THROUGH UTILITY-BASED INCENTIVE PROGRAMS Salt River, Arizona. Photo - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

ACHIEVING ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS THROUGH UTILITY-BASED INCENTIVE PROGRAMS

1

San Pedro River, Arizona. Photo Credit: The Nature Conservancy Salt River, Arizona. Photo Credit: Brittany Choate

Rushing Rivers Program:

Conservation Savings for Instream Flow

Water Resources Research Center Webinar – May 10, 2012 Drew Beckwith, Water Policy Manager dbeckwith@westernresources.org (720) 763-3726

RRP Schematic

WTP WWTP

Mountain View

5

6

RRP Initial Screen

SCREENING CRITERION WEIGHT Strength of community connection to the stream 20% Opportunity for saved water to stay in the stream for a meaningful distance 20% Strength of physical relationship between municipal diversion and target stream reach 10% Extent to which conservation savings could result in meaningful streamflow enhancement 15% Additional factors increasing community’s likelihood of embracing program 20% Additional factors increasing water utility’s likelihood of embracing program 10% Other factors increasing implementation ease 5%

7

RRP Ranking

CRITERION COMMUNITY SCORE #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 Pagosa Springs 90% H H M H H H M H Breckenridge 85% H H M H M H H M Winter Park 73% H H L H H M M M Steamboat Spgs 70% H H M M H M M M Glenwood Spgs 60% M H M L M M H H Gunnison 58% H H L L L M H H Crested Butte 55% M M M L M H H M Aspen 55% H H M L M H L L Eagle 48% M M M L M M M H Telluride 35% H L L L M H L L

8

Pagosa Area WSD

 80 mi2 service area  ~2,000 AFY  ~7,000 taps  Majority residential  Significant 2nd homes  San Juan River!

9

Bill Communication

You saved 3,700 gallons this month by comparison to last year. Mountain View residents’ conservation efforts kept 10,000,000 gallons more water in the river this month.

10

PAWSD Bill (old)

11

PAWSD Bill (new?)

Change in Use (gallons)

12

Outreach

13

Questions & Comments

Consultant report available 1-page handout available

Drew Beckwith dbeckwith@westernresources.org (720) 763-3726

14

Santa Fe Watershed Management Project

(Water is for… Collaboration)

Santa Fe’s Water Supply System

285 25

Santa Fe

Upper Santa Fe Watershed Wastewater Treatment Plant Canyon

• Rd. Water

Treatment Plant

Buckman Well Field City Well Field Nichols Res. McClure Res. Treated Effluent Buckman Direct Diversion (2011)

Santa Fe’s Water Supply System

5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045

Acre-Feet Year

Ground Water Conserved Water San Juan-Chama Water via the Buckman Direct Diversion Santa Fe River Gap between Demand and Available Supply

Historical Projected

Water Use

Watershed Property Ownership

Cerro Grande Fire, May 2000

Watershed Stand Conditions Prior to Treatment

• Dense ponderosa pine

forests

– Average 500 to 1,000 trees per acre, compared with 10-50 trees per acre historically in Southwest pine forests – Suppression of tree growth and herbaceous vegetation

• Many small trees less

than 16” in diameter

• Few fire resistant large

trees

• Poor habitat

Watershed Fire History Study

Credit: Ellis Margolis, 2009. University of Arizona Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research

Risk of Catastrophic Fire in Watershed

Pacheco Fire, June-July 2011 $9-10 million Las Conchas Fire, June-Aug. 2011 $40 million

• Costs to fight fire
• Impact to water supply

– Damage to infrastructure – Loss and replacement of source

• Impact to local economy

– Tourism is 40% of economy – Peak months June-August – P.A. $320 million/yr

Initial Forest Treatment Work

• NEPA initiated in fall of

2000

• September 2001, EIS

completed

• Treat up to $7,270

acres in non-wilderness

• $7 million federal funds
• Project monitoring,

Technical Advisory Group

Watershed Treatment 2002-2011

• Total of 5,500 acres treated in

ponderosa pine zone:

• Hand Thinning and

Mastication (chunking)

• Pile burning
• Broadcast burning
• Re-broadcast burn in 2,000

acres

The Challenge:

• Provide a framework for long-term

maintenance work in treated areas (PP);

• Treat areas in Wilderness that pose significant

wildfire risk (MC), not included in 2001 EIS

• Long-term monitoring
• Education and Outreach
• Long-term financial model

Now What?

