 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
(Note this Draft Plan is provided as a service to our clients. Since we have no control over the content or accuracy of it, we can not guarantee its content. As with everything, use at your own risk. If you have environmental problems, we suggest that you contact a professional. We would, of course, be flattered to be of service!)
Wetlands Conservation Plan
DRAFT PLAN
Prepared By:
The DRAFT Guam Wetlands Conservation Plan has been created as a result of planning efforts funded by the Guam Environmental Protection Agency, and undertaken by the consultant team of Winzler and Kelly Consulting Engineers, and Daniel Wooster M. S., in concert with the Guam Wetlands Steering Committee under the direction of GEPA. This initial draft version is submitted to government agencies and other interested parties for review . Once review comments have been received and appropriate revisions made, a revised draft will be issued and a number of public hearings will be conducted. Following the public review the Plan will be finalized.
The Plan Goal, developed by the planning team, is as follows:
To assure "No Net Loss" of the important values and functions of Guam's wetland resources, through a program of identification, conservation, public education and outreach, and legal protection.
Within each of the Plan objectives attainable measures have been developed. Implementation and monitoring strategies are other important components of the Plan.
This first version of the Guam Wetlands Conservation Plan is subject to revision. The planning team welcomes any and all comments which will help to assure that the Plan is workable and contributes to the protection of Guam's limited and fragile wetland resources.
The Guam Wetland Conservation Plan is created to promote the national wetland goal of "No Net Loss" of the important values and functions of Guam's wetland resources. Current regulatory efforts for protecting and managing wetlands on Guam are somewhat fragmented. Regulatory control of wetland impacts is generally achieved indirectly or coincidentally through the various water regulatory programs under the Clean Water Act, or through conservation programs under the Endangered Species Act. In order to focus regulatory and resource agency efforts for wetland protection, this Plan is created as a wetland-specific guide to wetland conservation. The Plan also aims to promote wetlands conservation through an integrated program of education and training for the public and professional community, to raise awareness of the need to protect wetlands.
To achieve the Plan goal, four objectives were developed that address technical and administrative requirements for successful wetland conservation. First, a wetland identification program is proposed in order to record known wetlands in a concise and readily available format. This program also includes the classification and prioritization of wetlands. The identification program also provides a means to update the database on a regular basis, so that previously unrecognized wetlands can be recorded.
The second objective, conservation, proposes a multiple-component approach to wetlands protection. Components include wise-use management, mitigation, preservation and restoration. One or more conservation components can be applied to a particular wetland, depending on the type, function, use or priority of the wetland.
The third objective of the Plan is public education and outreach. This program includes wetland-specific training for professionals in government and the private sector. It also includes a program to train teachers and to introduce wetlands ecology into middle and high school curricula.
The fourth objective is legislative. Without proper rules and regulations, and enforcement capabilities, regulatory and resource agencies cannot carry out the goal and objectives of the conservation plan. The legislative objective proposes to amend agency rules and regulations where appropriate, explore the potential of new legislation, and to re-direct or clarify regulatory responsibilities among Guam and federal agencies.
A three-year implementation schedule is proposed for the Wetlands Conservation Plan. A Plan monitoring and evaluation program is also proposed, which makes periodic assessments of how effectively the Plan is implemented. Plan implementation will be scheduled in three phases. The first phase includes technical aspects of the Plan, which include identification, classification and rank/prioritization of wetlands. The second phase includes administrative aspects, such as amending regulations, developing new legislation, or defining agency responsibilities. The final or comprehensive implementation phase will be ongoing, and includes the education and outreach programs that will be a regular feature of wetland conservation efforts on Guam.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1 Introduction to the Plan
2.1 Introduction2.4 Guam Wetlands Resources: The Past
3.0 GOAL AND OBJECTIVES FOR WETLAND PROTECTION
3.1 Introduction3.3.1 Identification Objective
4.0 EVALUATION AND ANALYSIS OF EXISTING WETLAND PROGRAMS
4.1 Introduction4.2 Guam Programs Applicable to Wetland Conservation
4.2.1 General4.3 Federal Programs Applicable to Wetland Conservation
4.3.1 Other Federal Programs4.4 Agencies / Programs Evaluation
4.4.1 Introduction4.4.3 Federal Wetland Programs
5.0 PROTECTION AND CONSERVATION MEASURES
5.1 Introduction5.2.1 Introduction5.2.2 Develop Wetlands Identification Map as Guam Standard
5.2.3 Establish a Guam Wetlands Classification System
5.3.1 Introduction5.4 Wetlands Conservation; Sustainable Use, Mitigation, Preservation, Restoration and Preservation
5.4.1 Introduction5.5 Regulatory and Administrative Improvements
5.5.1 Introduction5.5.2 Regulatory & Administrative Alternatives
5.5.2.1 Regulatory Alternatives
6.0 WETLANDS PLAN IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
6.1 Introduction6.2 Organization and Schedule of Implementation
7.0 WETLANDS PLAN MONITORING AND EVALUATION STRATEGIES
7.1 Introduction7.2.1 Plan ComponentsIdentificationEducation and Outreach
Conservation
Legislation/Administration
7.3.1 Evaluation Elements
8.0 OTHER MANAGEMENT SCENARIOS
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Glossary of Terms and AbbreviationsA1.1 Introduction
A1.2 Definitions of Terms
A1.3 Abbreviations
Appendix 2 Inventory of Published Resources Pertaining to Guam's Wetlands
A2.1 Introduction
A2.2 Inventory of Published Wetlands Resources
LIST OF TABLES
Table Follows Page
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Follows Page
1.1 Introduction to The Plan 1.2 Wetland definitions 1.3 Why protect wetlands?
Throughout the world wetlands are an important part of the landscape. They play critical roles in the maintenance of healthy human and natural environments. Because of their location in many watersheds, they protect water quality by trapping sediments and pollutants. Their high productivity and unique flora and fauna make them centers of high biodiversity and the location of nursery areas for species that mature elsewhere. In the human environment wetlands protect against flooding, provide rich farmland and provide the setting for educational and recreational activity. Unfortunately, for many of the same reasons that wetlands are valuable they are also very sensitive to natural and manmade impacts. They are subject to development pressure and a point of conflict between those who seek to realize short term economic benefits and those who wish to preserve them for the long term in a sustainable way so as to preserve the whole range of functions that they perform.
Because of their unique ecological role wetlands have been subject to some of the most complex and occasionally conflicting regulations by both the Federal, state (including territories) and local governments. These regulations, based on a mix of long standing riparian rights, water law, commercial law and environmental protection, have been created to protect often competing interests. In recent years the multidisciplinary field of wetland science has developed in order to both understand how wetlands function and to provide a scientific basis for planning, regulatory and conservation efforts.
On Guam, wetlands comprise less than four percent of the total land area. Guam's wetlands have been subject to an escalating level of human impact since the first islanders arrived some 3,500 years ago, harvested wetland resources, and practiced the cultivation of wetland crops such as rice and taro.
Recognizing the need to protect Guam's wetland resources and to assure no net loss of the important functions that they perform and the values they possess, the Guam Environmental Protection Agency with the assistance of a grant from the United States Environmental Protection Agency issued a Request For Proposals in early 1999 for the purpose of developing a wetland resources conservation plan for the island of Guam. According to the RFP "The proposed plan shall cover the conservation of all wetland resource areas in Guam and include a resource inventory from existing sources, evaluate current government programs which cover both local and federal permitting responsibilities, identify a number of conservation (or management) alternatives both planned and considered for future implementation, provide an implementation strategy, and provide a plan monitoring and evaluation strategy".
According to the Scope of Work, the plan ".. should provide a comprehensive single source management document that will guide the various wetland and natural resource protection, permitting and planning agencies, boards and commissions of the Government of Guam, in conserving the islands wetland resources. The plan should unify conservation strategies and harmonize a variety of conservation efforts, goals and objectives".
The project team of Winzler and Kelly, Consulting Engineers and Daniel Wooster, M. S. was selected as the consultant and, in August 1999, was given the Notice to Proceed to begin work on the Plan. A Guam Wetland Conservation Steering Committee headed by the Guam EPA and whose main membership includes representatives from the Guam Department of Agriculture, the Guam Bureau of Planning, the Guam Department of Land Management. The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, The USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service, and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service also served as Committee members, as well as a member from the general public. The steering committee has provided recommendations to the committee chair (GEPA) and the consultant regarding the various plan components through monthly planning meetings and the review of proposed management alternatives, implementation strategies and evaluation techniques.
This DRAFT Guam Wetlands Conservation Plan is the result of the above described planning efforts. This DRAFT Plan will be submitted for public and agency review, including its presentation in at least three public hearings before being finalized and adopted by the Government of Guam.
Throughout this DRAFT Guam Wetland Conservation Plan there are words and phrases that may be unfamiliar to the reader or whose exact meaning may not be clear. A glossary of wetland words, terms and acronyms is contained in Appendix 1 of this Plan.
