect.net
Dave Reuter
Habitat Specialist
23092 James Road
Holy Cross, IA 52023
563-552-2354 (Telephone)
563-590-1908 (Cell)
davetres@netzero.net
Tony Haupert
Habitat Specialist
319-325-2388 (Cell)
tonyhaupert65@hotmail.com
Casey Trine
Habitat Specialist
24265 County Road G28
Conesville IA 52739
319-629-4389 (Telephone)
319-325-1676 (Cell)
caseyjtrine@hotmail.com
Lincoln Utt
Habitat Specialist
1045 - 100th Street
Derby, IA 50068
641-897-3403 (Telephone)
515-975-0745 (Cell)
link@grm.net
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-75
Soil and Water Conservation Society
http://swcs.siteviz.com/index.cfm
Iowa Chapter
http://www.iaswcs.org/
Soil and Water Conservation Society
945 SW Ankeny Road
Ankeny IA 50023
Phone: 515-289-2331
Fax: 515-289-1227
President: Jim Frederick
jim.frederick@ia.usda.gov
Iowa State University Student Chapter
President: Tess Musil
tmusil@iastate.edu
Advisor: Richard Cruse
rmc@iastate.edu
Advisor: Bradley Miller
miller@iastate.edu
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-76
The Nature Conservancy of Iowa
303 Locust St. Suite 402
Des Moines, IA 50309
Phone: (515) 244-5044
O F I O WA
Fax: (515) 244-8890
E-mail: iowa@tnc.org
http://nature.org/wherewework/northamerica/states/iowa/
Mission/Goals: To preserve the plants, animals and natural communities that represent the
diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive.
Why We’re Successful:
• We work closely with communities, businesses and people like you. Together, we’ve
protected more than 92 million acres of valuable lands and waters worldwide.
• We practice sound science that achieves tangible results.
• Our non-confrontational approach.
• Over 86% of all funds are used directly for conservation!
Did you know?
• Total acres protected by the Conservancy in Iowa: 7,000
• Total acres protected by the Conservancy in the United States: 14,600,000
• Acres protected by the Conservancy outside the United States: 80,181,446
• Current number of Conservancy preserves: 1,400
• Conservancy members in 1952: 554 - Conservancy members in 2001: approximately 1
million
Our major landscape scale sights consist of:
• Loess Hills in western Iowa
• Driftless Area in northeast Iowa
• Lower Cedar Valley in southeastern Iowa
• Little Sioux Valley in northwestern Iowa
• Grand River Grasslands in southcentral Iowa
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-77
THE
ADOPT-A-STREAM
FOUNDATION
at the Northwest Stream Center
600 - 128th Street SE
Everett, WA 98208-6353
Phone: 425-316-8592
Fax: 425-338-1423
E-mail: aasf@streamkeeper.org
Teaching people to become stewards of their watersheds.
Each year, in thousands of rivers and streams, the Pacific Northwest witnesses a remarkable natural
phenomenon as millions of salmon return to their place of birth to spawn future generations. Each year,
however, the migration of salmon to their natal streams is threatened. Damage or destruction of stream
and wetland habitats, resulting from industrial pollution, urban development, poor agricultural
practices, and over-fishing put salmon at risk. We cannot afford to lose these vital cultural, natural,
and economic resources.
The Adopt-A-Stream Program was created in 1981 to increase public sensitivity to awareness of the
importance of the 3,000 miles of creeks, streams and rivers and the fish that inhabit them in
Snohomish County, Washington and to restore to health those waterways damaged by people or nature.
By 1985, the program’s success prompted the establishment of The Adopt-A-Stream Foundation
(AASF), a non-profit 501(c)(3) environmental education and habitat restoration organization, to assist
people in becoming actively involved in stream enhancement and environmental education. AASF offers
people the tools to play a vital role in protecting and enhancing the watersheds in which they live. The
Foundation helps to ensure that Pacific Northwest streams continue to provide healthy spawning and
rearing habitat for wild salmon, steelhead and trout and, at the same time, serve our growing
population by providing clean drinking water and places for rest and relaxation.
MISSION
Our mission is “To teach people to become stewards of their watersheds.” We achieve our mission
through two focus areas: Environmental Education and Habitat Restoration.
The long term goal of AASF is to ensure the protection and care of every stream by encouraging
schools, community groups, sports clubs, civic organizations and individuals to adopt their streams, and
to become Streamkeepers.
“Adoption” of a stream means that volunteers will provide long-term care of the stream and establish
stream monitoring, restoration, and community-wide environmental education activities. By supporting
these efforts, The Adopt-A-Stream Foundation provides the building blocks for an improved
environment and sustained healthy wild fish production.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-78
Trees Forever
770 7th Avenue, Marion, Iowa 52302
Toll Free: (800) 369-1269
Phone: (319) 373-0650 ; Fax: (319) 373-0528
info@treesforever.org
http://www.treesforever.org
Mission/Goals: Trees Forever is an environmental nonprofit organization founded by two
volunteers in 1989. It is committed to providing support to individuals and groups engaged in
locally-led projects involving the planting of and caring for trees. National headquarters are
located in Marion, Iowa.
Major Programs: Trees Forever Buffer Partnerships show farmers and rural landowners how
streamside buffers of trees, shrubs and grasses improve water quality and reduce soil erosion.
Trees Forever partnerships establish demonstration and project sites throughout Iowa and
Illinois that showcase flexible approaches to establishing and maintaining streamside buffers.
In 2001, Trees Forever developed an indepth local watershed planning model called Visual
Investments to Enhance Watersheds (VIEW). Trees Forever field coordinators facilitiate local
groups through the VIEW watershed planning process which involves an independent landscape
design consultant in the assessment and placement of targeted best management practices
within the watershed.
Buffer Solutions is a program established especially for livestock producers. When combined
with other conservation practices, buffers help protect surface and ground water quality,
improve airflow and air quality, and enhance the visual appearance of production facilities.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-79
756 16th Street, Des Moines IA 50314-1601
http://www.wallace.org/
The Wallace House
The Wallace House is an Italianate Victorian style home built about 1884, one of the oldest properties in the Sherman Hill
National Historic District, a residential area about ten blocks from downtown Des Moines. The house has a hybrid
Mansard/hip roof, with a flat top and perimeter. There are stacked bay windows and double doors, with a second story
balcony, on the south side. The front of the house has a Classical style wraparound porch with Ionic Roman columns.
The original homestead - 1890
Henry and Nancy Wallace purchased the property in 1892, and around 1895 altered the third floor from attic space to a
full story with the addition of a gambrel roof and dormer windows, adding two bedrooms. There is a complete set of
photographs that show every room in the house around 1915-1920, probably taken by Josephine Wallace, a daughter
and photographer, who lived in the house until 1923. The house was in the Wallace estate until 1940.
The house provides office space for the Wallace House Foundation and the Sherman Hill Association. The first floor is
used for exhibits and seminars, and is also available for meetings, special events, and group tours. There is about 1,500
square feet of space on the first floor, including front and middle parlors, library, dining room, kitchen, and bathroom.
The house is wheelchair accessible, and there is ample parking available.
Exhibits
“Uncle Henry’s Des Moines: Photographs 1880 - 1920"
A set of 75 copy prints of images of Des Moines from the archives of the State Historical Society.
“Good Farming, Clear Thinking, and Right Living: The Wallace Era of Wallaces’ Farmer, 1895 - 1933"
An exhibit of pages and excerpts from the paper when it was edited by Henry, Henry C., and Henry A. Wallace, and
owned by the Wallace family.
“A Multimedia Interactive Timeline of the Life of Henry A. Wallace”
Computer based interactive exhibit which combines text, graphics, and audio to bring to life the remarkable life of Henry
A. Wallace.
For more information contact:
Richard Graves, Executive Director
richardgraves@wallace.org
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-80
Water Environment Federation
601 Wythe Street
Alexandria, VA 22314-1994
Phone: 800-666-0206
Fax: 703-684-2492
http://www.wef.org/home
What We Do
About WEF
WEF’s vision to “preserve and enhance the global water environment” is the basis for all WEF programs and activities. WEF is
governed by a member appointed Board of Trustees acting on
behalf of its membership to advance its mission of providing
information, education, and resources to water quality professionals and the public.
WEF and its Members:
•
research and publish the latest information on wastewater treatment and water quality protection;
•
provide technical expertise and training on issues including non-point source pollution, hazardous
waste, residuals management and groundwater;
•
sponsor conferences and other special events around the world;
•
review, testify, and comment on environmental regulations and legislation.
WEF History
WEF has guided technological development in water quality since 1928. Previously called the Federation of
Sewage Works Associations (1928), the Federation of Sewage and Industrial Wastes Associations (1950),
and the Water Pollution Control Federation (1960); the name was changed to the Water Environment
Federation in 1991 to reflect an expanded focus of non-point and point sources of pollution.
WEF Member Associations
WEF’s global network of Member Associations (MAs) provides water quality professionals around the
world with education, training, and business opportunities.
WEF Committees
WEF provides opportunities for its members to participate in committees to develop consensus positions for
WEF on key technical and public policy issues; write Manuals of Practice and other technical publications;
and develop education and training programs.
Public Education
As leading source of water quality information, WEF develops programs and materials to help its members
communicate with their target audiences about key water quality issues. Its goal is to increase an understanding of the direct role water and wastewater services has in the protection of public health, the
economy, and the environment.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
7-81
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Section 8: Troubleshooting
“It is not a single leader that moves the organization to success—it is the shared
information distributed throughout the group and the community that can bring order to
everything” (Wheatley 1999:101).
Watershed group leaders and members must
expect challenges and a little chaos to occur
on a regular basis. Some crises will be small
and easily resolved. Others will take
purposive and consistent efforts to
overcome. In this section, potential problems
the group may encounter are identified and
alternative solutions are offered. Some
problems can be avoided or fixed by
implementing good organization and
community development practices. Some
problems will happen despite best efforts to
avoid them. Understanding the cause and
source of the problem will help the group as
they search for solutions.
The first step in troubleshooting problems
is to clearly identify the problem. Is it a
conflict between one or two group
members? Are confusion, information
overload, and unfocused discussions
preventing the group from doing anything
meaningful? Has a project been undertaken
that really does not support the mission and
objectives of the group? Do elected officials
or government agencies seem not to trust the
group? Are rumors about the group
circulating that are not true? Are fewer and
fewer people showing up at regular meetings?
