SWIS Recommendations: The Pieces of a State Wetlands Programs (Continued)

E. WETLANDS EDUCATION

While we have placed a great emphasis on regulation, we have made only modest investments in incentives and education. The regulatory process for wetlands can be frustrating to almost everyone, and even though steps are being taken toward improvement, regulations alone may never adequately protect wetlands. Education is a positive, non-regulatory approach to wetlands protection. It is proactive and preventive, and in the long term may give the highest return.

Education helps people understand the value of wetlands in their watersheds. It also empowers them to take actions that protect wetlands on their property or throughout their community. The value of education and training is usually well-understood and supported by most managers. Ironically, its worth is seldom matched by an adequate, dedicated investment of resources.

1. History and Current Status

Wetlands education efforts are not new in Washington, especially within the last five to ten years. Several state and federal agencies, local governments, local and regional interpretive centers, schools, and environmental groups have sponsored a variety of educational projects. Agencies and private organizations have created many educational resources for a variety of audiences; schools have participated in schoolground or community wetlands education projects; a teacher workshop program, Discover WILD Wetlands, has been presented to teachers throughout the state; local governments have sponsored community wetlands workshops; environmental organizations have offered materials and training encouraging citizen involvement in local wetlands issues; and business organizations have offered trainings to their peers on wetlands protection practices. There have been many successes, and it can safely be said that overall, there is a greater awareness about wetlands issues than there was 10 years ago.

It is also apparent, however, that a great deal of education and outreach is still needed.

Wetlands continue to be destroyed and degraded, and to some extent, these losses can be attributed to a lack of understanding of wetland values, wetland regulations, best stewardship practices, or preservation options.
While many programs or materials have been developed, they have often reached only a limited audience.
Many areas of the state, especially rural areas, have not received much attention from educational programs.
Several audiences have gained a very basic understanding of wetlands issues, but now need more specific, targeted information about regulations, non-regulatory options, best management practices.
There is an ongoing demand for educational resources.

The educational needs in Washington have evolved and are more complex. More audiences need more information on a variety of different issues at a variety of different levels. While several agencies and organizations are involved, their efforts are often fragmented, duplicative, or focused on limited geographic regions. Today's challenge is to efficiently use existing resources, identify opportunities for generating new resources, and bring agencies and organizations together, and collaborate to address the educational needs of Washington State.

2. Identification of Target Audiences

The Education Work Group identified and evaluated target audiences to ensure successful implementation of the recommendations. The group recognized that because some audiences have a greater impact on the resource, it was important to focus efforts on the highest priority audiences. While developing the list was not difficult (thirty-seven audiences in all), assigning priorities took more time. In order to provide a more consistent evaluation of the audiences, the group developed a list of evaluation criteria to apply to each audience. The criteria were:

Is the audience motivated to learn?
Is the audience able to change their behavior?
Is the audience located in a region with little information?
Does the audience have a significant positive effect on wetlands?
Is education to this audience supported politically by elected officials?
Is there a multiplier effect from educating this audience?
Will the effects of educating this audience continue over time?
Does educating this audience have a long-term effect (years)?
Does educating this audience have a short term effect (immediate)

After evaluating audience priorities, work group members developed a wetlands education matrix that identifies the high and medium priority audiences, who should be the lead educator for that audience, what the educational needs are of each audience, whom the lead educator should seek advice from when reaching out to the audience, and who most appropriately should develop the educational resources for the audience (Appendix F). The Interagency Wetlands Review Board and the Wetlands Education Group will promote the use of the Wetlands Education Matrix as a reference tool for agencies and organizations designing and implementing wetlands education efforts.

3. Coordination of Wetlands Education Programs

The long-term vision of the SWIS Education Work Group is to provide wetlands education within a watershed context. To achieve this, using wetlands education as a resource protection tool should be a priority for government agencies. The work group members acknowledged that numerous wetland education efforts currently exist throughout the state. However, these efforts would be more successful and have a greater impact on resource protection if they were well coordinated.

Recommendation #42: The Interagency Wetlands Review Board should establish a "Wetlands Education Group" to develop and implement collaborative wetland education strategies. The Department of Ecology should convene this group, which should include agencies, organizations, and citizens involved with wetlands education on a statewide basis. Education Work Group

This "Wetlands Education Group" will meet to facilitate, implement, and coordinate wetlands education efforts. The group will develop a wetland education strategy and present it to the IWRB annually. The group will continue to meet at least annually to evaluate past efforts and plan future efforts. The group should develop education strategies to build partnerships and encourage collaborative efforts to make the best use of funding resources. To ensure effective wetlands education, this coordination group shall:

provide wetlands education on a watershed basis
encourage and support peer education
identify and promote wetlands success stories
evaluate wetland education programs on a regular basis

Recommendation #43: Local education organizations (e.g. WSU Cooperative Extension, Conservation Districts and others) should convene a group of local education entities to coordinate and implement wetlands outreach efforts to individual communities and their associated watersheds. Education Work Group

4. Priority Issues

Adequate funding for Wetlands education needs to be provided for all the geographic regions of the state. Special consideration should be applied to geographic regions where past inequities exist (i.e., geographic areas outside of Puget Sound). Agencies should elevate the priority assigned to wetlands education. Agencies should also promote and enhance wetlands education efforts by providing adequate financial and staff support.

Recommendation #44: The Interagency Wetlands Review Board should support full funding of Water Quality Field Agents to provide wetlands and water quality education as laid out in Section EPI-2, 2.1 of the Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan. The Board should pursue legislation to implement the goals of that project by allocating funding for the project on a statewide basis. Education Work Group

Federal, state, tribal and local governments should build partnerships with private and non-profit organizations to provide wetlands education. Ecology shall contact agencies and organizations with existing funding programs and inform them of the recommendations of the State Wetlands Integration Strategy Education Work Group.

Recommendation #45: Wetlands systems that have not been an educational focus in the past (e.g., seasonal "dryland" wetlands and forested wetlands) should receive priority for education efforts. Education Work Group

The Interagency Wetlands Review Board should contact existing funding programs and inform them of the policies, priorities and recommendations of the State Wetlands Integration Strategy. The Wetlands Education Coordination Group should work to build partnerships and encourage collaborative efforts to make the best use of existing funding resources.

Recommendation #46: Ecology should work with other wetlands agencies and organizations to develop a directory on how to get information on wetlands (e.g., where to go to get information about funding for local projects, delineation training, regulations, research, publications and other educational resources, citizen involvement, etc.). Education Work Group

This directory could be used by agencies and organizations to help them direct calls. It could also be used by the general public, posted at libraries, and local planning offices. The directory should be updated annually and augmented locally.

Recommendation #47: Agencies should promote 1-800-424-4EPA (EPA hotline) for general information about wetlands. Agencies should provide appropriate information to the hotline. Education Work Group

Continue to the next section of this document

Return to the Table of Contents