Many of these words possess specific definitions that are written in law so as not to be open to multiple interpretations. The foremost word requiring an exact, specific definition is WETLAND, a word having a specific, legal definition agreed upon by U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, the two primary federal agencies tasked with promulgating and enforcing the main federal law governing activities in wetlands, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (renamed The Clean Water Act in 1977). For regulatory and enforcement purposes, these two agencies define wetlands as:
"Wetlands are areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas."
Other, non conflicting but slightly different definitions are used by other government agencies to define the term wetland in order to clarify the word for the purpose of each agencies' mission. For example, the Food Security Act ("Swampbuster") which is administered by the National Resources Conservation Service defines wetlands as follows:
"land that has a predominance of hydric soils and that is inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances does support, a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions".
The Government of Guam, in its existing wetland regulations, defined wetlands the same as the federal definition but includes references to aquatic life along with aquatic vegetation and makes references to mangroves, natural ponds, surface springs, and estuaries, in addition to swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas.
While it is often clear what is and what is not a wetland (upland), problems and confrontation between regulators and the regulated community frequently arise in the determination of the wetland/upland boundary. The determination of this boundary is called DELINEATION. Delineation is subject to a well defined set of processes which involves the determination of the soils, hydrology and vegetation at a number of locations perpendicular to the suspected boundary in order to determine the location of the point where the wetland criteria are met. This process is carried out at numerous locations, the boundary points connected to define the wetland. The determination of whether the required wetland criteria are met utilizes methods and data and that have been developed by wetland scientists and accepted by regulators. The procedure is described in the "Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands" which was prepared by an interagency committee comprised of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U. S. D. A. Soil Conservation Service (now National Resource Conservation Service).
Guam's wetland resources are important for a number of reasons. The majority of the islands' wetlands are located above, along, and at the lowest reaches of the numerous rivers and streams at the southern half of the island. At the headwaters and above the many feeder streams, wetlands act to filter and trap fine sediments which are eroded from upland areas. This action helps to protect downstream water quality and aquatic ecosystems. These upstream wetlands also store, within their hydric soils and vegetation, water which is released gradually downstream, thereby moderating and supporting minimum stream flows during periods of little or no rainfall. This process maintains the biological integrity of the streams and plays an important part in maintaining biodiversity of aquatic flora and fauna.
Within the floodplains and along the banks of Guam's rivers, wetlands play an important part in preventing erosion by absorbing the energy of the streams' flow during periods of flood.
Guam's coastal wetlands protect the shoreline by consolidating sediments, absorbing energy from ocean waves and, in the case of mangroves actually creating new land through the process of consolidation and trapping of sediments.
Wetlands are some of the most productive ecosystems on earth. A primary reason for this is that wetlands process and recycle nutrients that wash into them from upland locations. This material is trapped by wetland vegetation, decays and is converted into nutrients which are utilized by vegetation and pass up the food chain. In situations where there is an excess of nutrients entering the wetland, due to pollution or other reasons, wetlands act as a natural treatment facility by processing, storing and utilizing nutrients that would otherwise overload other freshwater or marine systems.
This filtering and nutrient processing function of wetlands plays an important part in the maintenance of water quality within the Ugum and Fena watersheds, where surface water resources are exploited for human use. At the few locations where wetlands are found upstream from groundwater recharge areas, this filtering function also protects groundwater quality.
Guam's coastal wetlands, primarily the mangrove stands located within Apra Harbor and, to a lesser extent at a few locations along the southwest coast, act as nursery areas for species of marine fish and shellfish, which are used for human consumption. Though wetland agriculture plays a much smaller part than it did in the past, there is still commercial taro cultivation taking place within the Agana marsh. Much of the aquaculture activity now taking place on Guam is located within the floodplains along the lower reaches of the Talofofo and Inarajan rivers. This activity, while providing economic benefit, is controversial because wetland and floodplain functions are lost through this alteration of existing natural systems.
Guam's wetlands also provide an important setting for cultural, educational and recreational activities. The collection of native wetland plants and other resources for medicinal and other cultural practices are all important links to Guam's past. Recreational activities which take place within Guam's wetlands include hiking in natural areas, bird watching, and the aesthetic appreciation of the natural environment as well as damaging uses such as off-road mud trials. Also, recreational fishing occurs(talapia, eel, etc.). While limited at the present, Guam's wetlands also posses the potential for educational uses, such as acting as outdoor classrooms.
2.1 Introduction 2.2 Information Resources 2.3 Plan Setting 2.4 Guam's Wetland Resources: The Past 2.5 Guam's Wetland Resources: The Present 2.6 Guam's Wetland Resources: The Future
This Section describes the Plan setting and the resources that are subject to this DRAFT Guam Wetlands Conservation Plan.
Since the passage of important federal wetland protection regulations in the 1970's, a large body of information concerning wetlands in general, and Guam's wetland resources in particular, has become available. General texts that deal with the multiple disciplines which make up wetland science and which also include descriptions of the regulatory environment are available (refs ) and recommended for those wishing to better understand and appreciate this topic.
Copies of the various laws and regulations which govern activities in wetlands are available at a number of locations, including on the Internet. The federal government is also the source of the following important documents necessary to delineate wetland boundaries; The Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Wetlands (ref) and the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands Hawaii (Region H) (Reed 1988).
There exists a considerable amount of information which specifically relates to Guam's wetland resources. In 1983 the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service produced their National Wetlands Inventory maps for the Island of Guam. This is the primary source of information concerning the location, size, and type of Guam's wetland resources. Other sources of graphic information related to Guam's resource is contained within the Soils maps found in the Soils Survey of Guam (ref), Flood Hazard Area Maps for Guam, delineation maps submitted with permit applications, and aerial photographs.
Written material important in the understanding of Guam's wetland resources includes monographs and field guides to the islands flora (stone, raulerson ) and fauna (bruner) as well as a number of site specific biological surveys of a number of the islands' wetlands. (uog, ). The Recovery Plan for the Mariana Common Moorhen (USFWS 1991) contains important information on the islands resources as does the Guam chapter in "A Directory of Wetlands in Oceania" (1993 Scott).
Appendix 2 of this Plan contains an inventory of most of the wetland resource material that relates to Guam.
This DRAFT Guam Wetlands Conservation Plan covers all of the fresh and brackish water wetlands on Guam. Special aquatic sites in the marine environment, such as sea grass beds and coral reefs, which are regulated in the same way as wetlands under section 404 of the CWA are not included.
Guam, with a land area of 212 square miles, is the largest and southernmost island of the Mariana Island chain. Guam is located at 13 degrees, 28 minutes north latitude, 144 degrees 45 minutes east longitude, well within the tropics. The weather is tropical marine with an annual daily temperature of 81 degrees Fahrenhieght. There are two distinct seasons, a dry season which lasts from January through May and a wet season which lasts from July through November; June and December are transitional months. The mean annual rainfall averages between 80 and 100 inches with 70% falling during the wet season. Typhoons and tropical storms are fairly common and generally occur during the wet season.
Guam is an uplifted volcanic island which is partially overlain with coralline limestone, a result of periodic submergence and emergence. The surface geology of the southern half of the island consists of nearly impermeable volcanic clays that were laid down under water. The region is mountainous and deeply incised by many streams and rivers. This geology accounts for the fact that the majority of Guam's wetlands are located in the south. The northern half of the island consists of a coralline limestone plateau which, at only two small areas, does the underlying volcanic substrate form outcroppings. This limestone is highly permeable and accounts for the fact that there are no surface streams or rivers in the north. At a few locations springs are found where the limestone meats the less permeable volcanic material below it at elevations above sea level. Maximum elevations range from 180 meters in the north and 400 meters in the south.
2.4 GUAM'S WETLAND RESOURCES: THE PAST
Guam and the rest of the Mariana Islands are oceanic islands which have never been connected to any continental landmass. Prior to the arrival of man on Guam the islands flora and fauna had become established and developed as the result of millions of years of chance colonization and subsequent adaptation to the islands environment. Pre settlement land fauna of the island was limited; the only species of mammal were two species of bats, reptiles were limited to skinks and geckos. Because of their better mobility and greater chances of reaching Guam the islands avifauna was more diverse and consisted of a number of endemic species. The biological setting of the island at the time of man's first arrival was much different than it is today. It is likely that much more of the island was forested and that the savanna grassland areas which now cover much of the south were proportionately smaller. Coastal wetlands such as estuarine and mangroves were much more extensive.
It is thought that man first arrived on Guam approximately 3,500 years before the present time by sea from south east Asia. The arrival of man brought on a many changes to all of the biological resources of the island. The pre-contact (by europeans) period lasted some 3,000 years during which the indigenous Chamorros practiced subsistence agriculture which included the cultivation of wetland food crops including rice and taro, harvested native plant and animal resources and, introduced a number of non-native species of plants and animals. Population estimates for Guam prior to the arrival of the first Europeans are as high as 100,000.