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
The troubleshooting tables in the next few
pages are organized by different group
development stages (pre-watershed group
formation; group formation; and sustaining
the group). Symptoms, problems, and
possible causes are first identified. Then,
alternative actions and pages in the manual
that refer to that stage of group
development are offered. The alternative
actions column suggests only a few
remedies. Discussions with several trusted
members of the watershed group and/or
outside advisors can lead to additional
suggestions that better fit the exact nature
of the group problem. Following the
troubleshooting table is an Iowa State
University bulletin: Purposeful Partnerships
in the Community Interest. Page 4 of this
section contains a diagnostic tool developed
by the University of Wisconsin for
evaluating group functioning. If you think
the problem is the organization and
practices of the group, make copies of this
form and ask each member in your group to
complete it. Summarize their responses,
then use your findings to discuss with the
group each item and what actions are
needed.
8-1
Table 8.1. Pre-watershed Group Formation.
Symptom
Lack of attendance by
watershed residents
at community
meetings
Lack of participation
during the community
meeting
Possible Causes
Alternative Solutions
Refer to
Section /
Page
There is a process to letting people know in
advance about an upcoming public
meeting. Start about 4 weeks in advance.
Target your audience. Send press releases
to all newspapers and radio stations. Mail
notices to those you want to attend. Put
brochures in places where your target
audience might go, such as banks,
elevators, grocery stores, and city hall.
Section 2
Section 4
Section 5
Inadequate
recruitment
Each resident should hear about the
upcoming public meeting and participation
opportunities 4-5 times – via personal
letter, media coverage, and face-to-face
invitations.
Section 2
Issue is not perceived
as being important by
local residents
Participation is almost entirely dependent
upon the problem or issue’s importance.
The issue may be important to a specific
organization or government agency, but
not the community. A solution is to revisit
the issue, rank its importance, and then
decide whether or not it is worth pursuing.
If it is important, you need to find a way to
convey that to the community.
Section 2
Some projects have had success with
activities that include a “pay-off” to
residents, like free water testing of rural
wells, combined with on-farm visits by
person representing project or agency
inviting their participation.
Section 6
Agenda does not
allow time for
residents to voice
their concerns.
Formulating the agenda of the community
meeting is critical to achieving good citizen
participation. Are the presentations kept
short, and to the point? Is the number of
presenters kept to a minimum (nothing is
worse than listening to a third speaker who
is saying basically what the first and
second speakers have said)?
Section 4
Citizens aren’t
convinced they will be
listened to or can
make a difference.
Is there enough opportunity for the
residents to speak? Small group
discussions allow the quiet participants to
speak and everyone to voice what they are
thinking. It also is a learning opportunity as
people listen to each other and their
concerns.
Section 3
Not enough public
notice
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
2-6;
5-2, 5-3
2-6
2-2,
2-8–2-12
6-14–6-17
4-5, 4-6
3-2
8-2
Table 8.1. Pre-watershed Group Formation, continued.
Symptom
People don’t volunteer
to form a watershed
group
Possible Causes
Purpose of the group
needs to be better
articulated.
Alternative Solutions
Refer to
Section /
Page
People usually are quick to volunteer for
something if (1) they find the issue to be
critically important, and (2) they believe
that they can make a difference. The
planning team needs to offer compelling
reasons for others to get involved. If people
haven’t volunteered for a long-term
commitment to forming a watershed group,
consider offering a study circle that will
meet 3 or 4 times to discuss watershed
issues.
2-2
Paid staff is perceived
as being able to do “it
all.” Citizens don’t
perceive their input is
needed or wanted.
Staff needs to share responsibilities and
decision-making with residents. If
residents perceive that their participation
will not make a difference, they will not
volunteer. Agency staff can encourage
citizens to work with them to learn about
the watershed and help plan appropriate
actions.
Section 5
There may not be
widespread public
interest or concern.
Re-emphasize community awareness
education; highlight scientific problems
connecting to local quality of life.
2-2
Section 5
Section 1
1-1
The community may not be ready to form a
citizen group. Community organizing may
need to wait for a crisis or increased
interest.
Lack of participation in
watershed group
formation in support of
a specific water
management project
Bringing people in
after a project is
started; citizens don’t
see their contribution
as meaningful.
Hold public meetings before a watershed
group is established and before a project is
delineated, and before proposals/
preproposals are written. Build ownership
and get buy-in at front end. This will
eliminate the need for "selling" to residents
later.
Section 2
Section 4
However, it is never too late to ask citizens
to participate in an ongoing project. The
project team will need to spend time
helping citizens learn and understand
projects in progress. Citizens will also need
a meaningful role in the project.
Community denies
they have watershed
problems
Community does not
understand their
watershed and the
symptoms that signal
water problems
Need to share information about the
watershed more widely. Tours of the
watershed and credible technical experts
can be used to share knowledge and
extend communication among community
members. Public meetings, news articles,
one-to-one conversations among
neighbors and acquaintances will help
identify current and potential issues.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
1-9
Section 6
6-14
8-3
Table 8.2. Watershed Group Formation.
Possible Causes
Lack of support and
participation by
citizens once the
group has formed or a
project is undertaken.
Public participation in
approved projects
doesn’t have flexibility
to incorporate citizen’s
suggestions.
Let residents have ample opportunity for
input on projects before they are begun.
Build their ownership and commitment to
the project.
Broad based
participation not
established from the
start
Be sure discussions about the mission and
activities of the group are inclusive. If the
group focuses on only one project or a
single sector’s interest (e.g., ag practices
or development policies) it will be much
more difficult to broaden and include other
community sectors. Find common
concerns that affect several sectors and
involve them in planning activities that
address those issues.
5-1
Poor agenda
Formulate the agenda so that it creates an
efficient meeting. People value their time.
Meetings must respect time people
commit. Does the agenda allow the group
to accomplish what they need to
accomplish? Does the agenda allow group
members to interact and offer
suggestions? Does the agenda allow time
for team building, such as coffee and
cookies before or after a meeting? Are
citizen group members participating in the
construction of the agenda?
Section 5
5-3
Poor facilitation
The steering committee meets with the
facilitator and sets ground rules for
democratic participation. The facilitator
may not be a good match with the group.
Get another one.
Section 3
Dominating individual
or dominating clique
Ask facilitator to set ground rules for
broad-based participation and be
responsible for enforcing mutual respect.
Section 3
6-8
Too many “experts”
Ask experts not to speak unless asked a
question. Facilitator needs to moderate
expert participation so citizens are not
intimidated or view their contribution as
meaningless.
Section 3
Lack of participation in
watershed group
meetings
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Alternative Solutions
Refer to
Section /
Page
Symptom
Section 5
Section 6
Project must meet needs of residents.
Having residents participate in a project
design increases likelihood that residents
will be willing to participate and will adopt
practices they identified to address needs
they defined.
6-5
8-4
Table 8.2. Watershed Group Formation, continued.
Symptom
Possible Causes
Alternative Solutions
Group gets
sidetracked on
conversations that
lead nowhere;
meetings end without
anything being
accomplished
Leader isn’t facilitating
the meeting
effectively.
Set an agenda that supports the group’s
mission and goals and stick to it. The group
needs a facilitator/leader that is sanctioned
by the group to cut off discussions that
don’t pertain to the agenda. Members of
the group need to agree to limit their
comments to the work they plan to
accomplish.
A project fails. It does
not solve the problem
expected
Refer to
Section /
Page
Use Diagnostic
Tool for Evaluation ofGroup
Process, p. 3
of “Purposeful
Partnerships”
8-11
Group’s mission and
objectives aren’t clear.
If the mission and objectives of the group
aren’t clear, take time to clarify them so
everyone knows where the group is going.
It may be time to revisit the mission,
objectives and activities, and change them
to better reflect the group’s expectations.
5-1, 6-5
The group moves to
action without
adequate knowledge
of the ecology of their
watershed and how
known practices can
be applied.
Ask a technical expert to be present on a
regular basis to offer guidance and advice
when the group needs information.
Section 7
The group needs to continuously learn
more about their watershed. Plan meetings
where experts share their information
(county sanitarian, district conservationist,
naturalists, water resource specialists,
fisheries and forestries scientists, water
resource scientists). Plan activities that
connect the group to the watershed:
headwaters tour, river trash pickup days,
farm tours, land use and development
tours.
Section 5
Section 6
6-14
Group has inadequate
resources to solve the
problem.
Find partners who will collaborate on the
project. Remind members that changes to
the watershed may be long-term rather
than short-run.
Section 7
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
8-5
Table 8.3. Sustaining the Group.
Symptom
Group’s activities and
projects don’t support
mission and goals the
group set out
Conflicting or
misinformation about
the watershed
Possible Causes
Alternative Solutions
Refer to
Section /
Page
Technical advisors to the group offer good
science of land use practices and
measurements to track issues to gather
the right information. They can help keep
the group in balance.
Section 7
The group needs to understand their
watershed better, identify sound land and
water solutions, and have data to support
themselves. If data on the watershed are
not available, make plans to gather it.
Data can help the group conduct informed
dialogues and set priorities.
Section 7
Section 9
Pre-meeting discussions with influential
leaders and watershed leadership can
calm fears and identify points of conflict.
The group may have to respectfully
disagree with a dominant individual and
make it clear that the group as a whole
doesn’t support projects that don’t
accomplish the mission.
Section 6
The mission and
goals may not match
the group
membership interests.
The whole group should revisit the mission
and goals they set out to determine if
those are still the group’s intent.
5-1; 6-5
Poor communication
Outside credible experts are needed to
provide technical expertise and advice.
The group needs to understand their
watershed better, sound land and water
solutions, and have data to support
themselves. If data on the watershed are
not available, make plans to gather it.
Section 7
Be sure everyone in the group
understands the mission and goals.
Extend information the group is learning to
the whole community.
5-1; 6-5
Group meetings are
dominated by
economic interests,
well-intentioned
government
employees, or
residents with a
personal agenda that
is not supported by
the whole group
Consider a regular newspaper column,
radio show, and/or monthly newsletter.
People don’t know
what to do next; lack
of clarity of group
intent
The group mission
isn’t clear. Objectives
need to be more
specific to guide
activities.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Refocus on the vision for the watershed
and the relationship of the watershed
group mission to the community vision.
Examine the group processes used to
accomplish the group intent. Are they
inadequate? How should they be
changed? This should be a group
discussion.
Use
Diagnostic
Tool for
Evaluation of
Group
Process, p. 3
of “Purposeful
Partnerships”
8-11; 6-5;
5-1, 5-16
8-6
Table 8.3. Sustaining the Group, continued.
Symptom
Interest and
participation lags;
people stop coming to
meetings
Refer to
Section /
Page
Possible Causes
Alternative Solutions
Meetings’ agendas
aren’t accomplished;
meetings run too long
and are unfocused;
activities and decisions
are made by a few
rather than everyone.
Organizational process needs to be
strengthened. Use Diagnostic Tool for
Evaluation of Group Process, p. 3 of
“Purposeful Partnerships” Discuss with group
how to respond to key problems.
Section 3
Plan and execute greater variety of visible
projects, events – examples might include
tours of land and agriculture management
practices. Get involved in activities like
IOWATER and nature mapping. Find
students who have interests in community
service projects and team up with them on a
watershed project.
