of National
1992
.
medium-level projects should be reported in the
promotes the project. The SWCD, together with the
county ASC committee, determines the priority of
Federal Register. Projects would risk cancellation if
technical assistance among applicants for water
monitoring efforts fail to meet minimum require-
quality plans based on criteria developed by the local
ments.
coordinating committee. The SWCD also approves
All approved projects should have monitoring to
water quality plans and revisions.
determine BMP application progress and to
SCS coordinates technical assistance for
trends in one or more variables related to the
and recommends the appropriate agency for assist-
water quality problem. Stream water quality monitor-
ance.
provides technical assistance for setting
ing requirements for high-level projects should be
priorities among applicants and developing and cer-
consistent with
EPA 319 National Monitoring
tifying their water quality plans. The role of SCS as
Protocol (U.S. Environ.
Agency, 1991; Spooner,
the lead technical agency for land treatment should
1992). The protocol requires 20 samples per season
be retained; however, the contribution that can be
at a weekly or biweekly frequency for physical and
made by other agencies and opportunities for inter-
chemical variables and measurements of ex-
agency cooperation in achieving land treatment
planatory variables (e.g., flow
for
goals should be recognized. As a result of the Mas-
each sample. If biological monitoring is desired,
sachusetts RCWP project, a new approach to farm
biological and habitat variables should be monitored
USDA agencies;
visits was developed by the
one to three times per year. land use and land treat-
ASCS and SCS staff members now routinely visit
ment data must be reported on a drainage basin rela-
farms together to perform their duties under several
tive to the water quality monitoring station. In
USDA programs.
addition, paired watershed studies are strongly en-
couraged.
The role of Extension Services should be ex-
panded to emphasize management practices to com-
The protocol's main objective for high- and
plement structural practices. For example, during
medium-level projects is to monitor water quality and
the latter phases of the Pennsylvania RCWP project,
land treatment simultaneously to determine if water
most of the land treatment effort was facilitated by
quality changes can be documented and associated
the ES through individual contacts and nutrient
with changes in land treatment. Two features of this
management plans. For this project, the high num-
objective must be met: (1) detecting significant or
ber of farms needing animal waste storage facilities
real trends in both water quality and land treatment
and the resistance to installing such facilities made
implementation, and (2) associating water quality
the use of the ES and nutrient management plans the
trends with land treatment trends.
only effective way to reduce nutrients in the area
Guidance for minimum monitoring of land treat-
streams.
ment and associated water quality changes for the
model program and its projects should be main-
Water Quality and Land Treatment Monitor-
tained and enhanced by EPA and USGS in consult-
ing. The State water
agency should par-
ation with other Federal, State, and local agencies.
ticipate on the State and local coordinating
This approach will allow valid technical evaluations
committees and monitor and evaluate the project's
of individual projects. For example, the monitoring
effectiveness. Because Federal assistance is
requirements established by the EPA Clean
quired to encourage consistent and continuous
Program have been published in the Federal Regisfer
water quality and land treatment monitoring
(1980b). The lack of a complete and uniform
throughout the project period, Federal funding for
database has limited the effectiveness of evaluations
water quality monitoring must be authorized as a
of the Model Implementation Program (MIP),
part of the model program. Funding for monitoring
and (by current indications) the present
is required to document progress, the need for con-
USDA Demonstration Hydrologic Unit Areas as well
tinued treatment, and water quality changes. Fund-
as Management Systems Evaluation Areas (MESA)
ing would be provided to all projects to meet
water quality project.
minimum monitoring requirements for both land
treatment and water quality.
The paired watershed approach involves
monitoring two or more similar subwatersheds
Greater accountability by the State water quality
before and after BMP implementation in one of the
or other monitoring agency is needed to ensure ade-
watersheds. This design is the most technically
quate water quality monitoring. Where applicable,
sound and reliable method available to document
USGS,
local universities, SCS, and Extension
water quality changes in the shortest time period (3
Services should provide technical assistance for
to 5 years). The Vermont
project employed
monitoring program design and implementation.
the paired watershed approach successfully and
Minimum monitoring protocols for high- and
372
Previous Page
