(http://www.scfishingreport.com/)

 South Carolina Rivers:

 Report on the Future of South Carolina’s Rivers Forum

&

Building a Cooperative River Network

Overview

Forty-five participants from diverse backgrounds and with a variety of interests participated in the South Carolina Rivers Forum March 17 and 18, 2008, in Columbia.  There were three groups of participants: university faculty and staff, state and federal agency staff, and representatives of nongovernmental conservation organizations.  Organized by American Rivers and the Center for Humans and Nature the goals of the forum were to (1) increase awareness of potential effects of global climate change on the state’s rivers and water resources, (2) identify related threats, actions and strategies, (3) facilitate networking among river advocates, and (4) assess the interest in developing a statewide river collaborative to increase the effectiveness of river and water advocates.   

Breakout groups assessed (1) climate change events that affect, or could affect, rivers and water resources (2) actions that will better protect rivers from climate change, and (3) strategies to build awareness and effect changes needed to address the threats.  The breakout topics were 1) Water Supply Efficiency, 2) Recreation, and, 3) Water Quality and Wildlife.   A summary (See below) of each breakout group’s discussions is provided on this website. 

Forum participants recommended that a unified strategy regarding climate change and South Carolina’s rivers be developed to encompass the areas discussed in the breakout sessions.  Because these issues are clearly interconnected, actions that affect one would likely affect another.  

The conference participants discussed whether South Carolina is ready to establish a coordinated network advocating for the state’s rivers.  Diana Toledo of River Network proposed several models, and discussion followed on what model may work best, how it could function, and how it may evolve.  (See Diana’s summary, including Table 1 below.) 

There was general consensus that South Carolina is ready for improved collaboration through an Information Network to further our work on river conservation, climate change and other river-related issues.  Key components of this collaborative would initially consist of  

·          A web site supporting relevant information

·          An email distribution list or listserv for disseminating information and promoting dialog among river and water advocates (See Table 2 below for list of SC river organizations.)

·          Regularly scheduled (annual) meetings of river collaborative participants to promote networking, information exchange and strategic planning.  The next such meeting is tentatively scheduled for March 9-10, 2009, in Columbia. 

American Rivers and the Center for Humans and Nature will follow up on the discussions and recommendations of the group and pursue forming a SC River collaborative as outlined above. 

Breakout Group Summaries

Breakout Group One: Water Supply Efficiency and Climate Change

Threats

Supply related – More extreme weather conditions will affect the amount of water into and out of existing water supplies.

Demand related – As state and region grows, demand will likely increase unless efficiency can be integrated into mainstream growth patterns. The changing land use associated with growth and development can significantly damage water quality beyond the concern of increased consumption.

Management –As the state grows there must be a conscious effort to manage and regulate our water resources.

Lack of knowledge and political leadership – Without the recognition of water as a critical, finite resource by the general population, getting the message to the community and political leaders will be difficult. Leaders are apparently unaware of the threats facing water resources and, therefore, have not taken the appropriate steps to ensure long-term protection of the resource.

Economic perceptions – Individuals are not paying the true cost for energy or water, given the numerous pollutants and other economic factors that are not accounted for in current pricing structures.  Moreover, the perception is that efficiency measures are costly. Efficiency should be seen as an investment and a means of containing costs.

Actions

Education (K-12, colleges & universities, and the general public)  Focused education is needed for the private sector to encourage private investments, research, implementation of efficiency, and an understanding of the relationships between water and energy and climate.

Good legislation – Encourage and guide progressive legislation for water resource management

Implementation of plans and legislation – Plans/legislation in place are currently not being activated or made effective. Educational programs should encourage the public to demand implementation of these plans.

Taxes and government investment – Public facilities should develop and use efficiency measures and other water quality improvement technologies, both to save taxpayer money and to serve as a demonstration of these concepts.

Strategies

Use specific climate conditions to secure lasting change for water-use policies and practices. For example, use droughts as an example to pursue outreach, education, and advocacy.