Section 7
6-14
People don’t feel
the group is doing
something meaningful.
Cultivate on-going media coverage – at least
monthly articles in local newspapers or better
yet, a column.
Partner with other groups and their activities,
like Trees Forever, Ducks Unlimited, etc.
Section 7
Build realistic expectations from the
beginning of a project with clear and open
communication and inclusive processes.
Only one sector
regularly attends; nonfarmers or town
residents don’t
participate
Not included from the
very beginning;
discussions too
narrowly focused
Build their participation from the start – if
possible. Include representation in formation
and planning stages, community meeting,
watershed group, and in planning
maintenance activities.
Create subcommittees with specific focus
that would be relevant to farmers and nonfarmers (e.g., agriculture land use
management) and have them develop
recommendations for the larger group.
Section 2
2-5; 5-10
5-13
Subcommittees and activities that are
relevant to non-farmers might include
demonstrations of practices in home and
lawn care and disposal, septic systems,
water monitoring, and nature mapping.
Find activities and interests that are common
to farm and non-farm sectors. Allow both
perspectives to be voiced on a regular basis.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
6-14
8-7
Table 8.3. Sustaining the Group, continued.
Symptom
Farmers and rural
landowners don’t
participate
Possible Causes
Feeling threatened by
downstream urban
demands
Meetings are always
held in urban areas
Alternative Solutions
Create subcommittees of special interest
such as urban development and agriculture
practices. Ask them to report back to whole
group. The group needs to find common
mission and objectives between rural and
urban residents. Engage in activities that
encourage interaction and learning from each
other.
Refer to
Section /
Page
5-13
Watershed groups that span rural and urban
interests should alternate meeting between
urban and rural sites.
Conflicts arise
People don’t like each
other’s opinions/ideas;
lack of trust among
members.
There is a legitimate
conflict in perspective.
Rules of mutual respect need to be discussed
and enforced in group discussions.
6-8
Address conflicts with solid fact-based
information when possible. Use participatory
data gathering processes – let residents be
part of data gathering and discussion of
interpretations.
Section 6
6-2, 6-13
Facilitator or coordinator(s) seek strategies
that allow conflicting parties to work together.
Minority perspectives need to be
acknowledged, and mutual respect given so
they can continue to participate.
Sometimes consensus is impossible.
Elected officials
afraid/unwilling to
cooperate with the
group
Lack of trust; lack of
information; prior
activities didn’t go well;
officials do not see
political benefits but do
see political risks.
The watershed group needs to undertake an
activity or two that builds their reputation with
the community. Individual members need to
use their personal relationships to talk with
elected officials to clarify the mission and
objectives of the group and defuse
perceptions that the group is a threat to
elected officials. Invite them to attend regular
meetings and encourage them to dialogue
with the group about their concerns.
Nothing seems to be
happening; the group’s
efforts don’t seem to
make a difference.
Short-term
expectations from
actions that will take
longer to show results
Patience. Changes in the watershed will
occur when people begin to see how their
personal behaviors contribute to the whole
system.
6-14
Chose a balance of activities that will have
visible short-term results and long-run impact.
Undertake coalitions that bridge the interests
of different organizations so the group has
more resources to attack the problem.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Section 7
6-10
8-8
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Section 9A: Ways of knowing:
Strategies for acquiring local
knowledge
There are many opportunities for members
of community watershed groups to become
involved in gathering, interpreting, and using
data. Standard secondary data on
populations, industrial and agricultural uses,
climate, soil classifications and land
formations, social and economic conditions
are available for building multi-layered
knowledge of the watershed. Members can
participate in water monitoring, land use,
and habitat assessments. In addition,
community watershed groups can assist in
collecting data on knowledge, attitudes, and
beliefs about the watershed as well as
economic and social measurements that are
not available in standard data sets.
There are several ways that watershed
groups can expand their knowledge:
participatory research, collaboration with
established researchers, and funding of
research to answer specific questions. Most
groups will use more than one strategy.
Participatory research is a process
whereby some of the group members learn
appropriate techniques to gather data on
questions the group has about particular
aspects of the watershed. The group
members formulate the questions, then seek
to gather data that can answer those
questions. Once data are collected, they
work together to make sense of it. Findings
often lead to other questions and additional
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
data collection. The group turns their data
into information the watershed group can
use in planning and collective actions.
Members often feel they can “trust” their
data because they know and understand the
conditions under which it is gathered.
Participatory research has the distinct
attribute of involving residents in ways that
build in-depth understanding and confidence
to direct change for the watershed. But
there are cautions. Care needs to be taken
so that an adversarial relationship is not
created with interest groups and perhaps
also with those who are in technical and
scientific roles. Watershed physics are
complex and participant led research can be
flawed and vulnerable to criticism if it is not
done rigorously or if it does not use reliable
methods. Once the group formulates
research questions, they should seek advice
on accepted methods for collecting
different kinds of data.
A second or “middle” ground approach is
for watershed group members to learn to do
certain technical and data gathering
activities in collaboration with or under
the guidance of credible and established
researchers. Water monitoring and nature
mapping training offer members
standardized methods for increasing local
knowledge (see pp. 7-20, 7-29). Thus, the
group builds a local and regional database
for themselves and others to use.
9-1
A third strategy is to identify the questions
that need answering and then commission
the research from a credible vender. If the
group is well established, interest is high,
and the research product is delivered in a
timely fashion, then information from the
contracted research will likely be used in
meaningful ways. If the research questions
are highly technical, then this may be an
advisable approach. If the interest is less
technical, or if the council is at a more
exploratory stage, then the other approaches
may be quite viable and less costly.
Participatory research may be easier to
implement for understanding human context
issues than hydrologic processes.
Applying usable and reliable information
must be one cornerstone of citizen led
watershed planning. Although essential,
information for making decisions is not
limited to hydrological and geophysical
characteristics and trends of the watershed.
Also important are knowing and
understanding the social, cultural,
economic, and political dynamics of
residents and other stakeholders.
Fortunately, indicators for certain of these
characteristics may already be available and
readily assembled. Other data, however, will
likely need to be generated from residents
and stakeholders themselves.
In this section we discuss several alternative
ways of knowing. Knowledge is built
through listening and learning about what is
happening in the watershed. In the context
of physical and biological change, this may
require sophisticated equipment for
measuring baseline conditions and tracking
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
changes. In the social context, much can be
learned by “listening” to residents
themselves. Several “listening” alternatives
build on advantages of the participatory
research approach, especially if there is
interest in understanding stakeholder
knowledge, values, attitudes, motivations,
commitments, actions, and behaviors
helpful in addressing watershed issues. The
watershed planning group should recognize
there is a variety of evidence individuals
find helpful and acceptable for knowing and
understanding, and, subsequently,
determining what becomes important
factors when they act.
Similar to other kinds of problem solving,
generating systematic feedback can be
broken into parts. The time-tested parts of
the lead in newspaper reporting can be
helpful, namely addressing “who,” “what,”
“when,” “where,” “why” and “how.” These
considerations are addressed below,
although in a slightly rearranged order.
Why listen to watershed residents and
stakeholders?
“Listening” or generating systematic
feedback provides at least two principle
functions, both of which are necessary for
effective watershed planning. One is, of
course, the new information that will be
considered in the planning deliberations.
The second is residents will more likely
follow and be committed to solutions they
have helped form. Planning and watershed
problem solving are never solely a matter of
knowing the physical conditions and
processes and then finding engineering
9-2
solutions. While knowing the physical
conditions and engineering alternatives are
central ingredients to watershed problem
solving, policy decisions also involve
choices that are tempered by understanding
and incorporating human factors. It is rare
that an analysis of physical conditions and
engineering alternatives will yield an
unequivocal single best course of action.
Rather, a range of actions is often feasible,
and individually many actions can make at
least an incremental contribution to
maintaining sound stewardship, reducing
risks, or ameliorating emerging problems.
Although most residents will not possess
highly technical information, they often do
possess an indigenous understanding and
history of the watershed as well as the kinds
of solutions that will be accepted from
social, economic, and political
perspectives.
What to listen for?
“Why” a watershed group listens to
residents and stakeholders will determine to
a great extent “what” to listen for. Thus, one
of the first decisions in planning for citizen
input, is determining for what purpose the
information will be used. For example, is
the reason to:
? generate ideas for possible solutions and
courses of action?
? document land use or profile certain
conditions and behaviors?
? assess values and attitudes?
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
? inform as well as listen?
? generate interest, motivation, and
involvement?
? recruit resources and solicit
commitment to action?
In a stakeholder or citizen-driven initiative
to address watershed issues, each of the
above interests is a legitimate reason to
conduct information gathering activities, but
no single technique or approach will yield
full information about all. Consequently, the
group must focus and prioritize what
information will be most strategic for
planning. Then they can match what they
want to know with the right data collection
techniques.
Choosing the information and knowledge
that will have greatest interest and priority
will also help in selecting whom to listen to.
For example, survey methodology is not an
especially efficient technique to generate
new and creative ideas, but is very helpful to
document people’s beliefs, attitudes and
actions. Town meetings may allow for
informing as well as listening and, perhaps,
generating ideas for potential and even
creative solutions. But, information from
town meetings will not provide a statistical
basis to profile socio-political factors, let
alone current land use or agricultural
practices.
A pitfall to avoid is trying to gather too
much information, or gathering information
that covers too wide a spectrum. Although
broad-based information is helpful for
9-3
“perspective,” most citizen led groups
cannot afford the luxury of time and
resources it takes to generate everything
that potentially may be useful.
Once what information is to be used for is
decided upon, then specific information to
be generated can be addressed. Groups
often find it helpful to differentiate the kind
of information they are seeking in order to
better frame their questions and information
gathering. Again, do not lose sight of what
the group wants to know.
Beliefs are people’s perceptions about the world and how it works. They are
statements about what is regarded as true and not true. Beliefs arise from a number
of sources, ranging from scientific fact, systematic (or unsystematic) observation,
learned behavior, or unverified assumptions. When a verification technique is
attached to beliefs, then beliefs are regarded as knowledge. People are often
assumed to act rationally based on their beliefs; therefore, knowing resident and
stakeholder perceptions about conditions, causes, and solutions can be strong
predictors regarding future behaviors. Assessing beliefs and knowledge can also
be useful in determining the information and misinformation that may be present
within the watershed setting. Also, a fairly typical technique where substitute courses
of action are being considered is to offer “what if” or future alternative courses of
action. This is sometimes called projective techniques, and taps respondents’
perceptions of hypothetical situations.
Values are deep seated and pervasive ideas or orientations about what is
important and right or wrong. In the realm of watershed management the strength of
one’s endorsement of such concepts as environmental stewardship, sustainability,
natural resource preservation, property rights, and economic development provide a
framework from which individuals organize their lives and interpret new ideas,
courses of action or social change. Within a watershed, these may be shared
among residents or they may differ greatly. Often a person’s values are organized
consistently, but, at least externally, sometimes they may appear inherently at odds
with one another.
