A Method for Comparative Analysis of Recovery Potential in Impaired Waters Restoration Planning |
| |
| Authors: | Douglas J Norton James D Wickham Timothy G Wade Kelly Kunert John V Thomas Paul Zeph |
| |
| Institution: | (1) Office of Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (4503T), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460, USA;(2) Office of Research and Development, National Exposure Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (E243-05), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA;(3) Office of Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (4204M), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460, USA;(4) Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1807T), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460, USA;(5) Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Water Management, P.O. Box 2063, Harrisburg, PA 17105-2063, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Common decision support tools and a growing body of knowledge about ecological recovery can help inform and guide large state
and federal restoration programs affecting thousands of impaired waters. Under the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), waters not
meeting state Water Quality Standards due to impairment by pollutants are placed on the CWA Section 303(d) list, scheduled
for Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) development, and ultimately restored. Tens of thousands of 303(d)-listed waters, many
with completed TMDLs, represent a restoration workload of many years. State TMDL scheduling and implementation decisions influence
the choice of waters and the sequence of restoration. Strategies that compare these waters’ recovery potential could optimize
the gain of ecological resources by restoring promising sites earlier. We explored ways for states to use recovery potential
in restoration priority setting with landscape analysis methods, geographic data, and impaired waters monitoring data. From
the literature and practice we identified measurable, recovery-relevant ecological, stressor, and social context metrics and
developed a restorability screening approach adaptable to widely different environments and program goals. In this paper we
describe the indicators, the methodology, and three statewide, recovery-based targeting and prioritization projects. We also
call for refining the scientific basis for estimating recovery potential.
|
| |
| Keywords: | Clean Water Act Indicators Recovery Resilience Restorability Restoration Stressors Total Maximum Daily Load |
| 本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录！ |
|
