  |
|
|
Advanced planning and watershed assessment processes can be used to identify critical areas which sustain watershed viability. Wetlands protection goals will be advanced if these identified sites for non-compensatory actions also receive consideration when compensation is required under the regulatory process. Links such as these need to be made if we are to achieve our wetlands protection goals.
Unlike activities such as compensatory mitigation, non-regulatory actions are voluntarily initiated. Leadership for specific projects (e.g. preservation and/or restoration of a specific area) is expected to come from local governments and landowners. For example, comprehensive plans prepared by local governments should include non-regulatory strategies for wetlands management. The challenge is to assess what is currently in place and what is effective, identify appropriate situations for using different methods, and broaden protection opportunities in key areas.
State and Federal agencies need to undertake a coordinated effort to provide technical assistance, and commit financial and other support in cooperation with locally initiated activities. Federal and state involvement should also include the development of tools (technical and procedural) for identifying, selecting, and implementing non-regulatory projects, and where appropriate, on-the-ground demonstration projects undertaken in cooperation with landowner, and local and tribal governments.
Outreach includes the concept of soliciting non-regulatory involvement and providing technical assistance. Outreach to local governments would consist of a coordinated statewide effort by all key federal and state agencies involved in wetlands protection. These agencies would commit to provide direct support for non-regulatory activities. Outreach would also occur at the community level, with local governments and other community organizations providing assistance to landowners.
Coordinated Effort implies that federal and state agencies will work under a collaborative framework to provide direct assistance to local and tribal governments, and landowners. This effort would integrate/coordinate with existing state non-regulatory programs such as the wetlands protection component of the Puget Sound Plan, the Washington Natural Heritage Program, the Washington Duckstamp Program, etc.
Local governments provide direct on-the-ground resource protection within their communities. To improve this role, they need to develop comprehensive wetlands protection programs which integrate non-regulatory with regulatory approaches. Local governments need to: commit to develop and implement non-regulatory approaches, integrate these approaches with regulatory efforts, develop partnerships with agencies and other community groups that can assist with non-regulatory options, and provide a means for direct assistance to landowners wishing to improve stewardship.
Ongoing resource stewardship on the part of landowners is the true measure of protection. Involvement on the part of owners dictates how effective wetlands protection will be. Means of informing, involving, and assisting landowners in committing to wise wetlands management practices is critical to the ultimate achievement of wetlands protection goals over time.
Federal and state agencies could and should be more actively involved in promoting non-regulatory activities. In recent years, as non-regulatory programs have arisen at the federal and state level, the need for improved coordination between agencies and the establishment of working partnerships has developed.
As federal and state agencies understand non-regulatory issues better, they can play a key role in facilitating the involvement of local governments and others. Active local involvement increases the number of non-regulatory actions that occur, thus rapidly multiplying wetlands protection benefits. The extent to which federal and state agencies can not only participate themselves, but can engage local communities in active non-regulatory efforts, the more wetlands benefits will be realized.
Historically, agency staff allocations have dealt primarily with issues related to regulatory protection of wetlands through existing authorities such as the Clean Water Act, Shoreline Management Act, etc. Recently, local government outreach has focused on implementation of ordinances under the Growth Management Act, as well. However, it has become increasingly apparent that the time has come to integrate non-regulatory approaches with regulatory ones. Local communities are ready to apply voluntary measures as they recognize that regulations alone do not meet wetlands protection goals or fully address the needs of their communities. It is also apparent that federal, state, and local regulations can be barriers to landowner stewardship. Implementation of non-regulatory practices and other actions which augment wetlands are often impeded by regulatory processes which do not discriminate between positive versus negative outcomes.
An interagency coordinated effort of outreach to local governments is warranted to meet these changing needs and address deficiencies in wetlands resource protection through integration of non-regulatory actions with regulatory ones. The agency outreach would solicit local information and involvement, assess and address informational needs, and provide direct technical support to local and tribal governments to develop and implement effective non-regulatory actions.
Some local communities and/or tribal governments are developing new incentives which integrate non-regulatory actions with regulatory. Information about these approaches and the lessons learned should be provided to other communities. Disseminating information and technical guidance materials across local communities would be a role of the agency coordination effort. Identifying what information is most needed would result from an inquiry of local and tribal governments across the state. Guidance materials would be developed to serve broadly identified needs across jurisdictions. Information would be followed up by direct staff assistance, working with these players to tailor the available options to their community needs/capabilities, to integrate local resource protection programs, and to implement non-regulatory projects.
Recommendation #33: When interest is expressed by local governments, tribal governments, conservation districts, or other community players, state and federal agency staff shall provide assistance in the form of technical documents/information, financial support (through existing grant programs), and staff expertise. Agency staff shall work in partnership with the community to tailor their activities to local conditions and needs. Non-Regulatory Work Group
Recommendation #34: The Interagency Wetlands Review Board (IWRB) member agencies should reallocate internal agency staff to address non-regulatory wetlands protection efforts. The link with regulatory programs should be clearly made to facilitate integrating resources from existing programs as appropriate. Non-Regulatory Work Group
Recommendation #35: The Interagency Wetlands Review Board (IWRB) and federal agencies represented on the State Wetlands Integration Strategy (SWIS) should commit resource support (in the form of grant funding and staff) to non-regulatory wetlands efforts. Designated staff should be assigned to provide assistance to local communities. For some issues, such as wetlands restoration (i.e., program implementation of Puget Sound Plan element W-8 and statewide restoration efforts), agency technical assistance should involve an interdisciplinary team, such as the Cooperative River Basin Team (A five member team working on non-point source issues in the watersheds of the Puget Sound). Non-Regulatory Work Group
The agency coordinated effort should undertake to: a) provide direct, consistent, and ongoing technical assistance from agency staff to local communities; b) motivate community involvement; c) guide planning and resource assessment within a watershed context; d) assess and address technical problems and/or community needs related to non-regulatory applications; e) integrate non-regulatory with regulatory efforts and integrate wetlands resource issues with other water related issues in the watershed; f) provide written guidance such as technical manuals, etc., to streamline local implementation; g) link local and state/federal activities through collaborative partnerships; h) monitor wetlands protection progress across the state; and i) provide funding information and pursue funding options for program implementation at the community level.
