Chapter 2: Program Analysis
Lesson: The
responsible for water
2.2.6 Water Qualify
be
in
quality
Evaluation, and
selection of the project and the preparation
of the proposal in order to ensure the
on-going commitment of the agency to the
Water quality monitoring, evaluation, and
project.
reporting are needed to refine and transfer NPS
pollution control technology
future efforts.
Example: The Oregon
of Environ-
Monitoring documents water quality changes due
mental
in project plan-
to land
practices, whereas evaluation
project They
ning for the Oregon
and reporting conveys
results. The following
provided a high level of commitment, including
water quality monitoring and data analysis.
lessons provide an overview of the essential
elements of a successful monitoring program.
The USGS in Pennsylvania,
money from a
grant,
involved
2.2.6.1
planning and continued to be
initially in
the lead water quality agency for the duration of
the project
Lesson: NPS
projects whose
objective is to document water quality
changes resulting from BMP implementa-
Lesson: For water quality projects, moni-
tion should be funded only when there
toring activities should be coordinated with
exists a firm long-term (six to 15 years)
water resource management activities.
monitoring
commitment to water
Management activities such as biological
and evaluation from a responsible agency.
can
controls, dredging, or lake
Effective and responsible administration is
significantly alter lake chemistry and hy-
essential
maintain and support such
d r o l o gy, making the detection of trends
long-term activities.
due
difficult or impossible
The commitments
detect.
monitoring
South Florida Water Man-
agement District in Florida; Division of Envi-
In Virginia, ground water high in
ronmental Quality in Idaho; Department
phosphorus was pumped into project area reser-
Quality in Oregon; USGS
voirs when the reservoirs were low, thus con-
Pennsylvania; Utah Mountain Land Association
founding detection of phosphorus
of Government
tbe University of
mont in
Department
In the
project, lake draw-
Control in Nebraska; the Minnesota Pollution
down and
treatment of carp impeded
Control Agency in Minnesota; and
Depart-
the detection of lake water quality trends, further
ment of Environment and
Resources in
complicating the linkage of water quality to land
South Dakota contributed greatly
success
treatment
in water quality monitoring in these projects.
Stocking of trout during the project
The Louisiana RCWP project
period in the Minnesota project confounded the
unable to determine if the implemented
detection of trends in monitored fisheries vari-
improved the water quality of the bayou because
ables that may have been attributable to RCWP
of the
lack of
from
the water quality monitoring agency.
Example:
quality monitoring funding for
the Virginia project
at the end of
p e r i o d AS a
scheduled post-project water quality
was canceled due to lack of funds and
effectiveness of the
will remain
3%
Previous Page