In 1521 the Portugese explorer, sailing for Spain, landed on Guam. This event began the post-contact phase of the island's history. The period of Spanish domination lasted some 350 years and the pace of change accelerated. Under the Spanish the indigenous population was decimated by war and disease. Many new plant and animal species were introduced and the first large scale civil works impacting wetlands were undertaken. The Spanish at the Agana marsh constructed a series of dikes as an attempt to grow rice, built roads and bridges.
In 1898 Guam was ceded to the United States of America under terms of the Treaty of Paris as a result of its victory over Spain during the Spanish American War. Up until the invasion by Japanese forces on December 8, 1941, at the start of World War Two, life on Guam continued much as it had under the Spanish.
Japanese occupation of the island lasted until July 21, 1944, when U. S. forces recaptured the island after heavy fighting. During the Japanese occupation agricultural production, much of which occurred in wetlands, was dramatically increased through forced work by the native population. The Japanese also constructed airfields and other military installations which impacted wetlands.
The extensive shelling of the island prior to the landing of American forces, the heavy fighting which took place during the recapture and, the extensive military buildup following recapture all had a dramatic nearly instantaneous negative impact on Guam's natural resources, including wetlands. The construction of extensive military facilities as a part of Guam's role as a major staging area for the planned invasion of the Japanese home islands affected nearly all areas on the island. Probably the most serious impact to wetlands occurred in the Apra Harbor, Orote Point and Sasa Valley areas where extensive mangrove and other wetlands were filled, or dredged.
Following the end of the war Guam was a staging area for the military demobilization of the western pacific. Though not realized at the time as the environmental disaster which it would eventually become the inadvertent introduction of the brown tree snake, Boiga irregularis, occurred at this time. Other than the construction and operations of military facilities there was little development activity. Economic grown did not begin on Guam until the mid to late 1960's. In the middle 1960's when the Viet Nam War escalating military activity greatly increased. At or about this time the tourist industry began with the construction of the first hotels.
From the early 1980's to the middle 1990's there was a construction boom on the island brought on by the rapid growth of the tourist industry. Construction of hotels and resorts increased until the Asian economic bubble burst
2.5 GUAM'S WETLAND RESOURCES: THE PRESENT
According to estimates made from the USFWS National Wetland Inventory mapping project for Guam, issued in 1983, Guam's wetland resources covered by this Plan total approximately 5,000 acres. This acerage equals slightly less than four percent of the islands total land area.
Guam's wetlands fall into four of the major wetland subclasses used by the USFWS to describe wetlands and are as follows:
1. Palustrine, forested; (freshwater swamps of woody vegetation). 2,170 acres in river valleys in southern Guam. Primarily Hibiscus and Pandanus typically along edges of emergent wetland areas and in areas with less water than emergent wetlands. In the Talofofo River valley there is an extensive forested wetland which is dominated by Barringtoinia racemosa.
2. Palustrine, emergent; (freshwater marshes dominated by reeds and sedges) 1,386 acres typically dominated by Phragmites karka. The largest is the Agana Marsh.
3. Lacustrine , (manmade open water impoundments); 27 acres; wetland margins of the fena reservoir and small man made ponds. Small in area but important as habitat for the endangered Mariana common moorhen.
4. Estuarine (mangrove and lower channels of rivers) 176 acres primarily mangroves located within the inner Apra harbor area and to a lesser extent in Merizo.
2.6 GUAM'S WETLAND RESOURCES: THE FUTURE
The myriad of local and federal regulations and programs currently in effect purportedly protect Guam's wetland resources with the national goal of "no net loss". But, because of the increasing population, economic growth, and the resultant pressure to develop in coastal areas and on the larger undeveloped tracts of land in the south, wetlands face a number of threats. Existing wetland-specific programs and regulations are, for the most part, limited to protecting wetlands from direct threats such as conversion by filling or dredging; activities considered to be point- source impacts. Non point source impacts such as sediment runoff and pollution draining from adjacent uplands are governed by other regulations which may not provide sufficient protection or which may allow for small incremental impacts which have cumulative affects.
Though development can be regulated, it cannot be completely eliminated, from potentially sensitive sites due to a number of factors including the governments recognition that private property owners have certain rights to develop upland sites for projects which will inevitably adversely affect wetlands within the watershed.
Because of Guam's small size and geological setting there may be no practicable alternatives to siting and building projects which impact wetlands. For example, federal regulations specifically prohibit locating municipal solid waste landfills at areas which may impact wetlands. On Guam, there is no alternative to siting an urgently needed new landfill facility in an area where wetlands will be affected. The only alternative would be to site the landfill in the north, over porous limestone soils, which overly the islands' Sole Source Aquifer, a less desirable alternative which would pose a potential adverse threat to much of the islands' drinking water. Because of this contradiction, Guam is in the process of assuming, from the federal government, its own solid waste management program which will allow some flexibility that allows exceptions for local conditions. Other infrastructure related facilities such as sewage treatment plants and lift stations require placement at low elevation within the service area which, in southern Guam, typically is wetland.
Activities in uplands affect wetlands and include such things as inappropriate development on erodible soils, poor construction practices and , project siting. Other sources of sediment loading are such things as brush fires and the indiscriminate use of off road vehicles.
Guam's wetlands face other, non-human, threats which are not easily controlled or mitigated for. The introduction of invasive, non-native, plants and animals can easily upset the existing balance which has developed over millinea. Water hyacynths are an example of a plant which has choked streams. Tilapia and catfish have invaded many of Guam's fresh water areas and have displaced native species. The wallowing activity of feral pigs and carabao increases erosion potential, and provides breeding areas for mosquitos, while waste from these animals introduces unatural1y high levels nutrients and poses potential health risks.
3.0 Goal and Objectives for Wetland Protection
3.1 Introduction 3.2 Plan Goal 3.3 Objectives
Guam's wetlands constitute a unique natural resource that is vulnerable to disturbance from human activity. Roughly one half of Guam's 200 square miles of land area is an uplifted limestone plateau, which does not support any permanent rivers and streams. Wetlands are limited to the coastal fringe in this area. Most of Guam's wetlands are confined to the volcanic soils of the southern mountain range and coastal areas. Historically, development has concentrated on the northern plateau and coastal fringe, and wetland impacts were minimal. This pattern has changed in the past two decades. The increase in population, and accelerated economic development, has increased pressure to develop in the more ecologically sensitive southern areas of the island. Of particular concern during the economic boom of the late 1980's, was the development (and proposed development) of large golf resorts at a number of locations in the southern half of the island. These areas were not well suited to such projects. Regulatory agency staff were not fully trained to evaluate and mitigate the complex impacts from these projects. Finally, the public were not aware of the value of the wetland resources that were affected.
In addition to the major impacts from the 1980s economic boom, many small impacts on the southern watersheds and coastal fringes continue to occur, due mainly to increased population pressure, combined with the same lack of knowledge about the valuable functions that wetlands perform. Individual impacts are generally small, but cumulative effects should be considered a concern.
The public, development community, and regulators now have an opportunity to learn from past mistakes and plan for more orderly development in the future. This Guam Wetland Conservation Plan is created to guide the island's decision-makers, developers and public, towards a balanced approach to wetlands conservation to assure the future of Guam's wetland resources.
Wetland Conservation Goal for Guam
To assure "No Net Loss" of the important values and functions of Guam's wetland resources, through a program of identification, conservation, public education and outreach, and legal protection.
One fundamental purpose of the Plan is to bring together various government agencies and programs and the private sector, in a unified approach to conserve Guam's wetlands. The Plan Goal aims to promote consistency in order to focus on the same end result. The Goal provides an overall federal government principle with which to guide the programs and activities carried out for wetland protection. The Goal program provides a standard in order to assess progress, and encourages cooperation between the public and the government agencies involved in wetlands protection.
Objectives are developed in order to meet the Plan Goal. Each Objective provides focus for the programs established in the Goal, and provides a basis for creation or enhancement of the programs for wetland protection. Four Plan Objectives are presented below.
3.3.1. Identification Objective
To adequately plan for the conservation of Guam's wetland resources it is important to know the extent and types of wetlands present. It is also necessary to rank them according to their value. The existing National Wetlands Inventory Maps for Guam give an aerial estimate of the extent of Guam's wetlands, and classifies them into different types, based on the Cowardin system. The Cowardin classification system uses the physical features of the wetlands, such as soil type, vegetation and water source, to describe the resource. Physical features are used because little has been determined about the functional attributes of Guam's wetlands at this time. Development of a classification system that includes functional attributes of wetlands will be one focus of this objective. A ranking and priority system will also be developed under this objective, and will be used to assess the value of individual wetlands. The principal elements of the Identification objective are presented below.
Identification - Identification aims to locate wetlands on Guam. To do so it will be necessary to prepare updated wetland inventory maps and compile data from other existing delineation maps, to produce a comprehensive, single-source inventory document. The new inventory maps must be in a format that will allow periodic updates or revisions, in order to maintain a current document.