Attitudes are usually regarded as an assessment or subjective evaluation about a
more concrete or object, idea, or policy. Additionally, an attitude is a sensing or a
feeling response of good/bad or positive/negative rather than an analytical objective
or factual analysis. For example, one may believe regulation of livestock operations
is an effective policy to control pollution in a watershed, but oppose or have a
negative attitude about the policy because of one’s values regarding property rights.
Figure 9.1. Beliefs, values, and attitudes
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
9-4
Understanding the distinction between
beliefs, values, and attitudes is important in
how questions are asked as well as
interpreting the meaning of answers to
those questions.
Another arena of inquiry is behavior. Asking
residents to report on activities is a typical
approach to measure behavior. Often,
questions relate to past or current actions.
In the world of watershed planning,
questions could be about behaviors ranging
from what individuals do that contribute to
adverse conditions to their level of civic
involvement to address water quality issues
in the watershed.
To whom do you listen?
When generating local knowledge about a
watershed, deciding whom to listen to is a
critical decision. Earlier we referred to
residents and stakeholders as reference
groups for watershed planning. The meaning
and identity of residents is reasonably selfevident as is their interest in the future of
the watershed. Identifying other
stakeholders may be more involved, but
fundamentally we are referring to persons
who have a fairly direct and vested interest
in the environmental health of the watershed
and perhaps to the broader region. Quite
obviously, residents are a stakeholder
subset. Additionally, there are those who are
affected by the health of the watershed such
as persons whose drinking water comes
from the watershed. Also, persons who own
land or businesses within the watershed but
do not reside there will be affected by
policies affecting the watershed; thus, they
are an important stakeholder group as well.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Typically, in agricultural watersheds there
are many landowners, farm operators, and
other investors who do not reside in the
watershed but who could be substantially
affected by consequences of new projects
and policies. Not surprisingly, their
perceptions of problems and assessments of
alternative solutions may differ from those
who have less economic investment but may
be more personally subjected to
consequences of poor management
practices of the watershed.
Identifying and segmenting these
stakeholder groups is important. Because
their interests are tempered by their
connections relative to the watershed, it is
instructive to understand local knowledge
and how it is similar or different among
stakeholder groups.
How do you listen?
There are a number of useful formats from
which to listen and learn from residents and
stakeholders and generate information.
There is no one best method. Depending
upon one’s objectives, resources, and
constraints, each of several formats has
advantages and disadvantages. Several years
ago, the Wisconsin Cooperative Extension
Service offered “fifty-one” techniques to
generate information from citizens (Figure
9.2).
Nonetheless, most planning groups rely
upon a few that are more popular. Among
these are public record, survey, focus group,
participant observation, and community
forum.
9-5
advisory committee
alternative plan assistance
arbitration and mediation
behavioral observation
call-in radio show
charette
citizen employment
citizen honoraria
citizen review board
citizen training
community-sponsored meeting
computer-based techniques
coordinator
day-to-day public contacts
delphi
demonstration project
design-in
direct mail
display models or drawings
drop-in center
field trip
fishbowl planning
focused group interviews
game simulation
group dynamics
hot line
interactive cable TV
issue ballots in newspaper
key contacts
mail analysis
media analysis
neighborhood planning council
neighborhood sponsored meetings
nominal group process
ombudsman
open-door policy
planning balance sheet
priority-setting committee
public hearings
public information program
public meetings
referendum
representation on boards
short conference
staff reports
surveys
task force
telephone networks
value analysis
videotaped meetings
workshops
Hariett Moyer, University of Wisconsin Extension, unpublished.
Figure 9.2. Fifty-one techniques to obtain information and increase citizen knowledge
Be aware, people use different ways to
know and understand the world around them.
Information generated from these different
techniques will be more credible and
persuasive for some people than for others.
In part, but not entirely, believability is
influenced by the inherent advantages and
disadvantages the different techniques have
for the particular knowledge that is being
sought.
Community forum or town meeting is a
hallmark of public policy deliberation. It has
the advantage that everyone has the
opportunity to “be heard.” This watershed
manual uses the community forum at the
beginning of the process to involve citizens.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Sections 2 and 4 offer guidance for
preparing a community meeting.
Community forums have an advantage of
being inexpensive and relatively easy to
organize and administer. Input comes from a
wide range of people if proper planning is
conducted. Community forums can elicit
positive public relations as well as planning
benefits. Conversely, motivating residents
to attend can be difficult when there has not
been high concern or a “critical” event.
Some individuals may choose to use the
forum as a “gripe” session or promote
“vested” interest if the forum is not planned
and executed well. A few individuals can
dominate and intimidate the conversation at
a community forum and subvert the goals of
9-6
the organizers. The community forum is a
quick and relatively inexpensive way to tap
the sentiments of the community. However,
the generalizability of what is heard is
problematic. It does, however, allow the
feedback and deliberation to be conducted
without the criticism of “back room”
dealing.
Another model that could be adapted is the
widely known “national issues forum”
approach developed by the Kettering
Foundation. Information is available on the
Internet at: http://www.nifi.org/issues.html.
Also, in Iowa, a recently developed
coalition of individuals and organizations
has formed a partnership to assist with
public deliberation forums. A contact is
David Wilkinson; his email address is:
dwilkinson@isea.org.
Public records is a technique of searching
and assembling information that has been
archived by other agencies for other
purposes. These may be secondary data such
as Census Bureau and soil classification, or
newspaper, zoning and planning actions and
court records. Because of the public nature
of the information, it can be accessed and
used to inform the watershed group about a
number of social, economic, political, and
land use patterns within the watershed.
Increasingly this information is
electronically stored in readily retrievable
formats. However, often these data are
gathered and stored for geographical units
or political entities other than watersheds.
Consequently, approximating watershed
boundaries can be problematic, and making
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
the interpolations necessary to approximate
the watershed may be at times quite crude.
For example, the smallest unit of census
information is the census tract, and several
tracts may need to be aggregated to
construct an approximation of the watershed
boundary. Other information may be
available at a county boundary level, and thus
have major influencing factors, especially if
a major population base or point-source
pollution is outside the watershed boundary.
Although some county based data points
may be publicly available at a site-specific
level, to convert those indicators to a site
within the watershed can be tedious, timeconsuming, expensive, and will often fall
short of reasonable cost-benefit
considerations.
Public record information is largely
objective indicators and do not tap such
social indicators as beliefs, values, and
attitudes. Public records have an advantage
in that often the data include the full
universe rather than a sample. Additionally,
it is unobtrusive as the information has
already been collected and stored for other
purposes (and at someone else’s expense).
There is a flip side to the unobtrusiveness,
however. That is, it doesn’t involve citizens
in seeking their ideas and assessments. Like
other methods of generating new
knowledge, there may be a role for
volunteers to help assemble and information
for the planning group.
Survey is a technique that generates new
information from residents and
stakeholders on a fairly broad range of
9-7
indicators useful to understand dynamics
occurring within the watershed as well as
assessing courses of action and likely
acceptance or rejection of those ideas. If
appropriate sampling techniques are used,
survey also has the advantage of making
generalizations to the larger universe of the
watershed within known degrees of error.
But conducting a survey can be a major
undertaking and could involve tasks
requiring some technical assistance. For
example, writing questions that elicit
answers that reliably measure a person’s
behavior or attitude is a skilled craft.
Likewise, developing sampling frames from
which to select persons to be part of the
survey need to be systematic and follow
statistical procedures. The tabulation of
answers can be tedious and time consuming.
Finally, interpreting the meaning of the
statistical distribution can be challenging
for persons not trained in this empirical
research.
Several options for collecting survey data
are available. Self-administered mail
questionnaires are popular and less
expensive than telephone or personal
interviews, but they yield a less than
complete response rate, sometimes making
validity of the findings suspect. Web based
surveys are becoming more popular. They
have a cost advantage both in the data
collection and in the automatic tabulations
that are usually built-in. However,
respondents must have access to and be
comfortable with the Internet.
Unfortunately, at the present time web based
surveys are not appropriate for most
household based studies, but are becoming a
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
viable alternative for certain stakeholder
groups. If you feel a web survey might work
for you, the University of Virginia has a very
user-friendly web-based service. For a
modest fee ($125), you can easily develop a
set of questions, provide your respondents a
web address, and get instant tabulations. The
contact URL is: http://www.virginia.edu/
insideuva/1999/33/hotlinks.html.
If you are contemplating a more
conventional survey, the University of
Illinois has an extraordinarily helpful
website for planning a survey. It includes
steps in conducting a survey, help for
writing questions, and more technical
assistance in determining sample size. The
assistance is no cost to the user and may be
found at: http://www.
communitydevelopment.uiuc.edu/toolbox/.
Focus groups have been an increasingly
popular means to generate local
information. Currently a wide variety of
group-based feedback is conducted under
the label “focus group.” Unlike survey and
experimental methodologies, there are
fewer “standards” associated with the focus
group technique. Although most focus group
procedures lack the statistical base for
generalization that surveys offer, if done
well focus groups can generate credible and
useful information. Focus groups have a
special advantage of spontaneity and
interaction among participants. In addition,
they are more likely to generate new ideas
and solutions, whereas survey techniques
are stronger in validating what is proposed
on the questionnaire form. Focus groups are
often arranged with 8-12 participants, and a
9-8
conversation is organized for a period of 45
minutes to 1-½ hours. A small set of
prearranged questions are posed by a
facilitator who guides the conversation by
making sure everyone participates and
appropriate probes are asked in order to
establish meaning, detail, and clarity in
answers. Some guidelines for focus groups
stress the importance of sameness in how the
questions and probes are asked and how the
conversation is conducted. Other guidelines
are more relaxed and stress the importance of
eliciting ideas for understanding. It is,
however, important that the facilitator not
have an “agenda,” be neutral, and be regarded
as neutral by participants. Further, the
facilitator should not naive about watershed
and water quality issues.
Usually participants from a single stakeholder
group are invited to participate in a focus
group. Homogeneity rather than
heterogeneity among participants is usually
but not always recommended. There may be
conscious reasons for bringing together
stakeholders with different viewpoints into a
single focus group. If so, these assemblies
potentially require greater facilitation skill. In
total, 8 to 12 groups may be arranged over a
period of a few days or a few weeks.
Sometimes, the focus group session may be
recorded and transcribed and detailed content
analysis conducted. Other times, a recorder
will write ideas as they are offered and this
becomes the “data” for summarization. Often
there is a convergence of ideas, or at least
major themes that emerge among the various
focus groups. This pattern gives credibility to
the process and provides the watershed group
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
assurance in instituting courses of action
consistent with these response patterns.
