Watershed Councils’ effectiveness limited by policy

Eugene, Ore. — An in-depth analysis of selected watershed councils in Oregon, Washington, California and Idaho shows that they are taking positive actions but that their success in protecting and restoring essential habitat for salmon and trout is frequently constrained by land-use policies beyond their influence.  “In many cases their effectiveness was limited by factors out of their control,” said David Bayles, conservation director for the Pacific Rivers Council.  “We cannot rely entirely on watershed councils to reverse the slide towards extinction.

Pacific Rivers Council and Trout Unlimited commissioned two independent investigators — aquatic biologist Charles Huntington and watershed planning expert Sari Sommarstrom — to evaluate the work of 14 watershed councils in Oregon, Washington, Idaho and Northern California.

Nearly two-thirds of the restoration projects visited were affected to varying degrees by environmental factors that watershed groups and landowner volunteers could not or did not control. Of these factors, the selected watershed groups generally had the most success addressing grazing problems and a couple have had some success in resolving water use issues.  The best project of the approximately 80 examined was a very large fencing project (about 8.5 miles) along critical spawning habitat for listed spring chinook salmon along the Lemhi River in Idaho.


Unfortunately, many of the projects ranked less than ideal from an ecological benefits standpoint.  “In many cases logging, water diversions for irrigation, urbanization, or chronic overgrazing of riparian areas upstream limited the projects’ effectiveness,” said Bayles.  “All of these factors are typically out of the control of the watershed councils, and that is their greatest limitation.”

Even with these limitations, however watershed councils can serve effectively as catalysts for voluntary change.  “We are certainly better off with watershed councils than without,” said Jeff Curtis, Western Conservation Director for Trout Unlimited.  “Their real value is in their ability to motivate individual landowners to carry out restoration projects while involving the community in the health of the watershed.”

Recommendations


The report, “An Evaluation of Selected Watershed Councils in the Pacific Northwest and Northern California,” recommends increased funding and technical support for local councils.  The authors also notes the need for stronger incentives, disincentives, or other mechanisms that might increase voluntary involvement by landowners so that councils have greater opportunities to implement high priority restoration measures.
 

Trout Unlimited and The Pacific Rivers Council recommend:
  

•    strengthening state logging regulations to protect riparian areas and high risk sites, and to address risks from forest roads
   

•    development of state water allocation policies which prevent de-watering of streams

•    targeting of existing resources to maximize the implementation of high priority restoration actions
   

•    use financial incentives to entice more landowners to take part in high-priority projects
 

“There is almost a theology behind watershed councils,” said Curtis.  “Quite frankly, there is reason to believe that the theology of watershed councils is being proselytized by politicians and interest groups eager to relax environmental regulations or prevent additional restrictions.”
 


Watershed Council contacts for reporters:
 

Craig Bell, (coordinator, Garcia Watershed Council) 707-822-2150


Cole Gardiner, (works with but does not speak for the Clackamas River Basin Council) 503-287-2622