Classification - Classification aims to expand on the Cowardin system currently in use. The proposed classification system will provide a description of the identified wetland, including information on wetland functional attributes, hydrology, vegetation, and soils.
Rank and Priority - A subjective ranking system will be developed to assess the value of each identified wetland. Rank and priority will be determined in terms of function, ecology, economics and aesthetics. Ranking will provide the basis to prioritize wetlands for conservation efforts.
Conservation of Guam's wetlands is an important focus of this Plan. Conservation is a multiple-component approach to wetlands protection that includes sustainable use, mitigation, preservation, and restoration. By using the components described below, conservation can be achieved through preservation of the most highly valued wetlands, comprehensive sustainable use practices for impacted wetlands, and mitigation for lost wetland functions and values. Wetlands that were impacted and degraded in the past can be restored to regain desirable functions.
Sustainable Use in conservation language is typically taken to mean controlled use of, or controlled impact on, a natural resource. This Plan defines sustainable use in terms of controlled use, or controlled impacts, for wetlands resources, within the limits of regulatory control. As defined, sustainable use assumes that some functions or values of the wetland resource will be lost, but that the more desirable ones will be maintained. Thus, sustainable use is distinct from preservation (no impact), and mitigation (impacts are addressed, and functions or values are regained elsewhere).
Mitigation - In this context, mitigation is meant to describe those measures used to offset or compensate for losses resulting from permitted activity. The mitigation objective aims to enhance the quality of mitigation projects through technical assistance to parties tasked with mitigation. Assistance can come from resource agencies, or approved technical documents, to provide clear guidelines for mitigation scope and schedules. Mitigation planning is largely a technical task that requires expertise in a diverse range of subjects. Parties tasked with mitigation often require technical assistance in order to meet the specific criteria outlined in the permit conditions. This assistance can be provided from the regulatory agencies, and wetland protection will be enhanced through the cooperative efforts between agencies and applicants.
Preservation - Preservation aims at the complete protection of the most highly valued, ecologically sensitive, or irreplaceable of Guam's wetlands resources. Preservation should be the method of choice when first evaluating a project including wetland areas. Preserved wetlands also benefit scientific study. This adds to the body of knowledge and provides information for revising or developing conservation measures.
Restoration - Restoration aims to re-establish the functions and values of wetlands that were disturbed by natural or man-made impacts. On Guam, wetland restoration efforts have occurred as a result of enforcement activity. In order to decide on an appropriate scope of effort for restoration, degraded wetlands must first be classified, ranked and prioritized, similar to existing, intact wetlands. Many of the elements discussed above for identification, classification and mitigation can be employed in restoration efforts. Potential funding sources for restoration projects will be an important focus of the restoration component.
Increased appreciation of the functions and value of wetlands, by professionals, government and the general public, is one key to successful implementation of this Plan. Public awareness can be raised through a program of education and outreach. Professional training for regulatory agency staff and the consultant community will promote better technical dialogue between applicants and regulators. This in turn will help eliminate confusion or misunderstanding on each side of the permitting process.
Public Education - Public education aims to develop wetlands curricula for middle and high schools, and at the college/university level. This can be accomplished directly through revision and additions to existing courses. It can also be achieved through continuing education courses for teacher training, so that teachers can develop their own curricula in wetlands science.
Professional Training - Professional training will primarily focus on government agency personnel and the consulting community. This objective aims to identify categories of personnel, in appropriate agencies, for professional development. Once trained, qualified regulatory personnel will provide professional training to the consultant community in the form of workshops and seminars. Visiting federal agency experts will also be part of workshops and seminar series.
Public Outreach - Public outreach aims to make wetlands conservation issues visible to the general public. This can be accomplished through the use of mass media, organized special events, and the creation of wetlands conservation areas with public access.
3.3.4 Regulatory/ Administrative Objective
Wetland protection is a legal requirement of the Clean Water Act, and other federal and Guam laws and regulations. Enforcement of these laws is the responsibility of local and federal officials. Existing regulations may not adequately address Guam's unique circumstances, or resources. This objective aims to promote a review of, and recommendations for revisions to, existing Guam laws and regulations in order to achieve the Goal of the plan - No net loss of wetland functions and values. Promulgation of new Guam laws will also be considered. Legal mandates are crucial as a basis for any conservation effort, yet are only minimally effective without proper enforcement capability. While criminal or civil remedies are least desirable from a conservation perspective, they must be part of a viable suite of conservation enforcement options.
The regulatory and administrative objective also aims to enhance the function of existing Government of Guam agencies, to improve the results of wetlands conservation efforts. Wetlands regulatory jurisdiction is the responsibility of more than one agency. This sometimes leads to gaps in regulatory reviews, overlap or parallel efforts, or duplication of efforts. By improving the efficiency of the regulatory process, agencies can improve wetlands protection efforts without an increase in costs for materials or personnel.
4.0 EVALUATION AND ANALYSIS OF EXISTING WETLAND PROGRAMS
4.1 Introduction 4.2 Guam Programs Applicable to Wetland Conservation 4.3 Federal Programs Applicable to Wetland Conservation 4.4 Agencies / Programs Evaluation 4.5 Conclusions
Wetlands and the values and functions that they perform do not recognize local, state, or even international boundaries. Because of this, impacts resulting from wetland alteration cannot be isolated and may affect areas far from the wetland, even outside of the local regulatory jurisdiction in which the affected wetland is located. Governments have recognized the need to protect wetland resources and to preserve their functions in order to protect the public and preserve commonly held resources.
On Guam, activities affecting wetlands are regulated by both the United States Federal Government and the Government of Guam. The purpose of this section of the Plan is to describe the Guam and Federal programs and then identify and evaluate areas of program overlap, areas where the two programs may conflict, and explore the dual role of some Government of Guam programs which are tasked with administering Federal programs.
4.2 Guam Programs Applicable to Wetland Conservation
Guam is an unincorporated Territory of the United States and has a unique position in terms of applicability of Federal laws and programs. For the purpose of wetland regulation, Guam is treated as a state of the union and is subject to the same laws as the states. Guam is also eligible to participate in federal wetland conservation programs. In terms of wetland regulation, Federal law supercedes Guam law. Because of this, Guam's assumption of the Guam Coastal Zone Management Program and the Guam "401 Water Quality Certification" program are critically important in giving local control over development affecting wetlands. In addition to federal wetland programs, Guam has developed its own set of laws regulating development and other activities in wetlands.
Prior to the passage of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) in 1972 there was essentially no protection for wetlands, either federal (other than in navigable waters, as narrowly defined at the time) or at the local Guam level. Following passage of the CWA and the creation of a comprehensive land use plan for the island, Governor Ricardo J. Bordallo signed Executive Order 78-21 which authorized the Territorial Planning Commission (now Guam Land Use Commission) to designate wetlands as Areas of Particular Concern and to develop and promulgate rules and regulations concerning development and conservation activities that might affect them. These rules and regulations promulgated under authority of Titles XVIII and XIV of the Government Code of Guam and are now the primary Territorial law governing activities in wetlands.
Under the Flood Hazard Area and Wetlands Rules and Regulations, the Department of Land Management acts as the management arm of the government which issues permits while the Department of Agriculture and the Guam Environmental Protection Agency provide technical expertise. In practice, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and, to a lesser extent, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service also provide technical input. This input is most evident in the determination if the activity will affect wetlands, the delineation of the wetlands, and in the formulation of appropriate mitigation measures.
The Guam Wetland Rules and Regulations (as amended by Executive Order 90-13) state that the 1983 National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Map is the official wetland map for Guam until such a time that a study is completed. At the present time, the NWI map for Guam is the official map. Areas under jurisdiction of the Rules and Regulations include all Government of Guam and private lands on Guam. Land under federal jurisdiction is not governed by the Guam rules and regulations, though still subject to all 404 provisions. Compliance with the Guam rules and regulations shall precede application for permits from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. Issuance of a permit for development by the GLUC shall not preclude the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from denying an application under Sec. 404.
In addition to the above described Guam law, there are two Federal laws that allow the states and territories to administer federal programs greatly affecting wetlands. Guam has an approved Coastal Zone Management Program and an approved Section 401 Water Quality Certification Program. Guam's CZM program is administered by the Bureau of Planning while the 401 Water Quality Certification program is administered by the Guam Environmental Protection Agency. These important programs give Guam a powerful tool for managing the island's wetland resources, the denial of either the CZM consistency determination or the 401 certification can effectively veto the issuance of the Federal 404 permit.
Enforcement of wetland violations, such as unpermitted filling and other polluting discharges, is done primarily by the Guam Environmental Protection Agency, Water Division with some joint enforcement by GEPA, USEPA, and the Corps. Violators are usually charged with violations of the Guam Water Quality Standards.
4.2.3 The Guam Wetland Permitting Process
The procedure for application to the Guam Land Use Commission to undertake activities affecting wetlands roughly mirrors the Federal process though the decision making procedure is different. The applicant is required to submit a form titled "Wetland Permit Application to the Guam Land Use Commission". Information submitted includes the name of the applicant, the location, lot number, property ownership status, lot size and existing and proposed land use.