The St. Paul, Minnesota-based Management
Assistance Program for Nonprofits gives
more details on organizing and conducting
focus groups. The website address is: http://
www.mapnp.org/library/evaluatn/
focusgrp.htm.
Participant observation is a time-tested
methodology in the social sciences. It usually
relies upon a single observer, or perhaps an
observer and an assistant, who spends large
amounts of time interacting on location with
those being studied, in this case watershed
residents and stakeholders. The researcher
conducts in depth observations and
conversations with persons in the course of
living (and working) within the watershed.
That participant observer may also spend time
collecting data from public records, archived
reports, newspaper articles, etc. Although
time consuming, the trained and neutral
observer captures a wealth of information,
often in convincing detail. Participant
observation studies simultaneously have the
disadvantage of potential bias because the
information is collected and interpreted
through the eyes of a single individual, but it
has the advantage of its richness of detail
unmet by other methods.
When to listen
Watershed groups need to listen and gather
information throughout the watershed group
development process. As the group learns
about their watershed, they will ask more in-
9-9
depth and detailed questions and become
more skilled in generating knowledge that
can guide management decisions and
actions. The importance of dialogue, both
through the more deliberate and structured
techniques discussed above as well as
ongoing day-to-day conversations, must be
open and transparent. This cannot be overemphasized, and it calls to attention a
corollary of listening and learning. The
watershed group needs to communicate
back to residents and stakeholders regarding
what is being heard. This takes patience and
persistence, but no other activity has a
higher cost-benefit ratio for a citizen led
watershed planning process.
Where to listen
“Where to listen” rounds out the six criteria
for gathering data and learning about the
watershed. The lesson is simply to make
sure the feedback opportunities are as
convenient as possible. That is, schedule
meetings at times of the year, days of the
week, hour of the day, and location that will
invite the greatest participation. Today, the
personal and professional lives of many
households are such that civic involvement
comes at a sacrifice and premium with other
legitimate demands of everyday living.
Although completing a questionnaire,
attending a town meeting, or participating in
a focus group seems minimal, it is out of
the routine for many persons and may hold
less salience to many residents than to
dedicated watershed group members.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
9-10
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Section 9B: Ways of knowing:
Displaying and presenting data
to build knowledge and guide
decision making
Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
and Watershed Planning
“A picture is worth a thousand words.”
GIS has emerged as a powerful computer
tool for land planning and management.
Not only has it become a powerful tool for
planning and management professionals,
but also over the past few years especially,
this tool has begun to show its value in
citizen participation.
“Draw me a picture.”
Put It on the Map
For many of us looking at rows and
columns of data on spreadsheets, or
reading reports with no illustrations only
tends to shorten our attention spans and do
us eye damage! Images and pictures help
us to visualize what the information is and
helps us understand what it means.
Most of what we talk about is connected to
specific location. Such things as where
our home is, where we go to work, where
our farm is, where our schools are, hat the
surrounding cities are, where our grocery
store is, where our favorite stores are, the
roads we travel, where we recreate, our
favorite fishing spot, and the list goes on.
Using Computer Power to Visualize Your
Watershed
If you were told about a place, say Palo
Alto County in northwest Iowa, it is much
easier to picture it if some sort of visual
reference is given as in the following
image.
If we look closer at Palo Alto County, we
find and identify specific places on the
map. This helps to get our bearings about
the place and its surroundings.
The classic quotes above exactly describe
the power of Geographic information
systems (GIS). Over the last 2 decades
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
9-11
After we locate these places on the map,
the computer can take it a step further. It
can “attach”, or link, information about the
places to the location on the map. So, not
only do you have the name of the place
and its location, you have information
about that place.
With most GIS software it is possible to
see this attached information by simply
“clicking” on the screen on the place of
interest, as seen in the image below which
shows that by clicking on the city of
Emmetsburg we find that it is located in
Palo Alto County, that its 1980 population
was 4621 and that the 1990 population
was 3940.
the computer questions about these places
and find out much more.
Depending on what kind of information
we have linked to the places on the map,
we can ask the GIS such questions as:
??What is the population of my
hometown?
??What kind of pavement does this
highway have?
??How many people over 60 years
old live in my county?
??How many acres are within the city
limits?
But it doesn’t stop there. We can begin to
ask more analytical questions like:
??Show me which townships in this
watershed have the most people
under 5 years old.
??How many acres of forest are
within 100 feet of a particular
stream?
??Show us the most agriculturally
productive soils in the watershed
area.
Ask the Computer
GIS takes into account the actual physical
location of these places, information about
the place, and can help us understand the
relationships among them by showing
them on a map on the computer. Once we
see the “picture” of where these places are
we can begin to see how they are related.
Once the place on the map is linked to
information about it, we can then ask
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
9-12
Five Island Lake, Palo Alto County,
Iowa
Suppose our area of interest is in the
watershed of five Island Lake outside
Emmetsburg in Palo Alto County.
A Unites States Geological Survey
(USGS) map of the area would look like
the image below.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
A GIS could identify specific features in
that area, such as in the following image.
This image shows the various soil types
which are identified according to a
productivity rating called the “corn
suitability rating” or CSR. The CSR ranks
soils on a scale of 1-100 based upon their
productive potential.
In the following image the watershed of
Five Mile Lake is shown in relationship to
the lake and the different soil types. At
this point it is possible to ask the GIS, for
example, to determine the number of acres
of the different soils.
9-13
This Emmetsburg example simply shows
some of the capabilities and usefulness of
GIS in considering a physical place such as
a watershed area.
Putting GIS to Work
Some technical skill is usually needed in
order to use a GIS. With the guidance of a
person familiar with the technology, a group
of citizens can identify and investigate the
issues and concerns of their watershed in a
visual and graphic manner.
Much of the data required is readily
available from publicly accessible sources
(many are listed below under “Data
Source”). Hardware and software
suggestions are listed on the following
page.
Some of the initial steps to get started with
using a GIS are:
? Start with a base map of your general
area.
? Identify the boundaries of the watershed.
? Locate your points of interests.
? Identify issues and interests for targeted
data collection.
Data Sources
http://www.gis.iastate.edu/DataBaseNew.html
This document describes a centralized
geographic information system (GIS) data
base maintained by the Iowa State
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
University (ISU) GIS Support and Research
Facility. The data base is a general GIS data
base, maintained to support research and
education. The philosophy behind the
creation of the data base is to gather as much
information as possible for the variety of
uses of GIS information represented at ISU.
These applications include everything from
planning to environmental monitoring to
sociological studies. The data base contains
a variety of types of information developed
at a variety of map scales and resolutions.
Information is maintained at the national,
state, and local level.
http://www.gis.iastate.edu/Links.html
Links to a large number of data sources are listed
here by the GIS Support and Research Facility,
which is a public computing facility established to
support the use of geographic information system
(GIS) technology at Iowa State University.
http://igic.gis.iastate.edu
This is the website for the Iowa Geographic
Information Council (IGIC). The mission of the
IGIC is to:
• act as a clearinghouse for GIS information and
expertise in Iowa
• encourage the development of open GIS
standards
• facilitate the voluntary exchange of data among
GIS users in Iowa
• encourage the use of
telecommunicationsnetworks, like the Iowa
Communications Network, for exchange of ideas
• improve policy makers’ knowledge of GIS and
related technologies
• serve as a focal point for intergovernmental
efforts to receive additional funds, especially
federal funds, for GIS development in Iowa.
9-14
http://www.dot.state.ia.us/transdata/
viewmaps.htm
The Iowa Department of Transportation provides
access to digital transportation data through this
website.
Hardware & Software
Software:
·
http://www.igsb.uiowa.edu/nrgis/gishome.htm
The Natural Resources Geographic
Information System (NRGIS) is the
geographic information system (GIS)
developed and maintained by the Iowa
Department of Natural Resources (IDNR).
The purpose of the NRGIS is to improve the
availability, integration, and analysis of
natural resource information and improve
decisions regarding the management,
development, and protection of Iowa’s
natural resources.
http://www.geographynetwork.com/
The Geography Network is an online
resource for finding and sharing geographic
content, including maps and data, from many
of the world’s leading providers.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
ArcView GIS from ESRI. This is
popular software package used widely
thoughout the U.S. and the world.
www.esri.com
ESRI ArcExplorer Version 2.0.8
Classic GDS, Informatix Software
International Limited, Cambridge,
England, http:www.informatix.co.uk/
·
GeoMedia Pro by Intergraph. Another
popular software package.
www.intergraph.com
Hardware:
Many computer configurations are possible
and this would depend upon the
requirements of the software package which
are regularly updated. A computer with
processor speeds of over 400mhz, 128 Mb
RAM, and 20 Gb hard drive would be
suggested with a 17-inch minimum monitor.
A color printer will allow you to print maps
to share with the watershed group.
9-15
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Section 10: Resources and
Websites
Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay
http://www.acb-online.org/
David B. Bancroft, Executive Director
(410) 377-6270
dbancroft@acb-online.org
Washington DC
1612 K Street, NW Suite 202
Washington DC 20006
Phone: 202-466-4633
Fax: 202-293-5857
Maryland CBPO
410 Severn Avenue
Annapolis, MD 21403
Phone: 410-267-5700
Fax: 410-267-5777
Virginia
P.O. Box 1981
Richmond, VA 23218
Phone: 804-775-0951
Fax: 804-775-0954
acbva@acb-online.org
Maryland Baltimore
6600 York Road Suite 100
Baltimore, MD 21212
Phone: 410-377-6270
Fax: 410-377-7144
mail@acb-online.org
Pennsylvania
3310 Market Street, Suite A
Camp Hill, PA 17011
Phone: 717-737-8622
Fax: 717-737-8650
acbpa@acb-online.org
The Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay is a regional nonprofit organization that builds and fosters
partnerships for the restoration of the Bay and its rivers.
Watershed Stewardship: Encourages voluntary partnerships in projects that improve water quality
and wildlife habitat, build community involvement, and promote long-term watershed stewardship. We
train volunteers, organizations, and businesses with the technical skills they need to monitor water
quality and to restore stream and estuarine habitats. We also help businesses learn how to prevent
pollution and how to teach watershed groups to build strong organizations.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
10-1
Center for Watershed Protection
8390 Main Street, 2nd Floor
Ellicott City, MD 21043
Phone: 410-461-8323
Fax: 410-461-8324
http://www.cwp.org
center@cwp.org
Founded in 1992, the Center for Watershed Protection is a non-profit 501(c)3 corporation
that provides local governments, activists, and watershed organizations around the country with
the technical tools for protecting some of the nation’s most precious natural resources: our
streams, lakes and rivers. The Center has developed and disseminated a multi-disciplinary
strategy to watershed protection that encompasses watershed planning, watershed restoration,
stormwater management, watershed research, better site design, education and outreach, and
watershed training.
http://water.usgs.gov/owq/cleanwater/
The Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy and the Interior, the Environmental Protection
Agency, the Tennessee Valley Authority, and the Army Corps of Engineers are adopting a unified Federal
policy on watershed management. This policy provides a framework for a watershed approach to Federal
land and resource management activities. The final policy has been revised in response to public comments
on the proposed policy and was published in the Federal Register on February 22, 2000 (65 FR 8834).