USFS Collaborative Forestry Restoration Program (CFRP)

• Partners:

– City of Santa Fe Water Division and Fire Department – USFS Espanola District – Santa Fe Watershed Association – The Nature Conservancy

• Comprehensive 20-yr

plan with innovative payment for ecosystem services financial model

The Product: Santa Fe Municipal Watershed Management Plan

• Water Management: Monitor and analyze watery quantity

& quality, stream habitat assessment and improvement, infrastructure upgrades;

• Education and Outreach: Educational watershed classes

for 5th graders, guided hikes for adults, educational publications, utility bill stuffers, video production, public meetings and public opinion survey;

• Financial Management: City cost share forest work with

USFS through collection agreement, and payment for ecosystem services;

• Vegetation Management: Maintenance burning every 5-7

years in ponderosa pine areas already treated, NEPA Environmental Assessment, and fuels reduction work in 4,000 acres of mixed conifer located in wilderness.

Payment for Ecosystem Services

City Utility Bill

• Water customers are the

beneficiaries of a healthy watershed

• Indirect valuation:

ecosystem service = cost of watershed maintenance/monitoring ($200,000/yr)

• Utility rate payer impact

$6.50/yr (range $3.13 to $9.40)

Payment for Ecosystem Services cont.

• Another rate increase?

– Recent 48% increase for BDD, 4 yr phase-in

• Not so fast…

– Water Trust Board $1.3 mil. grant

• Evaluation of project funding alternatives

to PES

– Rate increase – Bond – Absorb in existing Water Utility operating budget

PES Implementation

• Existing rate increase will cover long-term

project costs

• What to call it? – “Water Source Protection

Fund”

Final thoughts: collaboration requires

• A lot of energy and trust
• Everyone needs to leave some of their

preconceptions at the door – not always easy

• Early and frequent engagement in the process of

developing a shared vision: makes people/groups feel valued (because they are)

• Not all projects allow for necessary time to

gather a collective understanding of what needs to be done- if you need to rush, may be better to use more traditional methods of planning.

Conserve to Enhance (C2E): An Innovative Voluntary Mechanism

36

Program development funded by the U.S. Bureau of

• Reclamation. Current funding includes Walton Family

Foundation.

How C2E Works

• 1. Water is conserved

(at homes & businesses)

• 2. Money saved through

water conservation

• 3. Money donated to a C2E

fund

• 4. Money used to

implement environmental enhancement projects

Water saved through conservation efforts Donations support environmental enhancement

Tapping into Motivation

37

• Why should I save

water?

• How do I save water?
• How are these things

connected? The environment can be a significant motivator that makes these connections.

Environmental Goals

38

• Meaningful, new funding

for local projects

• Wide range of projects
• Instream flows, green

infrastructure, stream restoration – whatever a community is interested in

• But maintain a

connection to water!

Beaver Creek, AZ. Photo credit: Brittany Choate

• Connect personal water savings to river

enhancement

• Raise awareness about community

benefits of riparian & river systems

• Provide additional water

for riparian restoration

• Increase local water conservation
• Inspire community engagement in

restoration projects

Setting Goals: The Tucson Example

Tucson Environmental Enhancement Priorities

• Located in Tucson
• Existing project
• Public visitation
• Ecosystem Enhancement
• Funding Source
• Permits

Recipient Site Selection Process

• Identified 15 local restoration projects
• RFP to select recipient sites
• 3 sites asked to make presentations to Board
• 2 sites selected as C2E recipient sites
• Narrowed down to one site due to feasibility of

project completion & benefit

41

Atturbury Wash, Tucson, AZ (Candice Rupprecht)

Flexibility & Adaptability

• Riparian Preservation & Restoration Listening

Sessions, Summer 2011

– Large scale projects: $ & don’t need water – Small scale (neighborhood) projects: need $, expertise, maybe water

• Tucson C2E expanding to include funding for

neighborhood scale projects

Tanque Verde Creek, Arizona. (Candice Rupprecht)

Tucson Water Checkbox program announcement, June 2011

43

Expanding the Reach