Additionally, the applicant is required to submit a Development Plan which shows the complete layout of the proposed project, including topography, existing structures, locations of property lines, easements, utilities, and drainage structures. The applicant is also required to submit additional information as may be required by the Chief Planner. Such information typically includes a delineation map, an environmental impact assessment, storm drainage calculations, a copy of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers permit application, if available, and other information supporting the project's viability. A mitigation plan is also required for projects whose impacts are more than minimal.
Once the application is certified as being complete, copies are distributed to members of the Application Review Committee (ARC), a committee made up of representatives from 9 of the Government of Guam regulatory, utility and resource agencies. Agency personnel meet with the applicant to discuss the project. At this meeting, questions about the project are discussed and the applicant is given the opportunity to explain the project.
Following the ARC meeting, a public hearing or series of public hearings if the project is controversial, is held. Planning staff from the Department of Land Management and members of the Guam Land Use Commission Board attend the hearing.
Prior to the regularly scheduled meeting of the Guam Land Use Commission, the various Application Review Committee member agencies prepare and submit agency position statements. These position statements either recommend project approval, approval with conditions, or project disapproval. The planning staff at the Department of Land Management then prepare a project package for the individual Commission members. The Chief Planner, in practice, may also make an independent recommendation for the approval or disapproval of the project. Finally, the project goes before the GLUC meeting and the Commission, during a public meeting, is presented with the project by the applicant or their agent. The Commission hears the position statements of the ARC agencies and the recommendation of the Planning staff and votes on the project. A simple majority of the Commission members is required for project approval. Project approvals are generally issued with ARC Agency conditions and recommendations.
A flow chart for the Guam wetland permitting process is included as Figure 4.2-1.
4.3 Federal Programs Applicable to Wetland Conservation
Federal regulatory involvement affecting wetlands began with the passage of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. Section 10 of the Act regulates activities that could affect the navigable capacity of a waterway such as dredging and filling of "navigable waters of the United States". While not specifically affecting wetlands or environmental protection, the law did establish, for the first time, federal jurisdiction over areas including what are now defined as wetlands. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was given the responsibility of administering the Act, but little attention was given to the protection or conservation of the nation's wetland resources.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) of 1972 and the FWPCA amendments of 1977 (33 U.S.C. Sections 1251-1376) which changed the name of the law to the "Clean Water Act", are the primary Federal laws which regulate activities in wetlands. Section 404 of the Act establishes the programs which regulate the discharge of dredged and fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. The Clean Water Act, including later amendments, defines what constitutes a wetland and what wetlands are under federal jurisdiction.
The question of jurisdiction and the definition of what constitutes a wetland have been contentious issues since the passage of the Clean Water Act. The current interpretation of the Act defines federal jurisdictional wetlands as those possessing the following three characteristics; that under normal circumstances they support a preponderance of hydrophytic vegetation, the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil, and the site possesses wetland hydrology. The methods for the determination of wetlands and the methods approved for the delineation of jurisdictional wetlands is contained in the 1987 Corps of Engineers, Wetlands Delineation Manual. Wetlands are included in the definition of "Waters of the United States" but all "Waters" are not necessarily wetlands.
Under section 404 the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency jointly administer the 404 program, each with different responsibilities. The Corps administers the permitting program, develops policy and guidance, and enforces Section 404 provisions. The USEPA develops and interprets environmental criteria used in evaluating permit applications, determines the scope of geographic jurisdiction, approves and oversees State 404 and 401 program assumption, identifies activities that are exempt, reviews and comments on individual permit applications, has the authority to veto Corps permit decisions, can elevate specific cases, and enforces Section 404 provisions.
Section 404(g) of the Clean Water Act allows states and territories to assume the Section 404 program to regulate activities in wetlands other than those which are traditionally used for navigation, and the adjacent wetlands. The section also sets forth the procedures for state program assumption. State assumption allows states to administer the Federal Section 404 permit program in certain waters within their jurisdiction thereby reducing the unnecessary duplication between state and Federal programs.
The requirements for state assumption are that the state program must:
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act allows states and territories to establish their own water quality standards providing that allowed pollutant levels do not exceed the national standard. The Act also requires that 404 permit issuance will not result in water quality degradation below state standards. In most cases, "Section 401 Water Quality certification" is required before a 404 permit can be issued. Section 401 also allows states to establish water quality standards specifically for wetlands.
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, "NEPA" (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), requires that all federal agencies, including the Corps, consider the possible environmental impacts of proposed actions and projects. NEPA is especially important in wetland protection because it requires that all federal agencies and all actions undertaken with any federal involvement prepare environmental documentation (typically a Finding of No Significant Impact, Environmental Impact Assessment, or Environmental Impact Statement) which describes the action and its expected impacts in an impartial and scientific way. The Act affords the public an opportunity for full project review. NEPA also provides a mechanism to resolve disputes when federal agencies cannot agree upon permit decision provisions. Executive Order 11990 (an amendment to NEPA) applies to federal agencies that have programs, facilities, or plans involving federal wetlands. The Order instructs agencies to avoid construction in wetland areas when feasible alternatives exist. In order to comply with NEPA, federal agencies, such as the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Aviation Administration and the United States Post Office, have prepared agency guidance documents which define procedures for compliance with NEPA. All of these documents specifically address wetland protection.
The Federal Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986 recognized that wetlands contribute to our economy, food supply, environmental quality, and recreational resources. The Act provided a number of protection measures to slow the loss of wetlands, including acquisition of high priority wetlands.
The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1934 (amended 1946, 1958, 1977; U.S.C. 661-667e) requires that the Corps consider the comments of the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service before issuing a Section 404 permit.
Section 7 of The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 U.S.C. Sections 1532 et seq.) protects against federal actions (such as the issuance of a 404 permit) which may destroy or adversely affect designated critical habitat or jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species. The Act requires that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service be consulted to determine the impact to critical habitat or to any species of plant or animal listed as threatened or endangered that will be caused by the issuance of a 404 permit.
In general, consultation with the USFWS must be initiated during review of a wetland permit application based on criteria specified by the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Endangered Species Act. Additionally, coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service may be appropriate for actions potentially affecting sea turtles when they are in the water.
Most ESA consultations with the USFWS are conducted informally with the Federal agency or a designated non-Federal representative. Informal consultations are an unstructured approach to meeting Section 7 requirements and include phone contacts, meetings, conversations, letters, project modifications and concurrences that occur prior to, (1) initiation of formal consultation because adverse effects cannot be avoided, or (2) Service concurrence that formal consultation is not necessary. There is no overall timetable for informal discussions although certain aspects of the process have specific timetables.
Informal consultations help the federal action agency determine whether a proposed action:
If an action agency determines a proposed action is likely to adversely affect listed species or critical habitat, formal consultation is conducted. Formal consultations are conducted to determine whether a project is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species (jeopardy) or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat (adverse modification).
The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. Sections 1451 et seq.) provides states with financial incentives to adopt their own Coastal Zone Management Program to protect coastal resources, including wetlands. This Act provides states (and territories) with a means to veto the issuance of a 404 permit if the action is not consistent with the state CZM program. This "consistency determination" is a powerful tool that allows states considerable authority over federal activities within the coastal zone. Guam has an approved CZM program in which the entire island, including all wetlands, is within the coastal zone.
The Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. Section 1201 et. seq.) contains provisions known as the "swampbuster program" which regulates agricultural activities in wetland areas and protects wetlands by withholding federal farm program benefits from any person who plants an agricultural commodity on a converted wetland that was converted by drainage, dredging, leveling, or any other means (after Dec. 23, 1985), and/or who converts a wetland for the purpose of or to make agricultural commodities production possible (after November 28, 1990).
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 created the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, which has the authority to review activities that may affect properties listed, or eligible for listing, on the National Register of Historic places. Section 106 of the Act requires that federal agencies take into account the possible adverse affect on historic properties prior to undertaking any federal action (such as the issuance of a 404 permit) and that the Council on Historic preservation be afforded the opportunity to comment on the proposed action.
4.3.2 The Federal Wetland Permitting Process
The federal wetland permitting process is primarily governed by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and is administered by The US Army Corps of Engineers. Coordination of the review of the application package by federal agencies is performed by the Corps.
Typically an applicant wishing to undertake any activity that may affect wetlands makes a preliminary visit to the local Corps office to determine the need for a permit, whether the activity may fall under any of the nationwide permits or require an individual permit, and to learn the application process. Nationwide permits may be issued for a number of activities that are deemed, individually or cumulatively, to have minimal environmental impacts and that fall into a number of predetermined categories. At the present time there are 43 categories of activities that may fall under the nationwide permit program. These permits are processed on the regional level (Corps) and require less documentation and have shorter processing time frames. Individual permits are required for activities that are likely to have significant impacts on the environment and will most likely require mitigation.
