A project of the Watershed A project of the Watershed Exchange and Technology Exchange and Technology

(WET) Partnership (WET) Partnership

From the Forests to the Faucet: From the Forests to the Faucet: Quantifying the ConnectionsQuantifying the Connections

From the Forests to the Faucet: From the Forests to the Faucet: Quantifying the ConnectionsQuantifying the Connections

Watershed Exchange and Technology (WET) PartnershipWatershed Exchange and Technology (WET) Partnership• Partnership with UMass• Focus on water supply watersheds• Transfer research results, information and

analysis• Communicate importance of forests to

water quality • Assist local communities with source water

assessment and natural resource planning • Showcase techniques to protect water

quality and improve water supply• Develop training in watershed forestry• Support practitioners through NEAFWM

Drinking Water Supply Drinking Water Supply Assessment Assessment

for the Northeastern Areafor the Northeastern Area

Drinking Water Supply Drinking Water Supply Assessment Assessment

for the Northeastern Areafor the Northeastern AreaObjectivesObjectives• Compile a GIS database to help quantify

forest, water, people connections in NA• Evaluate and rank current and future

conditions to identify priority areas for conservation and stewardship

• Develop one or more sustainability indicators

• Guide future work of the WET Partnership• Highlight key areas for investment• Provide useful information for SAP and

other regional analyses

Things to consider….Things to consider….

• Basic GIS Overlay Process – no modeling

• Used only existing data – readily available with documented sources – EPA and FOTE

• Results intended to guide both conservation and management programs

Three Step Analysis Process

Step 1: Create a watershed index for clean water – biophysical conditions

Step 2: Identify the distribution of Surface Water Supplies

- combine step 1 results with water consumer data (2a) and importance of private forest land (2b)

Step 3: Predict future water supply threats from land

conversion

Step 1: Ability to produce clean Step 1: Ability to produce clean water (APCW)water (APCW)Step 1: Ability to produce clean Step 1: Ability to produce clean water (APCW)water (APCW)• Index of water quality and watershed integrity• GIS overlay by 8-digit HUC’s in NA• Attributes rated very high to low on 30 meter

grid• Summed by watershed

% Forest land Higher % forest land ranked higher.% Agricultural land Higher % agric. land ranked lower.Road Density (% tile) Higher % road density ranked lower.% Riparian forest Higher % buffered ranked higher.Erodible Soils Higher soil erodibility ranked lower.Housing Density Higher housing density ranked

lower.

Vari

ab

les

Vari

ab

les

Some thoughts...Some thoughts...Some thoughts...Some thoughts...

• Results dominated by land Results dominated by land useuse• Could expand on ecological Could expand on ecological features features but suitable data sets were but suitable data sets were not readilynot readily available across NAavailable across NA• Useful for Criterion 4 Useful for Criterion 4 • Reasonable correlation Reasonable correlation with 303d datawith 303d data but more validation may be but more validation may be neededneeded

• Results dominated by land Results dominated by land useuse• Could expand on ecological Could expand on ecological features features but suitable data sets were but suitable data sets were not readilynot readily available across NAavailable across NA• Useful for Criterion 4 Useful for Criterion 4 • Reasonable correlation Reasonable correlation with 303d datawith 303d data but more validation may be but more validation may be neededneeded

Step 2: Existing Conditions Step 2: Existing Conditions (1992)(1992)Step 2: Existing Conditions Step 2: Existing Conditions (1992)(1992)2a: Prioritize the importance of 8-digit

HUC watersheds in NA for water supply from surface water sources

•Ability to Produce Clean Water (APCW)•Water Consumers per Unit Area

2b: Prioritize the importance private forests for water supply in 8-digit HUC watersheds in NA

•Step 2a + % Unprotected Forest

bb

These are the surface water These are the surface water supply “workhorses” most supply “workhorses” most dominated by unprotected dominated by unprotected

private forest landsprivate forest lands

These are the surface water These are the surface water supply “workhorses” most supply “workhorses” most dominated by unprotected dominated by unprotected

private forest landsprivate forest lands

Some thoughts...Some thoughts...Some thoughts...Some thoughts...• Small to medium sized surface water Small to medium sized surface water supplies supplies dominate New England and Mid dominate New England and Mid AtlanticAtlantic• Midwest is a mix of surface and Midwest is a mix of surface and groundwater groundwater supplies (run of the river/lake)supplies (run of the river/lake)• Results inform where to focus and Results inform where to focus and acknowledge acknowledge stewardship activities as well as stewardship activities as well as where to assistwhere to assist large municipal water providers – large municipal water providers – tailoringtailoring technical servicestechnical services• Data useful for finer scale analysisData useful for finer scale analysis