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
10-2
Clean Water Network
1200 New York Avenue, NW
Suite 400
Washington, D.C. 20005
Phone: 202-298-2421
Fax: 202-289-1060
http://www.cwn.org/cwn/
info@cwn.org
The Clean Water Network is a coalition of more than 1,000 public interest organizations that endorse our
platform paper, the National Agenda for Clean Water. The Agenda outlines the need for strong clean water
safeguards in order to protect public health and the environment.
The Clean Water Network includes a wide variety of public interest organizations representing environmentalists, commercial fishermen, recreational anglers, surfers, boaters, farmers, faith communities, environmental justice, labor unions, consumer advocates, and others. Any group that endorses our National Agenda can
join.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
10-3
Ecosystem Management Initiative (EMI)
http://www.snre.umich.edu/ecomgt//
Dr. Steven Yaffee, Director
Phone: 734-615-6431
yaffee@umich.edu
Mission: Promoting sustainable natural resource management through ecosystem-based teaching,
research, and outreach.
Ecosystem management (EM) uses an ecosystem-based approach to resource management in order to
address the myriad challenges that arise from fragmented landscapes and diverse management strategies.
(The) Great North American Secchi Dip-in
http://dipin.kent.edu/
dipin@kent.edu
The Secchi Dip-In is a demonstration of the potential of volunteer monitors to gather environmentally
important information on our lakes, rivers and estuaries.
The concept of the Dip-In is simple: individuals in volunteer monitoring programs take a transparency
(usually with a Secchi disk) measurement on one day in a period surrounding Canada Day and July
Fourth. Individuals may be monitoring lakes, reservoirs, estuaries, rivers, or streams. These Secchi
transparency values are used to assess the transparency of volunteer-monitored lakes in the United
States and Canada.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
10-4
Island Press
Editorial Office
1718 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 300
Washington DC 20009-1148
Phone: 202-232-7933
Fax: 202-234-1328
http://www.islandpress.org/
info@islandpress.org
A mission-oriented, non-profit publisher, Island Press was organized in 1984 to help meet
the need for accessible, solutions-oriented information through a unique approach that
addresses the multidisciplinary nature of environmental problems.
Our program is designed to translate technical information from a range of disciplines
into a book format that is accessible and informative to citizen activists, educators,
students, and professionals involved in the study or management of environmental
programs.
Shearwater Books, established in 1992 as an imprint of Island Press, explores through
literary nonfiction and autobiography, the relationships of nature, science, and human
culture.
Island Press publishes 35-40 new titles per year; our multi-channel distribution program
ensures broad and targeted access to these practical tools.
(The Multi-State Working Group on
Environmental Management Systems
General MSWG Questions:
Marci Carter
marci.carter@uni.edu
13912 W Stardust Blvd, Suite 103
Sun City West, AZ 85375
Phone: 623-975-4900
Fax: 623-214-2293
http://www.mswg.org
MSWG is an organization that convenes government, non-government, business and
academic interests to conduct research, promote dialogue, create networks and establish
partnerships that improve the state of the environment, economy and community through
systems-based public and private policy innovation. Its quarterly meetings move around
the US to accommodate participation. Meetings are open; everyone is welcome. All have
a right to speak. Decisions are by consensus. The Council of State Governments (CSG)
handles administration and to accommodate gifts has 501(c)(3) status. Voluntary dues
support MSWG. NGOs do not pay dues. New members are welcome, especially
businesses and NGOs. All 50 states are enrolled in MSWG and linked by e-mail. About
25 states regularly participate at quarterly meetings and 30-40 states attend the annual
meeting and workshop.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
10-5
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Nonpoint Source Control Branch (4503T)
Ariel Rios Bldg
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 202-566-1155
http://www.epa.gov/owow/info/NewsNotes/
Nonpoint Source News-Notes is an occasional bulletin dealing with the condition of the waterrelated environment, the control of nonpoint sources of water pollution (NPS), and the
ecosystem-driven management and restoration of watersheds. NPS pollution comes from many
sources and is caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the ground. As the
runoff moves, it picks up and carries away natural pollutants and pollutants resulting from
human activity, finally depositing them into lakes, rivers, wetlands, coastal waters, and
groundwater. NPS pollution is associated with land management practices involving agriculture,
silviculture, mining, and urban runoff. Hydrologic modification is a form of NPS polution that
often adversely affects the biological integrity of surface waters.
News-Notes was printed and mailed to subscribers free for the first 10 years of its existence.
It’s now published electronically. Current and back issues can be accessed at their website in
both .pdf and .html formats.
NWISWeb Data for the Nation
http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis
These pages provide access to water-resources data collected at approximately 1.5
million sites in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Online access to
this data is organized around the categories listed to the left.
The USGS investigates the occurrence, quantity, quality, distribution, and movement of
surface and underground waters and disseminates the data to the public, State and local
governments, public and private utilities, and other Federal agencies involved with
managing our water resources.
Riparian Buffer Systems (RiMS)
http://www.buffer.forestry.iastate.edu
A management approach for environmental enhancement of intensively modified agricultural
landscapes.
The Agroecology Issue Team is developing a RiMS Model for application in the Midwestern
United States.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
10-6
The River Network
http://www.rivernetwork.org/
National Office
520 SW 6th Avenue #1120
Portland, OR 97204
Phone: 503-241-3506 or
1-800-423-6747
Fax: 503-241-9256
info@rivernetwork.org
DC Office
3814 Albemarle Street NW
Washington DC 20016
Phone: 202-364-2550
Fax: 202-364-2520
dc@rivernetwork.org
Idaho
3920 Twilight Ct
Boise, ID 83703
Phone: 208-345-3689
Fax: 208-345-1588
Vermont Office
153 State Street
Montpelier, VT 05602
Phone: 802-223-3840
Fax: 802-223-6277
vt@rivernetwork.org
River Network was founded in 1988 with the conviction that the solutions to river degradation are primarily local and must be created by citizen action, watershed by watershed. We dedicate ourselves to
building citizen groups to speak out for rivers in every watershed across the country.
River Network’s Watershed Programs help local communities understand, protect and restore their rivers
and watersheds by providing technical assistance, information and seed funding to help local river and
conservation groups to flourish. In 1999, River Network merged with a sister organization, River Watch
Network, of Montpelier, Vermont. Also, in 1999 our watershed training program provided training to over
2,000 individuals and granted more than $700,000 to grassroots groups. Today, River Network has a $5million budget, with 34 staff working in 4 offices across the United States. River Network continues to
provide personalized assistance, training and information to more than 500 partner groups through our
watershed programs. River Network’s long-term vision is to establish vigilant and effective citizen organizations in each of the 2000 major watersheds in the United States.
In October 2000, River Network received an Environmental Merit Award from EPA for our bridgebuilding work in the Southeastern United States.
The River Conservancy is our initiative to directly preserve some of America’s best rivers by acquiring
riverlands for long-term protection. Our River Conservancy program purchased strategic riverlands in
Montana and the Pacific Northwest. River Network’s River Conservancy Program has acquired and
protected more than 40,000 acres of key riverlands to date.
River Network is a national organization. Our headquarters is in Portland, Oregon. We also have offices in
Washington, DC and Montpelier, Vermont.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
10-7
Science and Environmental Health Network
http://www.sehn.org/
info@sehn.org
Carolyn Raffensperger, Executive Director
Science and Environmental Health Network
217 Welch Avenue, Suite 101
Ames, IA 50014
Phone: 515-268-0600
Fax: 515-268-0604
carolyn@sehn.org
Ted Schettler, Science Director
Phone: 978-462-4092
ted@sehn.org
SEHN advocates the wise application of science to protecting the environment and public health. Founded
in 1994, SEHN serves as both network and think tank for the environmental movement, helping
environmental organizations use science in their work, guiding scientists to public interest research and public
service, informing public policy with science grounded in ethics and logic.
WATERSHEDSS
http://h2osparc.wq.ncsu.edu/
waterquality@ncsu.edu
The two primary objectives of WATERSHEDSS are to:
·
transfer water quality and land treatment information to watershed managers in order to assist them
in making appropriate land management and land treatment decisions to achieve water quality goals
·
assess and evaluate sources, impacts, and potential management options for control of nonpoint
source pollution in a watershed based on user-supplied information and decisions.
To adequately control nonpoint source pollution of a water resource, water quality managers must focus on
minimizing the impacts of individual nonpoint source pollutants. The strategic choice and placement of best
management practices (BMPs) in the watershed can successfully reduce the input of individual pollutants
and may improve water quality. WATERSHEDSS (WATER, Soil, and Hydro- Environmental Decision
Support System) was designed to help watershed managers and land treatment personnel identify their
water quality problems and select appropriate best management practices.
Mailing Address
NCSU Water Quality Group
Campus Box 7637
Raleigh NC 27695-7637
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Physical Address
909 Capability Drive Suite 3200
Research Bldg IV, Centennial Campus NCSU
Raleigh NC 27606
Phone: 919-515-3723
Fax: 919-515-7448
Revised May 2006
10-8
Publications
“Agenda Building and Big Science”
John J. Madison in Policy Sciences, 33:31-53, 2000.
This paper explores the idea of “agenda building” within two arenas–general social problem solving and “big
science”. The authors show how these arenas differ and use examples to show how agenda building occurs
within the “big science” arena. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Kluwer Law International, 233 Spring St. Fl.
7, New York, NY 10013-1522, Tel: 212-620-8000; http://www.kluweronline.com/
Beyond Maps: GIS and Decision Making in Local Government
John O’Looney, Ed.D., Ph.D.
This book is written to help local managers and elected officials use GIS (Geographic Information System)
technology in decision making and conflict resolution. It uses a wide variety of examples of effective and
innovative uses of GIS including public works, utility management, land-use planning, public health, parks
and recreation, and promoting environmental quality. It is 150 pages long and includes some illustrations.
Published by International City/County Management Association, 777 N. Capitol St., N.E., Suite 500,
Washington DC 20002, Tel: 800-745-8780; http://www.icma.org/
“Choice, complexity, and change: Gendered livelihoods and the management of water.” Frances Cleaver,
1998. Agriculture and Human Values 15:293-299.
Compensating for Wetland Losses Under the Clean Water Act
Committee on Mitigating Wetland Losses, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Water Sciences
and Technology Board, National Research Council
This 348 page book explores the adequacy of science and technology for replacing wetland function and
the effectiveness of the federal program of compensatory mitigation. Using the lessons learned from the
mixed results of previous mitigation efforts, this book offers ten suggestions for establishing and monitoring
mitigated wetlands and suggestions for institutional reforms within federal, state, and local agencies.