Mitigation is a procedure that helps to assure that wetland values and functions are not lost. NEPA defines mitigation as a sequential process where the applicant first must make every effort to avoid the adverse impact by not taking the action. If this is not possible, the impact should be minimized by limiting the degree of the action. Unavoidable impacts must then be rectified by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment. Next, the impact must be reduced or eliminated over time by preservation and maintenance operations over the life of the project. Finally, impacts must be compensated for by the replacement or provision of substitute resources or environments.
Once the need for a section 404 permit is ascertained, the permit application form (ENG Form 4345) is filled out and submitted.
The following information, at a minimum, is required:
Upon submission of the application documents and the Corps' determination that the information is complete, a file number is assigned. The Corps then issues a Public Notice "PCN" which is disseminated to the public, special interest groups, and local and federal agencies. Depending upon the nature of the activity, a 30 day (individual) comment period then takes place. The Corps then considers all comments and holds a public hearing, if requested or if the nature of the action warrants. Following the public comment period and hearing (if held), the district engineer makes a decision to either issue or deny the permit. If the permit is denied, the applicant is advised of the reason. Permits contain a number of general conditions and may often contain special conditions added to protect resources that the applicant must abide by.
The above described procedure may be complicated by a number of things. If there is the possibility that the activity may affect any plant or animal species protected by the Endangered Species Act, the Corps is required to initiate formal or informal Section 7 (of the ESA) consultation with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Service then has 30 days, from the time they have determined that they have sufficient information, to prepare a "biological opinion" as to whether the action will adversely affect the species. If the Service determines that the project will have an adverse impact which can be eliminated or reduced through mitigation, then they will approve the project with conditions. If the Service is of the opinion that, even with mitigation, the project will "jeopardize the continued existence of the species", it may ask that the permit be denied.
Section 404 permits are not valid unless Section 401, Water Quality Certification is issued or waived by the state, or territorial jurisdiction, providing an approved state program is in place. State, or territorial, Coastal Zone Management consistency certification (or waiver) is also required. Finally the activity must conform to all other required permits (such as grading and building) and approvals.
A flow-chart which shows the federal permitting process is included as Figure 4.3-2.
4.4 Agencies / Programs Evaluation
The following discussion describes and evaluates areas of overlap, areas of conflict, constraints, and the benefits which now exist within and between the individual Government of Guam and Federal Government wetland agencies and programs. This analysis and evaluation is the result of information gathered and opinions of the various Guam Wetland Conservation Plan Steering Committee member agency personnel, who met monthly during the preparation of this DRAFT Plan and who also provided written review comments on the various preliminary submittals to the Committee. Additionally, the project consultants met individually with agency personnel at their place of work.
Steering Committee members include:
The principal problem with the Guam wetland permitting program, which is administered by the Guam Department of Land Management, is that the existing regulations are outdated and do not require sufficient information or project justification from permit applicants. The application procedure is vague and the amount and quality of information required from the applicant is up to the discretion of the Chief Planner.
Technical review of the application is typically adequate, but review agency personnel comment that the responsibilities of the individual agencies are poorly defined. This seems to be especially true with the Guam Environmental Protection Agency and the Division of Aquatic and Wildlife Resources. While the Guam wetland regulations infer that DAWR is the lead technical review agency, the burden, in recent years, has fallen disproportionately on GEPA. The reason for this is the turnover of key personnel at DAWR and the availability of the needed expertise at GEPA.
Another problem inherent with the Guam wetland permitting process is that, after the recommendations have been made by the various Application Review Committee agencies and public input has been received, the ultimate decision whether to approve the project, approve the project with conditions, or disapprove the project is subject to the vote of the Guam Land Use Commission. Commission Members are members of the general public and may not always base their decisions on an analysis of alternatives, public benefit, or the protection of the environment. Decisions are often seen as arbitrary and occasionally counter to agency recommendations.
Other land use laws administered by the Department of Land Management provide potential loopholes whereby a wetland may not be identified on a project site. Planning, design and land parceling is allowed to proceed without adequate field inspection or review. This may happen during the familial and agricultural subdivision process as well as the approval of zone changes (generally to Planned Unit Development or Resort) where approval is granted based on inaccurate or deficient maps and wetland data. Wetlands are usually identified when the need for construction permits such as grading, septic tank approval, and building permits arise. Property owners suffer the loss of development investment to that point when subdivisions result in the creation of land parcels which are unsuitable for development due to the presence of wetlands.
Also, since "One Stop Permitting" was implemented, technical review by wetland competent staff has been greatly reduced and often results in violations of otherwise permitted activities.
Certain projects are undertaken by individuals, and at times the Government of Guam, where the activity does not come under the review of the Department of Land Management or by the Department of Public Works Building Permit section. These projects typically include cleanup activities following typhoons and tropical storms and small scale projects such as clearing and grading by private property owners for the construction of driveways, access roads and parking for funerals and fiestas.
The existing wetland rules and regulations, do not provide for quick enforcement. The typical legal process can be several months or years including issuance of the Notice of Violation, Hearings and Court proceedings.
4.4.3 Federal Wetland Programs
Because of the nationwide applicability of the federal wetland permitting program administered by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, it is not appropriate to expect that the program would treat Guam's wetlands in any unique way. The need for a consistency determination by the Guam Coastal Zone Management Program and the issuance (or waiver) of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification by the Guam Environmental Protection Agency before a federal permit can be approved is the point whereby Guam can effectively be involved in the federal permit process.
Administration of the federal permit program on Guam does have some potential problems. The Corps of Engineers is the primary federal agency which deals with development-related wetland issues on Guam. Coordination with other federal agencies on permit issues is done through and by the local Corps office. This office deals with permit applications and wetland violations in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands as well as on Guam. Additional responsibilities of the Guam Corps office include work on non-wetlands related Corps activities in the CNMI and on Guam. Following natural disasters the Guam corps office is often tasked with assisting FEMA in recovery efforts.
At the present time, the Guam office of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers is staffed by one person. This lack of personnel and the large workload occasionally results in situations where the Corps is unable to immediately respond to requests by Government of Guam Agencies and the public for permit related assistance.
The current Guam based Corps representative is a long time resident who is the single most knowledgeable individual on the island concerning Guam's wetland resources (delineation, location, history of development activity and violations, etc.). Unfortunately, this important source of institutional knowledge is unlikely to be replaced when the current office holder eventually moves on.
4.4.4 Government of Guam/ Federal Government Overlap
There appears to be few, if any, conflicts between the Government of Guam and the Federal Government concerning the administration of the various wetland programs. Verification and approval of delineation maps is done jointly and information is shared freely. There is a certain amount of duplication in administration of the programs such as the need for separate permit application forms and procedures. This duplication is not seen as necessarily bad because it serves as one of the checks and balances that helps to prevent oversights. In practice, the federal permit process precedes the local Government Review and Government of Guam Agencies defer to the Corps when determining permit conditions and mitigation requirements.
The general consensus of both Guam and Federal wetland agency personnel is that the present programs generally work, that there are enough checks and balances built into the system to assure that the vast majority of wetlands are property protected, and that exceptions are few.
Problems that are associated with programs and agencies fall into two categories:
1. Problems inherent in the regulations and in the programs administering them. These include such things as confusing or inadequate regulations, lack of immediate enforcement provisions, and poorly defined procedures for the Government of Guam interagency information sharing and project involvement.
2. Shortcomings in the management or application of existing programs and regulations that would otherwise work. This occurs because agencies are underfunded and under staffed. The high turnover of trained staff and the absence of institutional memory adversely affect program administration.
There are additional factors, outside of the existing wetland programs and regulations that affect wetland issues on Guam. One is the general lack of public awareness and true appreciation of wetland, their functions and values, and the regulatory requirements for activities that affect them. Also, a strong private property rights sentiment exists and is currently intensified by long standing federal or military land holdings. Recent discoveries of war time and post war land contamination and land return and distribution issues (Government verses private or original land owners claims) ordering with military down-sizing and base closures. Even the bigger issue of "Self Determination" shadows federal jurisdictional authority.
5.0 Protection and Conservation Measures
5.1 Introduction 5.2 Identification 5.3 Wetland Education and Outreach 5.4 Wetland Conservation 5.5 Legislative and Administrative Improvements
Selected conservation measures are presented here, and constitute the core of conservation, regulatory and planning efforts for Guam. These measures provide a general description of the wetlands protection efforts that will best serve the Goal and Objectives of the Plan. Emphasis is placed on attainability. To be effective, conservation measures must be practicable and measurable. They must operate within constraints set by law and available funding. In addition, they must allow for consideration of property rights and traditional land use, balanced against public interest and the common good. Each measure that is proposed includes a summary of alternatives. Alternatives are considered and prioritized for implementation. In some cases an alternative is considered but rejected. A "No Action" alternative is also considered where appropriate. The alternative with highest priority is developed in detail, and is the result of consensus among the Plan Steering Committee, the writers, and stakeholders.
The first step in a successful conservation plan is a thorough understanding of the resource to be managed.
