Wachusett Reservoir Watershed Land Management Plan

1
Wachusett Reservoir Watershed Land Management
Plan Metropolitan District Commission
(MDC)/Division of Watershed Management
(DWM) Ecosystem Management
Jeremy M. Lewis Mark Richardson Lauren
Tuori Orione Bean Robert C. Tulloch
2
Framework

• Wachusett Reservoir background
• Plan overview
• Ecosystem management evaluation criteria
• Rating of plan
• Concluding remarks

3
(No Transcript)
4
(No Transcript)
5
Wachusett Reservoir Watershed

• 26 owned by MDC/DWM
• 37 of watershed is privately owned
• 75 of watershed is forest or wetland
• 10 of watershed is residential
• 284 persons/mi2 compared to 16 persons/mi2 on the
  Quabbin watershed
• Overall only 52 of watershed is protected

6
MGL Chapter 372 Legislative Mandate

• Est. the DWM and directed it to utilize and
  conservewater and other natural resources in
  order to protect preserve and enhance the
  environment of the Commonwealth and to assure the
  availability of pure water for future generations
• Directs MDC/DWM to periodically prepare watershed
  mgt. plans for forestry water yield
  enhancement and recreational activities.

7
Broad overarching mandate Maintain high quality
source water for present and future generations.
(Sustainable mgt.)
Management Goals
Management Actions
Land acquisition public education
Land Protection
Maintain high proportion of forested conditions
Reduce/Control nutrient and pollutant inputs
Provide healthy diverse vigorous uneven-aged
forest strucutre and adequate regeneration
Uneven-aged Silvicultural Methods
8
Goals (cont)
Actions (cont)
Protection and maintenance of wetlands cultural
resources and fields
Maintain certain amount of non-forested habitat
Management restrictions in areas identified as
important to rare species and/or habitats
Protection of rare species and habitats
Continuing assessment and identification of
important cultural resources and appropriate
protection
Cultural Resource Protection
9
Water quality monitoring system in place CFI
develop system for monitoring other issues
Monitor water quality forest conditions biota
HWA invasive species
Continued field work and detailed mapping using
GPS
Improve Upon GIS database
Technical assistance Annual Wachusett public
meeting
Public involvement and education
Annual revisions based on technical scientific
and public input
Annual Revisions (Adaptive)
10
9 Ecosystem Management Criteria

• Societal Values
• Interstakeholder cooperation
• Organizational Change
• Human embedded in nature
• Ecological Boundaries
• Hierarchal context

• Ecological Integrity
• Data Collection Monitoring
• Adaptive Management

11
Societal Values

• MGL chapter 372 legislation directed by society
• plan acknowledges that the values of different
  stakeholder groups might conflict
• historical and cultural values such as
  preserving the Old Stone Church are emphasized
• ecological values especially preservation of
  biodiversity and native species are stressed
• economic values of land especially through
  timber harvesting are a key component of the
  management plan
• recreational values noted as possibly conflicting
  with ecological concerns
• BUT all of these values are secondary to the
  value of ensuring water quality

OVERALL RATING 9 out of 10
12
Interstakeholder Cooperation

• 1995 agreement with USDA Forest Service to
  provide technical assistance to private
  landowners
• 1998 agreement with DEM to manage adjacent lands
  together
• coordinates with Massachusetts Water Resource
  Agency responsible for water transmission and
  treatment
• plans to coordinate with Mass Wildlifes
  Endangered Species and Natural Heritage Program
  to inventory rare species and communities
• most emphasis on interaction with private
  landowners and the public than with other
  governmental agencies
• BUT primary goal is to acquire and own watershed
  lands and to have direct control over it

OVERALL RATING 5 out of 10
13
Organizational Change

• No major institutional changes were undertaken as
  a result of management plan
• Changes in project implementation such as timber
  sales law enforcement and wildlife management
• No indication as to receptiveness for future
  organizational change
• Note Romney administration proposes merging the
  MDC with the DEM and forming a new Division of
  Conservation and Recreation. Unsure of the
  impacts on plan implementation but funding cuts
  are inevitable.

Overall Rating 7 out of 10
14
Humans Embedded in Nature

• Plan acknowledges that ALL human activities on
  the land have direct impacts on the watershed
  ecosystem
• Goal is to discourage land uses that degrade
  water quality
• Major anthropogenic disturbance is timber
  harvesting
• No measurable impact on water quality required
  of all forest management activities
• Public education programs encourage private
  landowners and recreational users to be good
  stewards of the land

Overall Rating 9 out of 10
15
Ecological Boundaries

• Watershed Boundaries clearly defined but major
  challenge is managing across political boundaries
  within watershed
• Plan recognizes need to work across boundaries to
  achieve goals and objectives of watershed
  protection
• Plan encourages private landowners to be proper
  stewards of the land and to consider designing
  strategic management plans that considers
  surrounding ecosystem
• Encourages Massachusetts Forest Stewardship
  program
• Cooperative agreements with other land protection
  entities
• Land acquisition program

Overall Rating 9 out of 10
16
Hierarchical Context

• Plan does address need to manage beyond
  individual parcel level (i.e. public outreach
  land acquisition program)
• Systems Perspective addressed
• Ecosystem managed for primary purpose of ensuring
  water quality and other benefits are secondary
  and associated with forest habitat
• Most active management is focused on providing
  habitat or conditions for rare and endangered
  species in areas that do not affect water
  quality. -MDC/DWM

Overall Rating 6 out of 10
17
Ecological Integrity

• Manage for native diversity favor species best
  suited for particular sites
• Plan identifies the need to preserve critical
  areas and sensitive habitat (vernal pools seeps
  springs orchards buffer zones etc.)
• Control or eradicate invasive/non-native species
• Promote uneven-aged forest to reduce impacts from
  natural disturbance rather than emulate it
• Not concerned with increasing habitat diversity
  primary concern is maintaining forested condition
• Only concerned with maintaining existing open
  space rather than increasing its proportion
• No plans to reintroduce extirpated native species
• The MDC recognizes that its greatest contribution
  to regional biodiversity is protecting large
  areas of land from development and maintaining
  most of those lands in forest cover.

Overall Rating 7 out of 10
18
Data Collection Monitoring

• Established water quality and forest conditions
  monitoring system in place
• Limited wildlife research conducted plan
  recognizes need for increased research on
  endangered and high priority species
• Plan recognizes need for vernal pool
  certification of over 300 potential pools
• Using Quabbin format for cultural resource
  inventory
• Extensive use of GIS database for management
• Most improvements dependant on funding and
  personnel

Overall Score 7 out of 10
19
Adaptive Management

• Annual revisions are done based on scientific
  technical acquired lands and public input (i.e.
  Annual Wachusett Public meeting)
• All of the mgt. actions are easily applicable to
  newly acquired lands
• This plan should be viewed as an adaptive
  watershed management plan to be applied but
  updated and modified as new properties are added
  and new information comes to light.
• -MDC/DWM

Overall Rating 9 out 10
20
Key Points of Interest

• Positive Attributes
• Highly adaptable plan
• Effort to work with private landowners
• Addresses stakeholder values

• Negative Attributes
• Limited inventory of cultural and wildlife
  resources
• Inadequate interagency cooperation
• Lacks dynamic view of ecological processes

21
Concluding Remarks

• Overall rating of 75 based on our criteria
• Overall the plan addresses most of the ecosystem
  management criteria required to be considered an
  Ecosystem Management Plan
• The issue is with constraints primary attention
  to water quality funding personnel private
  landowner cooperation
• Once these issues are addressed the area will be
  properly managed as an ecosystem