• Small to medium sized surface water Small to medium sized surface water supplies supplies dominate New England and Mid dominate New England and Mid AtlanticAtlantic• Midwest is a mix of surface and Midwest is a mix of surface and groundwater groundwater supplies (run of the river/lake)supplies (run of the river/lake)• Results inform where to focus and Results inform where to focus and acknowledge acknowledge stewardship activities as well as stewardship activities as well as where to assistwhere to assist large municipal water providers – large municipal water providers – tailoringtailoring technical servicestechnical services• Data useful for finer scale analysisData useful for finer scale analysis

Step 3: Future Conditions Step 3: Future Conditions (2030)(2030)Step 3: Future Conditions Step 3: Future Conditions (2030)(2030)

• Ability to Produce Clean Water (APCW)• Water Consumers per Unit Area• % Unprotected Forest• 2000-2030 Housing Density Increase

Prioritize the threats to drinking water Prioritize the threats to drinking water supplies presented by development supplies presented by development pressure on private forest landspressure on private forest lands

Prioritize the threats to drinking water Prioritize the threats to drinking water supplies presented by development supplies presented by development pressure on private forest landspressure on private forest lands

Green to dark blue indicates high value Green to dark blue indicates high value drinking source water watersheds where drinking source water watersheds where development is likely to cause loss of development is likely to cause loss of private forest lands and impact the largest private forest lands and impact the largest number of water consumers.number of water consumers.

Green to dark blue indicates high value Green to dark blue indicates high value drinking source water watersheds where drinking source water watersheds where development is likely to cause loss of development is likely to cause loss of private forest lands and impact the largest private forest lands and impact the largest number of water consumers.number of water consumers.

Top tier rankings…Top tier rankings…Top tier rankings…Top tier rankings…

In an area of focus, the data could be reclassified using pixel-based scoring.

In an area of focus, the data could be reclassified using pixel-based scoring.

Parcel Evaluations*

* From source water stewardship project – WET/TPL 2004* From source water stewardship project – WET/TPL 2004

Value of Ecosystem Services:Value of Ecosystem Services: Less Forest Cover = Higher Less Forest Cover = Higher Treatment CostsTreatment Costs

Value of Ecosystem Services:Value of Ecosystem Services: Less Forest Cover = Higher Less Forest Cover = Higher Treatment CostsTreatment Costs

Impact of Forest Cover on Chemical Treatment Costs

$0.00

$50.00

$100.00

$150.00

$200.00

$250.00

0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent Forest in Drainage Area

Che

mic

al c

ost/M

G

A 10% decline in forest cover leads to an $8-12

increase in chemical costs per million gallons

of water treated. E.g. 26 MGD ($10) =

228.8 (365) = $ 95,000/yr

or stated another way…

For every 10% decline in forest cover, there may be

a 12-15% increase in chemical treatment costs.

Some thoughts...Some thoughts...Some thoughts...Some thoughts...

• Regional priorities for Legacy and Regional priorities for Legacy and other forestother forest conservation activitiesconservation activities• Customize information and adviceCustomize information and advice• Targeting assistance to Targeting assistance to communities and communities and water providers in threatened water providers in threatened areasareas• Opportunity to quantify the Opportunity to quantify the magnitude of the magnitude of the threat and the cost to society of threat and the cost to society of forest lossforest loss

• Regional priorities for Legacy and Regional priorities for Legacy and other forestother forest conservation activitiesconservation activities• Customize information and adviceCustomize information and advice• Targeting assistance to Targeting assistance to communities and communities and water providers in threatened water providers in threatened areasareas• Opportunity to quantify the Opportunity to quantify the magnitude of the magnitude of the threat and the cost to society of threat and the cost to society of forest lossforest loss

Next Steps…Next Steps…Next Steps…Next Steps…

• Review results• Verify top scoring watersheds with field-level experts.• Interpret findings in terms of management• Finalize maps and report for NA, post results on NA &

WET Partnership website, article for Journal of Forestry

• Prepare data in state by state format• Make metadata available to others• Identify additional questions for analysis & areas for

further assessment at 11-digit HUC watershed level.

““The water we drink may be The water we drink may be our most important our most important

connection connection to the forest.” to the forest.”

““The water we drink may be The water we drink may be our most important our most important

connection connection to the forest.” to the forest.”