Guam must have a program to identify the extent and characteristics of its wetlands, in order to identify problems that lead to wetlands loss, and to choose the best methods for addressing the problem.
An optimum island-wide identification program should provide information on the following wetlands parameters.
Parameters 1 through 4 are baseline data, obtained from an identification program. Parameters 5 through 7 will be determined from the baseline data.
An on-going wetlands identification program is proposed for Guam. This program should determine the baseline data for known wetlands, and should provide a framework to catalogue newly recognized wetlands, once they come to the attention of regulatory or resource agencies.
A three-tiered approach is proposed for the Guam wetlands identification program. The first requirement is to have the general locations of wetlands identified in an accessible and readable format. A map format is considered best suited for this. It should be understood that the map system does not purport to identify exact boundaries of known wetlands, or to include all wetlands of Guam. The map is intended as a first level of general identification, leading to more specific investigation of the area of concern. Once the location of a wetland is identified, the wetland can be classified according to a recognized classification system. Classifying the wetlands provides information on its characteristics, including type and functions. A classification system for Guam wetlands is proposed in section 5.2.3. Once the wetlands are classified their value can be assessed. Based on value, the wetlands can be ranked and assigned a priority rating. Regulatory and resource agencies can use the priority rating as a determining factor when considering conservation practices for a particular wetland.
To be most useful, the data generated in the identification program must be current, readily available, and retrievable. A centralized wetlands "library" is proposed as the best alternative for making the wetlands database available and useful and will include both general and specific wetland data.
Elements of the wetlands identification program are discussed below.
5.2.2 Develop a Wetland Identification Map as Guam Standard
Government of Guam and Federal agencies currently rely on several sources to determine the presence of wetlands, or to evaluate known wetlands, at potential impact sites.
These include:
Although this system often works well, it is fragmented and is subject to inconsistencies and oversights, due to changeover of personnel, workloads, or activities undertaken without permit applications.
A map standard is proposed as the first-level identification of wetlands on Guam. The Guam Wetland Inventory Map will be a common source of information for permit applicants, regulatory agencies, resource agencies, and consultants. A map format is considered best for this level of identification, since it compiles a large amount of data into a single, easily interpreted, document.
Several map resources are currently available that provide information on the locations and types of Guam wetlands. Each map resource is considered as a possible basis for the Guam Wetlands Inventory Map, as discussed below. The recommended alternative is discussed first, and is presented in detail.
Guam Wetland Inventory Map as the Wetlands Map Standard
It is proposed that the Guam Wetland Inventory Map (GWIM) will be produced by, or for, the lead wetlands agency for Guam. The lead agency will be responsible for all aspects of the map program, including creating the map, updating the map, and providing information to applicants or other agencies upon request, once the map is completed and functional. Although a grant funding source is not identified at this time, it is assumed that grant funds can be obtained to finance this mapping project.
The GWIM project will involve collection of existing wetlands data, similar to what was done for the Wetlands of Guam map (produced by BOP and discussed below). It is recommended that the GWIM should be a location-only map, and should be established in AutoCAD format. AutoCAD is preferable for the following reasons. AutoCAD is relatively inexpensive, easy to learn, and a commonly used program. It can be used on most conventional IBM-type PCs, given that there is enough storage and memory space. Therefore, there is no need for specialized equipment. The program will easily produce an entire map, or map sections, at any desired scale. AutoCAD maps can be established on any horizontal and vertical datum that is desired, so it is easily adaptable to the Guam horizontal and vertical control datum.
The GWIM is proposed as a location-only map for reasons of costs and simplicity. More sophisticated database mapping programs are available that store large amounts of data for specific entries. GIS is probably the one most familiar to many people. GIS and similar systems are expensive, require extensive training for operators, and require specialized, peripheral equipment. With the GWIM in AutoCAD format, production and availability of the map will be efficient and timely. Descriptive information on wetlands identified on the map, such as classification and ranking, will remain in a separate text file format.
It is recommended that the GWIM should be updated at least once every five years. Updating the GWIM frequently will reduce the level of effort needed for data entry, and will provide a reliable basis for assessing the progress of this Plan.
Other map formats that have potential as the basis of the GWIM, were considered but rejected, and are discussed below. Each of the map systems discussed will have some value as a data source for compiling the GWIM.
Bureau of Planning Wetlands of Guam Map
This map was issued in 1996, and contains a compilation of data on Guam wetlands. It was proposed to be an updated and current wetlands database for Guam. The Wetlands of Guam map was prepared under the direction of the Guam Bureau of Planning. The scope of the project was to collect data from known wetlands resources, including the NWI maps, and delineation maps from government agency files, and compile the data into a single source map.
To date, the Wetlands of Guam map has received little use, and problems exist with accessing its data. However, the conceptual basis of the map is sound, and it is proposed that this map be used as a model for the new Guam Wetland Inventory Map.
National Wetland Inventory Map
The National Wetland Inventory Map is currently the "official" wetland map for Guam, according to the Wetlands Rules and Regulations. The NWI was produced by the U.S. Department of the Interior in 1983, and is the accepted wetland standard in many locations throughout the United States. The map is based on aerial photography taken in 1975, and follows the format of the USGS topographic map series. The NWI for Guam includes classification of wetlands according to the Cowardin system. In general, these maps contain a large amount of information, but are outdated and do not accurately reflect current conditions on Guam. The map scale is 1:24000, which provides adequate resolution for first-level general identification.
National Resource Conservation Service, Soil Survey Maps
Soil Survey maps for Guam were issued in 1988. These maps were created to provide information on soils, but contain some information on vegetation as well. Although Soil Survey maps are generally regarded as an excellent resource for soils information, their suitability as a basis for the Guam Wetland Inventory Map is considered limited. Wetland soils, and wetland type vegetation are identified on the soil survey maps, but this information is coincidental, and not the primary purpose of the maps.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Hazard Maps
As with the Soil Survey Maps, FEMA Flood Hazard Maps contain indirect, coincidental information on wetlands. This is due to the fact that the large majority of areas prone to flooding are low-lying and have conditions favorable to wetlands. The Flood Hazard maps contain no information on soils or vegetation, and are considered unsuitable as a basis for the Guam Wetlands Inventory Map.
Atlas of the Reefs and Beaches of Guam
This atlas was produced by the Coastal Zone Management Section of the BOP. It was prepared at a suitably large scale, and provides considerable information on soils, vegetation, and topographic features. Since many of Guam's wetlands are located on the coastal fringe, this atlas will be a valuable resource for compiling the GWIM.
5.2.3 Establish a Guam Wetlands Classification System
There exists a large variety of land features, from salt marshes to prairie potholes, that fall under the definition of wetland and enjoy protection under the Clean Water Act. Because the legal definition of a wetland is so broad here, there has always been a need to further categorize the various morphological and functional wetland types. Categorization, or classification, is also necessary to properly regulate activities that are permitted under the Act. With increased development pressure on wetlands and the need to mitigate for wetland loss or modification, it is important to adequately describe all of the individual morphological and functional values found with each wetland type.
Wetland functions are the various attributes that a particular wetland performs within the ecosystem. These may include wildlife habitat, surface and ground water storage and recharge, and nutrient cycling. Wetland values are those attributes that a wetland contributes to the human environment such as aesthetics, crop production, and flood protection. Development pressure has also necessitated the need to rank wetland resources based upon their various functions and values. This ranking has generally been done towards the goal of "advanced identification" so that the various functions and values (based upon an accepted classification system) are known prior to entertaining development permit activity. Advanced identification, classification, and ranking all give the regulators (both federal and local), and the regulated community, a level playing field and a common understanding of why wetlands are important and what is required to mitigate for wetland management.
Classification and Ranking Systems.
Under the Clean Water Act, the definition of wetland classification has, from the beginning, been based upon obvious physical morphological features such as "salt marsh", "cypress swamp" and, on Guam, "Phragmites marsh". These terms are purely descriptive and do not specifically address the various functions and values that the various wetland types perform or possess. Nor do they fully address the range of different values and functions which may be performed by wetlands within each of the broad categories.
In 1979, Lewis M. Cowardin, Virginia Carter, Francis Golet and Edward T. LaRoe published "Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats in the United States" (Cowardin, Lewis M., et al. 1979). This classification system was used in the, then new, national inventory of wetland resources of the United States. The system is based upon the plants, soils, and frequency of flooding following the wetland definition used in the Clean Water Act. Wetlands are classified in a hierarchical system with five "systems" at the highest level; marine, estuarine, riverine, lacustrine, and palustrine. The systems are further broken down into subsystems. The next descriptive level is "class" based upon flooding regime and substrate type. Further characterization is the "dominance type", named for the dominant plant or animal forms, to be developed by individual users at a more local level.
In practice, the Cowardin classification system is the most widely used system to describe wetlands because the National Wetland Inventory maps are based upon it. While a trained resource technician can infer certain functional attributes from the classification system, it was not meant to describe the complete range of functions that a particular wetland performs or the values that it may posses.