Forge non-traditional partnerships among utilities, faith communities, the media, chambers of commerce, and the business community to promote the message.   Framing the issue in many different ways can reach a wider constituency.

Present a consistent message across the state.  This message should be targeted to both the public and private sector and should shift public perception to the fact that water is a finite resource that must be protected.

Establish demonstration projects that identify efficiency as making economic sense; provide examples across a wide range of techniques.

Form a coordinated advocacy strategy on local and state levels to accompany the messaging/education approach described above.  These two strategies should support and reinforce each other, with the educational approach providing the needed grassroots component for the advocacy to be effective.

Create classroom curricula, syllabi, or lesson plans on water efficiency.  (1) By educating children we can increase effectiveness because they will in turn teach their parents about the issues and become household advocates for more efficient water use.  (2) Create resources for teachers.  These resources must be tailored to meet state curriculum requirements.

Adopt a “carrots-and-sticks” philosophy for water resource protection.  Carrots should include the use of incentives for new research and implementation of technology.  Sticks should address the lack of true economic cost being paid for energy and water by creating tiered water rates or similar pricing structures.

Breakout Group Two: Recreation and Climate Change Priorities

Changes in Recreation - All members of the recreation group agreed recreation will change in the face of climate change.  There was consensus that the change could have a limiting effect on recreation by negatively affecting water quality, limiting access to recreational areas, diminishing natural beauty, and harming native fisheries.  These factors could have a severe economic impact on river based industries.

Water Quality - All members in the group agreed we need to have a better understanding of how climate change will affect water quality in rivers.  Degraded water quality in rivers due to prolonged drought, increased water temperatures, and increased runoff from storms could increase pathogens and harmful bacteria and create severe public health risks for river recreation. 

Limited Access

·          Building more dams for water storage and power will become an increasingly attractive strategy that will flood more miles of river, further limiting river recreation.  Expanded use of existing dams may further degrade rivers and limit recreation. 

·          As states adopt low in-flow protocol due to drought, recreation flows are the first to be cancelled.

·          Degraded water quality due to runoff from large storms and low, warmer water could create public health risks leading to mandatory recreation restrictions.

Native Fisheries - Native fish species will decline or be forced to move from their native waters due to changes in temperature and water quality.

The Role of Recreation - Recreation Groups need to play a larger role in the discussion about how to address climate change and its affect on rivers.

Actions

More research - More research is needed to determine how climate change will affect water quality and what kind of public health risks this could present for river users. Public health risks could include toxic algae blooms, pathogens, and harmful bacteria.

Land Protection

·          Climate change could result in greater numbers of large storms, increasing run-off into rivers, making streamside buffers increasingly important.  

·          New dams, unfavorable recreational operations for existing dams, and poor/dangerous water quality could limit river recreation to fewer places.  In order to protect the quality of recreation, it will be important to protect land in the river corridor.

Create River Basin Confederations to manage/protect rivers within a basin-wide framework.

Strategies

Build Strong Coalitions for Rivers:

·          Connect communities to rivers through recreation by promoting their economic and health benefits.

·          Create a strong unified voice for rivers. Include NGOs, state and federal agencies, city, state, and county politicians, utilities, businesses, land owners, and the recreation industry.

·          Promote rivers’ benefits to communities with water festivals and river rallies.

Education:

·          Link school programs to rivers by creating “living classrooms”. Possibly incorporate water quality testing, wildlife education, and other river-based activities into lesson plans.

·          Educate the public about the community benefits of healthy rivers and the importance of protecting them in the face of climate change.

·          Recognize that lake users and river users often have different recreational priorities. Try to unite them through education in the face of climate change.

Breakout Group Three: Water Quality and Wildlife

 Threats 

Supply-related climate threats include water volume and distribution

·          issues to be considered

o         storm surge/peak flows/low flows;

o         increased runoff (polluted and not polluted) caused by more frequent, heavier rains and great increases in the amount of impervious surface;

o         salinity intrusion in coastal areas;

o         groundwater protection;

o         protection of isolated wetlands. 