National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW, Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055, Tel:
888-624-8373 or 202-334-3313; http://www.nap.edu/; http://www.nationalacademies.org/
“Collective action in watershed management -- experiences from the Andean hillsides.” Helle Munk
Ravnborg and Maria del Pilar Guerrero, 1999. Agriculture and Human Values 16:257-266.
“Creative Problem Solving as a Result of Majority vs. Minority Influence”
Charlan Jeanne Nemeth and Joel Wachtler in European Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 13, 45-55,
1983
This research shows that minority influence results in groups finding new solutions to problems that they
would not have found without the minority influence. This shows the importance of including minority
viewpoints in group problem solving. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 605 Third Avenue. New York, NY 101580012, Tel: 212-850-6645.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
10-9
Dams and Rivers: A Primer on the Downstream Effects of Dams
By Michael Collier, Robert H. Webb, and John C. Schmidt. U.S. Geological Survey, Circular 1126.
Tucson, Arizona, June 1996. (Also paperback, 94pp, ISBN: 0788126989, DIANE Publishing Company,
December 1998.)
Dams & river regulation have become an integral part of 20th-century landscape & livelihood. Virtually
every river in the lower 48 states is now regulated by dams, locks, or diversions. This report illustrates the
downstream consequences of dams & explains the basis on which rivers can be scientifically managed.
“Dissent, Group Process, and Creativity: the Contribution of Minority Influence”
Charlan Jeanne Nemeth in Advances in Group Processes, Volume 2, pages 57-75.
This research “shows that the persistence of a minority, even when incorrect, leads to more original thinking,
that is, dissent, even when wrong, can foster the detection of truth”. It is helpful in understanding the
importance of including dissenting opinions in group discussions. JAI Press, Inc., 55 Old Post Road–No. 2,
PO Box 1678, Greenwich, CT 06836-1678, Tel: 203-661-7602.
“Economic Development and Community Social Change”
Gene F. Summers and Krsiti Branch in Annual Review of Sociology. 1984. 10:141-66.
This chapter reviews and summarizes a number of studies of communities coping with rural industrialization
and natural resource development. It especially focuses on changes in employment patterns, income,
population, agriculture, local businesses, and public sector costs and revenues. The authors find an
underlying tension between the free movement of capital and worker welfare and community stability.
Annual Reviews, Inc., 4139 El Camino Way, Palo Alto, CA 94306, Tel: 650-493-4400; http://
soc.annualreviews.org/
“Entrepreneurial social infrastructure and growth machine characteristics associated with industrialrecruitment and self-development strategies in nonmetropolitan communities.” Jeff S. Sharp and Jan L.
Flora, 1999. Journal of Community Development Society 30:2:131-153.
EPA 910-R-98-008 Discussion Paper: “An EPA/USDA Partnership to Support Community-Based
Education”
This 31 page paper addresses and defines the idea of “community based environmental education” and its
connection to the community, relevancy to people’s lives, and the link between local activities and a quality
environment. The report finds six goals for EPA and extension professionals working together to expand the
community’s capacity to improve environmental quality. This paper, although written specifically for EPA
and extension professionals, provides good information on strengthening a community’s capacity for
environmental care. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Seattle, WA 98101
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
10-10
“Information Exchange and Use in GSS and Verbal Group Decision Making: Effects of Minority Influence.”
Alan R. Dennis, Kelly M. Hilmer, and Nolan J. Taylor in Journal of Management Information Systems,
Winter 1997-98, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 61-88.
This research shows that in group problem solving, when there is a distinct minority/majority divide groups
exchange more information, make better decisions, and take no more time than groups with no minority/
majority divide. This is due to the better exchange of information. M.E. Sharp, Inc., 80 Business Park Dr.,
Armonk, NY 10504; Tel: 800-541-6563 or 914-273-2106; http://rmm-java.stern.nyu.edu/jmis/
Iowa Geology 2001
A 30 page illustrated introduction to major geological features of Iowa with special attention to surface
water, ground water, and baseflow. Published by Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Geological
Survey Bureau, 109 Trowbridge Hall, Iowa City, IA 52242-1319, Tel: 319-335-1575;
www.igsb.uiowa.edu
Learning from Gal Oya. Norman Uphoff, 1992. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
“Making a Case for Collaborative Problem Solving.”
Christopher T. Gates in National Civic Review Spring 1991
This seven page article outlines several “New Realities” that communities must face including: less public
money available, increased responsibility for problems, focus on local decision making, and the wide and
thin distribution of community power, and increasing diversity within the community population. In order to
“work”, a community must approach these “New Realities” using collaborative approaches. National Civil
League Press, 1445 Market Street, Suite 300, Denver, CO 80202-1728, Tel: 303-571-4343;
www.ncl.org
“Nitrate Nitrogen, Iowa’s Unintended Export.” Robert D. Libra, 1998. Iowa Geology 23:4-7. Iowa
Department of Natural Resources.
“Personality Characteristics of MIS Project Teams: An Empirical Study and Action Research Design”
Kate M. Kaiser and Robert P. Bostrom in MIS Quarterly/December 1982
This 17 page paper addresses the communication gap in a group between organization oriented staff and
more technical systems staff. Contrary to previous hypotheses, this study finds that the gap is not due to
differing personality characteristics of the organization staff and the systems staff, because their personality
types were very similar. Rather, the communication gap is due to organizational space between the
organization staff and the end-users of the system. MIS Quarterly, Carlson School of Management,
University of Minnesota, 321 19th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55455, Tel: 612-624-2035; http://
www.misq.org/
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
10-11
Partners in Future Success: Working Together to Build Our Future. Comunity Forum Water
Management in the Des Moines and Raccoon River Watersheds, West Des Moines, IA, July 28-30, 1999.
Protecting Natural Resources in an Urbanizing World: NEMO and the National NEMO Network.
Arnold Chester, 2000. Land Use and Water Quality session in Farm Foundation 2000 National Public
Policy Education Conference, Albany, NY, September 17.
“Resolving Hidden Differences Among Perspectives on Sustainable Development”
William Ascher in Policy Sciences, 32:351-377, 1999.
Although the ecological sciences and the policy sciences have important commonalities–they are problem
oriented, value-committed, contextual, process-oriented, multi-method, and holistic–there are also important
differences. These hidden differences could produce conflicts when specific issues arise. This paper
identifies and examines these differences. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Kluwer Law International, 233
Spring St. Fl. 7, New York, NY 10013-1522, Tel: 212-620-8000; http://www.kluweronline.com/
Restoring Streams in Cities. A Guide for Planners, Policy Makers, and Citizens
By Ann L. Riley. Washington, DC and Covelo, CA: Island Press. 1998.
Ann L. Riley describes an interdisciplinary approach to stream management that does not attempt to
“control” streams, but rather considers the stream as a feature in the urban environment. She presents a
logical sequence of land-use planning, site design, and watershed restoration measures along with stream
channel modifications and floodproofing strategies that can be used in place of destructive and expensive
public works projects. She features examples of effective and environmentally sensitive bank stabilization
and flood damage reduction projects, with information on both the planning processes and end results.
Chapters provide: history of urban stream management and restoration; information on federal programs,
technical assistance, and funding opportunities; and in-depth guidance on implementing projects: collecting
watershed and stream channel data, installing revegetation projects, protecting buildings from overbank
stream flows.
Serving Maps on the Internet: Geographic Information on the World Wide Web
Christian Harder
A very readable 130 page book on how geographic information systems (GIS) can be used on the internet.
It is filled with helpful illustrations and each of its thirteen chapters is a case study of different public and
private organizations that deliver geographic information via the internet. Especially relevant are chapter 7–a
case study of Interrain Pacific, a nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting environmentally conscious
development in the northeastern costal rainforest that makes biogregional geographic information available
on the web, and chapter 12–a case study of how the US Geological Survey has made its information
available on the internet. Published by: Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., 380 New York Street,
Redlands, CA 92373-8100, Tel: 800-447-9778, email: esripress@esri.com; http://www.esri.com/
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
10-12
Social Influence and Social Change
Serge Moscovici, 1976
This 239 page book examines the social psychology of social influence and social change. Chapters four
and five discuss minority influence and its relationship to groups norms and conflict. This is relevant to
understanding the influence of the majority and the minority within a group. Academic Press, 525 B Street
Suite 1900, San Diego, CA 92101-4495, Tel: 619-231-0926; http://www.apnet.com/
“Synthesis: Platforms of collective action in multiple-use common-pool resources.” Nathalie Steins and
Victoria M. Edwards, 1999. Agriculture and Human Values 16:309-315.
“The Affective and Cognitive Context of Self-Reported Measures of Subjective Well-Being.”
By William Pavot and Ed Diener in Social Indicators Research, 28:1-20. 1993.
This paper asserts that although moods and social conditions may have some effect on an individual’s
response to a question measuring well-being, “the data provide evidence for a significant degree of stability
in subjective well-being and life satisfaction”. This is relevant to research measuring individual well-being.
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Kluwer Law International, 233 Spring St. Fl. 7, New York, NY 100131522, Tel: 212-620-8000; http://www.kluweronline.com/
Turning the Tide: A Citizen’s Guide to Reducing Runoff Pollution
An easy to read, informative, 28 page guide with illustrations that defines runoff (or nonpoint source)
pollution, then gives 13 of its most common sources, and also gives suggestions on what a citizen can do
about them. Printed by: South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Bureau of Water,
Nonpoint Source Program, 2600 Bull Street, Columbia, SC 29201-1708, Tel: 803-898-4300; http://
www.scdhec.net/water/
Voices of the Watershed: A Guide to Urban Watershed Management Planning Based on Experiences
of the North Branch Watershed Project
A practical guide to urban watershed management based on the experiences of the North Branch
Watershed Project in the Chicago, Illinois area. The guide has 83 pages with eleven chapters ranging from
an introduction that defines important terms, advice on getting started, tips on partnerships and funding, and
a chapter on how to keep the project going. To obtain copies of the handbook contact: Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Water, Watershed Management Section, PO Box 19276,
Springfield, IL 62794-9276, Tel: 217-782-3362, Fax: 217-785-1225 or Friends of the Chicago River, 407
South Dearborn Street, Suite 1580, Chicago, IL 60605, Tel: 312-939-0490, email:
friends@chicagoriver.org
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
Revised May 2006
10-13
Photo by E.C. Stanley
Section 11: Glossary of
Watershed Terms
BMP
Best management practices. Tested practices that have been found to be
effective and efficient when applied to specific situations.
