Watershed Management

1. Watershed Management Better Coordination of Data Collection Efforts Needed to Support Key Decisions Laura Gatz Analyst, U.S. GAO gatzl@gao.gov

2. Agenda • Research Questions • Methodology • Results • Recommendations • Contacts for Additional Information

3. Research Questions • Requester: Chairman, House Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment • Question 1: What are the key entities that collect water quality and water quantity data, what types of data do they collect, how are the data stored, and how can they be accessed? • Question 2: To what extent do these entities coordinate their water quality and water quantity data collection efforts?

4. Identified and surveyed key federal agencies that collect water quality and/or water quantity data Conducted site visits to Colorado, Mississippi, and Virginia Interviewed federal, state, and local agencies; industry; volunteer monitoring groups; and academia Interviewed members of federal and state coordinating organizations (NWQMC, State Councils) Interviewed other key organizations such as the Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators Methodology

5. Results: Question 1 – Water Quality • GAO identified 15 key federal agencies that collect at least some water quality data on a variety of parameters. • States play a central role in water quality data collection to fulfill their responsibilities under the Clean Water Act. • Hundreds of other organizations (local watershed groups, volunteer groups, industries, and members of academia collect water quality data for specific projects). • Water quality data are stored in a variety of ways, affecting their accessibility to potential users.

6. Question 1 – Water Quantity • GAO identified 15 federal agencies that collect at least some water quantity data. • Collection of water quantity data is considerably more centralized, with a few primary agencies collecting a majority of the water quantity data available nationwide. • These data are often stored in nationwide databases and accessed widely by a variety of users. • Some states collect water quantity data, often to fill in gaps in the data collected by federal agencies.

7. Results: Question 2 – Water QualityStrong Consensus on the Need for Better Coordination • Officials in almost all of the 15 federal agencies GAO contacted that collect water quality data indicated that: • Coordination was either not taking place or falling short of its potential, and • Enhanced coordination could provide data users with better data about water quality conditions and a more complete picture of the health of watersheds • State environmental agencies we contacted generally agreed, especially regarding coordination among state monitoring efforts and between states and other data-gathering entities

8. Question 2 – Water QualityMost Frequently Cited Barriers to Coordinating Water Quality Data Collection Efforts by 15 Federal Agencies

9. Question 2 – Water QualityData Management Challenges Also Limit Data Availability • Water quality officials we interviewed also often noted that difficulties in data management are a factor inhibiting their ability to use water quality data to make watershed management decisions. • Concerns focused in two areas: • Complexity of using STORET, and • Inability to integrate data from various sources to provide a more complete picture of water quality within watersheds. Example: STORET/NWIS incompatibility.

10. Question 2 – Water QualityCoordinating Entity with Sufficient Resources and Authority Suggested as a Potential Solution • The national, regional, and state monitoring councils that promote coordination have frequently been impeded by: • A lack of authority to make key decisions, • A shortage of funding to undertake key coordinating activities, and • Low priority attention from data collecting organizations. • Some have cited these difficulties in calling for a clearly designated water data coordinating body at the national level with both sufficient resources and authority.

11. Question 2 – Water Quantity • Federal and state officials generally agreed that efforts to coordinate the collection of water quantity data have been comparatively successful. • Several reasons cited: • Data collection is more centralized among fewer entities. • Critical and time-sensitive decisions require accurate and complete water quantity data. • Technology allows for immediate distribution of some data. • Water quantity data parameters are generally more consistent nationwide.

12. Question 2 – Water QuantityOverall Lack of Water Quantity Data is a Key Concern

13. Recommendations • GAO recommended that the Congress consider formally designating a lead organization to enhance and clearly define authority for coordinating water data collection nationwide. • Among its responsibilities, the organization would: • Support the development and continued operation of regional and state monitoring councils. • Coordinate the development of an Internet-based clearinghouse. • Coordinate the development of clear guidance on metadata standards.

14. Contacts for Additional Information For information: • Steve Elstein, Assistant Director, (202) 512-6515, elsteins@gao.gov • John Stephenson, Director, (202) 512-6225, stephensonj@gao.gov For e-copies of the report: • www.gao.gov (Report Number GAO-04-382) For printed copies of the report: • http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/ordtab.pl