Demand-related threats

·          ever-growing demand for water as population increases

·          decreased availability of adequate wildlife habitat

·          poor water quality 

·          inflexible water management schemes (e.g. instream flow)

·          a general lack of knowledge among lay persons, including elected and appointed officials, regarding threats to water quality and the effects of degraded water quality on wildlife and other natural resources 

Cost of Water

·          a general lack of awareness of the long-term costs associated with failing to preserve water quality and wildlife habitat. 

·          a general lack of knowledge regarding the “real” costs of water consumed, which leads to people having little or no incentive to conserve water. 

 Actions 

Education.  Riverine education should be improved at all educational levels. Are K-12 schools doing an adequate job of educating about water issues?  Can water quality and quantity activists and professionals provide schools with materials and other assistance? There is a need for further education for state and local political leaders and all citizens. 

Interrelationships between Wildlife Habitat and Water Quality/Quantity   

 The interrelationships between wildlife habitat and water quality/quantity, should be communicated to the general public and other audiences. One member raised the idea of focusing on understanding biodiversity--all flora and fauna including microbes--which play critical roles in maintaining water quality, ecosystem function and wildlife habitat.

Conservation and Efficiency                

                Conservation and efficiency and their relationships to water quality and quantity needs be included in any discussions of rivers. In addition to developing new and improved conservation practices, we need new ideas and approaches to prevent additional degradation of water quality and wildlife habitat, and to restore that which has been damaged. Functioning policies/mechanisms from different states, regions, and nations could be considered for adoption in South Carolina.  

                Since water is very inexpensive efforts to have people pay the real costs of water are to be encouraged. 

Strategies

Current Drought 

                The ongoing drought provides an excellent opportunity for addressing the educational needs identified. .  Droughts can also serve as a learning tool to make the public aware of water quantity and quality issues.  Educating members of the public who do not have a strong background in water issues should be a priority because many people do not understand the connection between water conservation and the real costs of water used in their homes and businesses.

 Adaptive Management

 The group discussed the benefits of employing an adaptive management approach to be used to adjust water management strategies quickly as unforeseen problems arise. Following on this effort would be an effort to address long-term water management planning. 

Political Education and Outreach 

All Levels of Government

 It is necessary to work with state and federal legislators to address water quality and quantity, conservation, and management to encourage progressive legislation designed to improve conservation.  All levels of government can and should provide legal and regulatory incentives and disincentives to better manage water quality and quantity.  In particular, it may be necessary for Congress to address isolated wetlands protection. 

Local governments have the power to use zoning, land use, design and building codes, and other powers to promote water conservation.  These entities must be educated to be made aware of, and understand, their power to affect water use, water quality, and the resulting benefits to their communities.  

At the state government level: work to resolve issues related to protection of isolated wetlands; regulate water withdrawals and interbasin transfers; educate state regulators on evolving trends in water management including issues related to flow regimes.

Consistency of Laws and Regulations

 There was considerable debate over whether consistency among laws and regulations across states is desirable.  Some regulated bodies desire regulatory uniformity or consistency, others do not.  There was no resolution of this issue during the breakout session.  

FERC Hydropower Relicensing Process 

The FERC hydropower relicensing process can be used to improve water quantity and quality and wildlife habitat in both the reservoirs and rivers affected by projects. Relicensing must include the inevitability of climate change in approach.   

Diana Toledo’s Summary

Discussion of SC River Collaborative 

Diana Toledo of River Network asked participants at the South Carolina Rivers Forum to consider whether any of the action items raised in the small group discussions were of sufficient concern to their organizations that they expected to take action during the next few years. The majority of participants acknowledged this to be the case.  

There was also general agreement that, in the case of most of those high-priority issues, participants’ organizations would be unable to succeed if they tackled them alone. 