BOD
(biochemical oxygen
demand)
Used as an index of the quantity of oxygen-demanding substances (i.e.
organic matter subject to decay) in the water. These substances include
septic tank effluents, oil and grease, manure, etc.
Biodiversity
Refers to the number of species (plants and animals) that exist within a
given ecosystem
Ecosystem
A term referring to all the plants and animals and their interactions with
water, land, air, and each other in a given area
Groundwater
Water that sits or runs under ground, usually in aquifers that are tapped
through wells for drinking water and irrigation
HUC
(Hydrologic Unit Code)
A national coding system developed by the United States Geologic
Survey (USGS) and extended by USDA Natural Resource Conservation
Service (NRCS) to uniquely identify all watersheds. The code divides the
country into regions (major river basins such as the Missouri),
subregions and progressively smaller units. Larger numbers indicate
smaller watersheds. For instance, the South Skunk River Basin is an 8digit HUC no. 07080105. The units referred to as “watersheds” for most
water protection projects in Iowa are typically11-digit HUCs (less than
100,000 acres in size or 62.5-390.6 square miles). Sub-watersheds are 14digit HUCs (15-62.5 square miles).
Invertebrates
An organism without a backbone (e.g. snails, worms, clams, aquatic
insects). The number and kinds of invertebrates in a water body are
indicators of the degree of pollution present.
NPSP
(Non point source
pollution)
Water pollution that originates from multiple sources, which alone can
be relatively insignificant, but when added together constitute a
significant threat to water quality. Multiple sources include runoff from
field crops, construction sites, and parking lots as well as spills from
livestock production facilities.
PSP
(Point source
pollution)
Water pollution that originates from one particular source (for example,
the drainage pipe from a factory or a community’s sewage treatment
facility)
Sediment
Fine particles of soil which are carried into the water when stream banks
erode and heavy rains or snowmelts create soil erosion during runoff.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
11-1
Sub-watersheds
Watersheds of tributaries that flow into a larger river
Surface water
Water which is present above the soil surface
Tributaries
Smaller feeder streams or rivers which flow into a larger mainstem river
TSS (Total suspended
solids)
A measure of the amount of solids found in the water, such as mud, silt
or other elements. An excessive amount of these elements may result
from soil erosion. Excessive TSS may indicate poor water quality
through hindering stream flow and because the solids may carry
pollutants such as nitrogen, phosphorous, or pesticides.
Turbidity
A measure of the amount of material suspended in the water. The more
transparent or clear a water body is the lower the turbidity level.
Vertebrates
Organisms with a backbone (e.g. fish, birds, amphibians). The presence
or absence of certain vertebrates (such as types of fish) is used as an
indicator of water quality.
Watershed
The geographic region within which water drains into a particular
river, stream, or body of water. That area may include wilderness,
farms, suburban, urban, commercial, or industrial areas.
Wetlands
Transitional areas between the land and water systems that have a high
water table at or near the surface (or a shallow covering of water) and
hydric soils and hydrophytic plants
Watershed Government Agencies and Programs
CWA
(Clean Water Act)
Passed in 1974, the Clean Water Act mandates that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in collaboration with state
environmental agencies, develop a systematic approach to remediating
polluted waterways from point source pollution and the protecting of
America waterways from non point source pollution
District Conservationist
A USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) employee who
manages staff and programs of each Soil and Water Conservation
District and USDA Service Center to provide information and technical
assistance to farmers on conservation of natural resources
EPA
(The United States
Environmental
Protection Agency)
Responsible for management and regulation of U.S. water quality, air
quality, and species protection
IDALS/DSC
(Iowa Department of
Agriculture and Land
Stewardship/Division of
Soil Conservation)
The Iowa state government department charged with providing
technical and financial assistance to farmers and land owners in a variety
of areas including watershed management, wetland conservation, and
soil and water conservation—specifically through the Division of Soil
Conservation
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
11-2
Iowa DNR
(Iowa Department of
Natural Resources)
The Iowa state department charged with management and regulation of
water quality, air quality, conservation, and protection of species habitat
RC&D
(Resources Conservation
and Development)
Development organization, often a non-profit, with administrative and
financial support from NRCS that works in a multi-county area to
promote natural resource conservation and development
Section 319 Program
An Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) program administered by
the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) that provides funds
for a wide variety of non point source pollution water quality and
monitoring efforts.
SWCD
(Soil and Water
Conservation District)
Coextensive with counties, SWCD provides local leadership on
conservation issues through the election of locally elected officials who
are mandated to facilitate worthy conservation efforts in the county. The
district is the entity that manages expenditure of all conservation and
water quality funding allocated through state and federal agencies.
TMDL
(Total Maximum
Daily Load)
An evaluation system for water quality designated under the Clean
Water Act to estimate watershed pollution levels. This evaluation
involves determining the maximum pollutant load that a water system
will tolerate to maintain ecological integrity, the current pollutant load in
that watershed, and modeling the causes and impacts of types of
remedial actions in that watershed. The Iowa Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) is responsible for submitting to EPA a list of impaired
waterways. These waterways are required to have TMDL plans to
achieve targeted TMDL levels.
USDA-NRCS
(Natural Resources
Conservation Service)
An office of the US Department of Agriculture that works with other
governmental and non-governmental agencies to conserve and sustain
natural resources. NRCS provides funding for a District Conservationist,
as well as support for other conservation efforts in each county,
including partial support for the Soil and Water Conservation District
and administrative support for RC&Ds.
USGS
(The United States
Geologic Survey)
Provides basic information about surface and ground water quality. Each
state has a USGS office that is partly responsible for monitoring water
quality and flow rates.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
11-3
Federal and State Programs to Support Watershed Management
CREP
(Conservation Reserve
Enhancement
Program)
Provides $1.5 million in state funds to work with private landowners to
restore or construct wetlands where they intercept tile runoff from
agricultural lands. Wetlands should be designed to provide maximum
water quality benefits through removal of nitrates and other pollutants
from runoff water. Additional benefits are expected in habitat protection.
The program uses state funds to leverage USDA funds to establish longterm contracts or easements with landowners.
CREP
(Conservation
Reserve Program)
This federal program offers annual rental payments, incentive payments
for certain activities, and cost-share assistance to establish approved
cover on eligible critical areas. The length of the contract is 10 and 15
years. At least 50% of the establishment cost is paid as well as an annual
rental rate based on the productivity of the soil.
EQIP
(Environmental Quality
Incentives Program)
This federal program applies to lands with significant natural resource
problems prioritized by local work groups, and to statewide resource
concerns for lands not in Conservation Priority Areas. Up to 75% of the
cost of conservation practices may be covered. The program offers 5- to
10-year contracts.
FIP
(Forestry Incentive
Program)
This program is administered by USDA-NRCS. It provides financial
assistance for up to 65% of the cost of tree planting and timber stand
improvement on private forest stands of less than 1,000 acres. Payments
are limited to $10,000 per year. The contracts are for 10 to 30 years.
Floodplain Easements
The goal of this USDA easement program is to protect high-risk lands
subject to repeated flood damage. It is a part of the Emergency
Watershed Protection program. The easements are permanent. Some
harvesting of timber or hay may be allowed. Up to 100% of restoration
costs may be paid.
Iowa Water Quality
Program (IDALS)
This $11.2 million dollar state initiative enacted in 2000, matches federal
funds for water resource programs including conservation efforts and
water quality monitoring. Areas covered include: septic systems, soil
conservation, buffer initiatives, water quality monitoring, water quality
planning, standards, and assessment, conservation, TMDL, floodplain
education, review of NPDES permits, integrated livestock and farm
demonstration program, and water monitoring and environmental
restoration volunteer activities. The program is also funding efforts by
the state to provide watershed data locally through geographic
information systems (GIS).
NPDES
(National Pollution
Discharge Elimination
System)
This initiative provides resources for the review and issuance of permits
for all wastewater treatment facilities or effluent in waters of Iowa (such
as city sewage plants, industrial effluents, or livestock). The permit
program is set in federal law as part of the Clean Water Act. It is
administered through the state DNR. The Iowa Water Quality Initiative
has allocated funds to enable the DNR to “acquire professional
assistance to staff to reduce the backlog of expired NPDES permits.”
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
11-4
REAP
(Iowa Resource
Enhancement and
Protection Account)
The result of Iowa legislation passed in 1989, REAP is financed by
individuals who purchase a REAP license plate when they register their
vehicles. Twenty percent is allocated for soil and water enhancement and
made available as grants from IDALS-Division of Soil Conservation to
Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCD). Another 20 percent is
directly allocated to county conservation boards.
WHIP
(Wildlife Habitat
Incentive Program)
This wildlife habitat improvement restoration program is administered
by USDA-NRCS. The contract is for 5 to 10 years. The Program offers
landowners up to 75% cost-sharing for wildlife habitat improvement
projects.
WPF
(Iowa Water
Protection Fund)
Iowa water quality initiative that funds local SWCS non point source
pollution related water quality projects including watershed
development grants. Administered by Iowa Department of Agriculture
and Land Stewardship (IDALS). Financed by the Iowa license plate
REAP program.
WRP
(Wetland Reserve
Program)
This federal program targets critical wetland areas in need of restoration
and protection. The contract can be for permanent or temporary
easements. Easement payments are disbursed over 5 to 30 years, and the
payment depends on soil type and crop history, location, etc. Permanent
easements are included. Restoration costs of up to 100% is possible for
permanent easements, with cost sharing of 50%- 75% for 30-year
easements.
WSPF
(Iowa Watershed
Protection Fund)
Iowa water quality initiative that funds local SWCS natural resource
protection projects including water quality and erosion control.
Administered by Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land
Stewardship (IDALS). Financed by the state legislature yearly.
Glossary prepared by Stephen Gasteyer, North
Central Regional Center for Rural Development
and Extension to Communities, Department of
Sociology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa.
Renewing Local Watersheds:
Community Leaders’ Guide to Building Watershed Communities
11-5
Prepared by Lois Wright Morton, Steve Padgitt, Jan
Flora, Beverlyn Lundy Allen, Jeff Zacharakis-Jutz,
Sandy Scholl, Alan Jensen, John Rodecap, James
West, and Joan Steffen-Baker, Iowa State University
Extension to Communities, Department of Sociology,
Ames, Iowa.
http://www.extension.iastate.edu/communities/
This publication is funded by the U.S. EPA Region VII
Water Quality Cooperative Agreement Program
Contract No. CP98705301.
. . . and justice for all
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits
discrimination in all its programs and activities on the
basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion,
age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and
marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply
to all programs.) Many materials can be made available
in alternative formats for ADA clients. To file a
complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Office of Civil
Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and
Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 202509410 or call 202-720-5964. Issued in furtherance of
Cooperative Extension work, Acts of May 8 and June
30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of
Agriculture. Stanley R. Johnson, director, Cooperative
Extension Service, Iowa State University of Science
and Technology, Ames, Iowa.