Major components of this effort shall include:
The outreach effort should begin with documenting the economic benefits and services wetlands provide, and identifying demonstrated non-regulatory successes.
Agency staff should use this information to demonstrate to local governments and others the benefits of non-regulatory activities and solicit their active involvement.
A general assessment of local needs should be conducted to determine common problems local and tribal governments face. Input from representative local and tribal governments, statewide, would be sought and would include a sampling of jurisdictions from the following categories: Eastern WA/Western WA, city/county, rural/urban, small/large, etc. Following the needs assessment, solutions shall be sought which address the common needs expressed by these jurisdictions. Products should include guidance materials and direct technical assistance by agency staff.
Demonstration efforts should be undertaken by local and/or tribal governments, conservation districts and other local groups with direct hands-on technical assistance from the agencies. The agencies would work with them to help evaluate their current programs, assess needs, develop tailored solutions which overcome limitations associated with non-regulatory implementation for the community, and actively participate in project implementation. Solutions should be put in place which integrate non-regulatory actions with existing programs and actively commit agencies to assisting local communities.
An ongoing effort should be made to identify and address weak links in non-regulatory implementation. These may include such items as inadequate funding and deficient technical information. The federal and state agencies should make every effort to overcome identified problems and provide support for measures which advance non-regulatory opportunities.
In many cases, local governments can readily integrate non-regulatory activities into other efforts they are already involved in. Most local governments have one or more programs in place that could be used directly or modified to more broadly serve non-regulatory activities. These may be open space current use taxation programs, park acquisition efforts, conservation futures taxes, or a detailed inventory of the jurisdiction's wetlands.
The most straightforward opportunities are likely to come by improving and integrating existing efforts. For example, if a county has an Open Space Current Use Taxation Program already in place, a "public benefit rating system (PBRS)" (as defined in RCW 84.34) might be added to specify additional tax relief available to landowners who place a restrictive conservation easement on a wetland of high value to the community. Also, the PBRS could define all highest quality wetlands identified in the local Sensitive Areas Ordinance as prime candidates for current use taxation classification, thus linking regulatory and incentive programs for improved protection.
To take advantage of funding opportunities for acquisition and restoration actions, maintaining an active list of potential sites for immediate action is critical. This facilitates the securing of funds and advances non-regulatory implementation. Also, the establishment of complementary partnerships will greatly advance implementation. Setting up relationships which share resource information and technical skills, such as associations between local governments and land trusts, works to everyone's benefit.
One of the benefits of non-regulatory efforts is that they can be combined with regulatory efforts to provide a more complete and comprehensive wetlands program. Given that non-regulatory efforts are voluntary and therefore more "use-friendly" than regulatory programs, non-regulatory incentives should be emphasized.
Local governments frequently ask for models to use when integrating their regulatory and non-regulatory wetlands programs. One model that local governments may choose to use is the Wetlands Program of the Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan. This model combines regulatory program elements with the following non-regulatory elements:
Recommendation #38: Local governments should identify their non-regulatory goals in comprehensive management plans and maintain an up-to-date list of identified projects for immediate action when funds become available. Non-Regulatory Work Group
Recommendation #39: Agencies and local governments should take every opportunity to develop and promote public/private partnerships with non-profit organizations and citizens to advance acquisition and restoration actions, including the identification and management of sites. Non-Regulatory Work Group
To the private landowner, several areas seem to limit stewardship actions. First, landowners need more information about why wetlands are important and why they should be protecting them. Many landowners simply need to be given the information on how to protect their wetlands, with the technical assistance to make it happen. Often, landowners have a general distrust of government. Building ongoing working relationships within the community may increase receptivity to stewardship actions. Support for non-regulatory opportunities may also be achieved with the assistance of professional associations such as real estate and construction industries, agricultural and business groups, and the legal and planning professions. Lastly, funding for landowner compensation and/or long-term land management of private wetlands is a major limitation.
Recommendation #40: Agencies and local governments should provide education/information materials on non-regulatory options available to landowners. Government should also provide direct technical assistance to private landowners to advise them regarding preservation options (tools) and foster community relationships which promote stewardship. Non-Regulatory Work Group
Agencies and local governments should work with existing groups within the community, such as the cooperative extension offices, conservation districts, local land trusts, and others to help provide technical expertise to private landowners. Professional and trade associations, such as real estate and construction industries, agricultural and business groups, etc., should be acquainted with stewardship options and called on to promote application of stewardship options by landowners.
Recommendation #41: Agencies should work with tribal governments to set up stewardship programs on tribal land that could serve as models. Non-Regulatory Work Group