Diana then reviewed River Network’s Collaboration Continuum Chart (See Fig. 1 below), which outlines different approaches to collaboration that vary in level of formality, structure and participant commitment, providing specific examples of each.  

There was discussion of failed efforts to create a collaborative effort around SC water issues.  Following discussion on the various “shades” of collaborative efforts outlined in the Continuum Chart, there was general consensus that an information network would be the model most likely to succeed in SC Although the group did not delve deeply into what such a Network would entail, suggestions included an electronic discussion forum (e.g. a listserve, a discussion board, etc.), regular conference calls around particular topics, and/or an annual face-to-face meeting.  

While some participants expressed interest in having the network evolve over time into something more formal and directed, Diana explained that information networks typically allow participants gradually build trust that, enables them to increase future collaborative efforts.  

Participants were then asked to consider a number of questions regarding their organizations’ participation in a future SC Water Collaborative. Participants volunteered their responses (see below), many of which were shared by various attendees. 

What would you need to get from a SC collaborative river effort?

o         Local contacts

o         Information about what’s happenings around SC

o         An audience for our aquatic data

o         Diversity in participants, including both NGO’s and governmental institutions

o         Equal voice given to all participants

o         A clear sense that our organization can contribute to the collaborative

o         Tangible outputs 

What could you bring to such a collaborative effort?

o         Ability to elevate issues to a national stage

o         Data-

o         Funding

o         Meeting space

o         Expertise in communication

o         Expertise in advocacy

o         The interest and support of grassroots members

o         Student labor

o         Experience working with similar collaboratives (in NC)

o         Connections to funders

o         Time (staff resources)

o         Case studies of successful efforts

o         Networks in General Assembly

o         Background information

 What barriers would limit your interest/participation in a collaborative effort?

o         Diversity of participants (beyond NGOs)

o         Unequal power among members

o         Insufficient overlap in the collaborative’s and our own organizational goals

o         Inefficient (too many resources required)

o         Advocacy positions

 From these responses, one main issue emerged:

Should participation in the collaborative be limited to conservation organizations or  include academic, governmental and other institutions with an interest in water issues?     

While the group didn’t come to a final resolution the discussion concluded in support of broad participation, given that most discussants were interested in establishing an informational network. This would not preclude conservation organizations from deciding at a later time to coordinate more closely through a separate effort.  

Conclusion

The meeting organizers (i.e. American Rivers and the Center for Humans and Nature) agreed to have a follow-up meeting to identify which issues suggested by participants could be moved forward given the existing resources. American Rivers and the Center for Humans and Nature will host another face-to-face meeting in 2009 and will continue to explore development of an electronic medium for ongoing communication.

Table 1 – River Network’s Collaboration Continuum

	1. No Collaboration	2. Information Network	3. Coordinating Council	4. Campaign	5. Ongoing Coalition
Purpose	N/A	Sharing information between like-minded groups	Coordinating work on specific issues between groups with similar goals	Collective action towards a known goal over a specific timeframe	Advancement of a group of related issues over a longer timeframe
Membership	N/A	Open to all interested	Formal members or a loose alliance of active leaders	Strategic partnership between diverse groups	Longer term commitment of diverse, allied organizations.
Structure	N/A	Loose. System for communicating between members	Structured like a network with one or more leaders driving work	Steering and working committees often staff-driven.	More structured with board directing staff.
Examples	N/A	Volunteer Monitoring Network; NC Muddy Water Watch	North Carolina Watershed Alliance;  Kentucky Watershed Watch	Save Our Cypress Coalition; Georgia Water Coalition	Great Lakes United
Required “Inputs”	None	Minimal; staff or volunteer time to participate in meetings or follow electronic traffic	Staff or volunteer time; willingness to give up some control over your project work in order to coordinate it with others.	More substantial staff time, likely needing a paid-coordinator, willingness to undertake joint fundraising	Less control by member groups (unless they sit on the Board)