Largely because of the increased pressure for "advanced identification" of low value (developable) wetlands, and the requirements to mitigate for a more complete range of wetland functions and values, there is a need for a new classification system. A number of such systems have been proposed that attempt to quantify (for ranking and mitigation purposes) wetland functions. Following are descriptions of two of these systems.
The Habitat Evaluation Procedure, or "HEP" (USFWS, 1980), is a system that quantifies the habitat quality and quantity of a wetland, to arrive at a Habitat Suitability Index or "HSI", which can then be compared to optimum habitat conditions to give a score from 0 to 10. This score can be used to assess impacts from a proposal to alter a wetland and for other planning purposes. The HEP procedure is based upon biological parameters and does not directly address such functions as flood storage, and nutrient cycling.
The Hydrogeomorphic Functional Assessment Approach, "HGM" (Brinson, M. M. 1993 and Smith, R. D. 1994), is an attempt to address the entire range of functions of the regional subclasses of wetlands. The method uses a comparison of reference wetlands with the highest sustainable levels of functions, including; hydrology, biochemistry, biology, and life support. When compared to the reference wetland, use of the system results in the development of a "functional capacity" index with a value between 0 and 1 for the range of wetland functions under study. The HGM approach can be used to compare project alternatives, compare pre- and post-project conditions for determining impacts or mitigation success, provide guidance for avoiding and minimizing project impacts, and determine mitigation requirements.
While the HGM approach is the most comprehensive classification system in use, and appears to be the system most favored by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, it does possess drawbacks. The primary one is its complexity and the long time period (X &emdash; X years) required to develop models and test the approach for each regional subclass of wetland.
A Classification System for Guam.
Guam's wetland resources are of a number of relatively distinct types, which under the Cowardin system, fall into only a few subclasses. By far the most prevalent freshwater system is the Phragmites dominated palustrine wetland.
During the development of this Wetland Conservation Plan for the island of Guam, the need for a Guam wetland classification system was considered. While it is understood that the HGM approach is the most comprehensive system, its complexity and the long development time make it a possible long term goal. It was not considered as an urgent need for Guam at this time. What was considered, and generally agreed on, was the development of a Guam wetland classification system based upon the Cowardin subclasses, but which includes a more comprehensive consideration of all of the wetland functions and values. This system could be loosely based upon the same parameters as the HGM system but much simplified. The system could be developed on-island by a consultant or government entity using the best available information and the knowledge of local and regional wetland experts.
5.2.4 Establish a Guam Wetlands Rank/Priority Scheme
One use of the proposed Guam wetland classification system is to assist in the advanced identification, prioritization, and ranking of the island's wetland resources. This will facilitate the goal of protecting the most valuable sites and the prioritization of others, in terms of their develop ability or level of threat from development or other alteration.
As with classification, there has been no attempt made to rank Guam's wetlands according to their functions and values with regard to suitability for development. At the national level there is a movement to rank and classify wetlands so that low value wetlands can be developed (with appropriate mitigation) and especially high value wetlands can be preserved.
5.2.5 Establish a Guam Wetlands Library
The Guam Wetlands Library is proposed as an in-house wetlands data repository, managed by the lead wetlands agency. Besides the GWIM, the library should include aerial photographs, delineation maps, permit applications, enforcement actions, and reports, guidelines books, and other publications pertinent to wetlands science and wetlands management on Guam. It is proposed that the library management will be included in the job description of an existing position within the lead wetlands agency.
In order for wetland protection efforts to succeed, there must be an appreciation by the general public, government decision makers and the development community of the valuable functions that wetlands perform. There must also be an understanding of the laws that regulate activities within wetlands. In recent years there have been a number of well publicized wetland violations on Guam. There have also been less well reported violations including incidents where property owners have been ordered to halt illegal filling activities and made to restore damaged wetlands. Unfortunately, media attention to wetlands issues has usually focused on negative stories such as the Mannengon Hills wetland violation and problems encountered from the siting and construction of the Guam Southern High School. The general perception on Guam, by the public as well as by some government officials, is that wetlands are an expendable resource and measures to protect them can be an impediment to legitimate development activity. The professional training component of the Plan will educate those government decision makers, agency officials, and the development community concerning wetland values, functions and regulations.
The education and public outreach objectives of this Plan will increase the general public's appreciation of Guam's wetland resources and of the valuable functions that they perform. Increased public awareness will, hopefully, result in a decrease in illegal activities which damage wetlands and an understanding as to why regulations exist.
Guam's youth are important to preserving the islands' limited natural resources. School age children and young adults will eventually become the stewards of island wetlands and other natural areas.
A key objective of this Plan is to instill an appreciation for wetlands in the future voters and decision makers on Guam.
The following public education objectives were selected as feasible alternatives proposed to meet the public education goal of the Guam Wetlands Conservation Plan. The "no action" alternative was rejected because it would result in the continuation of the status quo.
The development of wetland related curricula should be included in the science and/or history course work in local middle and high schools. The appropriate curriculum should be developed by knowledgeable local wetland experts in conjunction with the Guam Department of Education's science teachers. A mechanism for the training of teachers in the content of the curriculum already exists in the Department of Education's' Continuing Education Program. This program offers teachers continuing education credit for approved course work that contributes to the enhancement of his or her knowledge. A continuing education course on wetlands should include basic wetland science, terminology, wetland functions, biological and physical attributes, and an introduction to the various laws and programs which protect wetlands and regulate activities within them.
The Plan encourages increased emphasis on wetland related studies in relevant college courses taught at the University of Guam. The mechanism for such "encouragement" must respect the UOG faculties' independence. The establishment of a scholarship fund to support wetland related graduate studies is one form of encouragement.
Wetland science now incorporates an extensive body of knowledge, the result of three decades of intensive work in wetlands and related fields. The promulgation and complexity of wetlands law has grown accordingly. Guam's regulatory personnel must have access to educational and training opportunities on a regular basis to keep familiar with the current state of wetland science and regulations. Annually, there are many conferences, workshops, seminars, etc. sponsored by USEPA, other Federal agencies, NGO's and professional associations that focus on wetlands. The professional training program aims to generate commitment among appropriate agencies to provide key personnel with training in the various wetlands disciplines.
Priority focus areas for agency personnel are
General wetlands ecology
Wetlands determinations/delineations
Wetlands law, with emphasis on local/federal regulations.
This program will educate key government personnel and decision makers at two levels; a basic knowledge of wetland biology, including functions and values, and a working knowledge of local and federal regulations (including mitigation). Training for key agency technical staff in jurisdictional determinations and delineation is proposed as a field training exercise. This will be arranged through the local ACOE or NRCS, or through visiting experts from mainland agencies.
There is also a need to train and educate the private sector, especially the consultant community and laypersons on the Guam Land Use Commission. Briefings, with handout materials to GLUC board members, are proposed for regularly scheduled Board meetings. These briefings will focus on general functions and values of wetlands, and the current state or trends in wetland regulations. Briefings are to be given by qualified regulatory agency personnel. To educate the development community (realtors, land surveyors, architects, engineers, contractors) in wetland functions, values and regulations, it is proposed that qualified regulatory personnel will host periodic seminars or workshops.
Because of Guam's isolation, small size and dynamic population, the island community is generally well informed and interested in current events. This is evidenced by the large percentage of eligible voters who actually vote and by the interest in current affairs and local issues. The Guam media includes two newspapers, talk radio shows, and locally produced news and public interest television shows, which reach a large percentage of the population. Because of this, there exists an opportunity to inform and educate the public at large concerning wetland issues. The following alternatives were selected as feasible objectives which will meet the Public Outreach goal of the Guam Wetland Conservation Plan. The "no action" alternative was rejected because positive changes can be accomplished within existing programs at little or no cost.
A Guam Wetland Park should be established at the wetland mitigation site for the Guam Southern High School, which was constructed in Piti during the 1990's. It is envisioned that the park will be jointly managed by the Guam Department of Education (which has the responsibility of maintaining and monitoring the mitigation site under the terms of the Section 404 permit which was issued for the project) and the Guam Division of Aquatic and Wildlife Resources. It is suggested that the boundaries of the park can be somewhat enlarged to include nearby mangroves and the salt marsh on the inland side of Route 1, to the south.
The site is ideal because a regulatory framework for its maintenance and monitoring already exists; because of its easily accessible location; and because of the variety of wetland types, including Hibiscus dominated forested wetlands, Phragmites dominated marshes, open water, and potentially, mangroves and salt marshes. The site can be used for research (on the Mariana common moorhen, wetland biology, ecology, chemistry, nutrient cycling, hydrology, etc.), education (guided field trips for students), and recreation (bird watching, photography, etc.).
The physical development of the site, required to meet the education objective, can be limited to such things as viewing platforms, elevated walkways, interpretive signs, and fencing.
A provision should be included, within a new (or revised) set of Guam wetland regulations, requiring mitigation plans approved for development projects to include a reasonable education component. This requirement should be flexible and allow for a variety of actions to satisfy the requirement, including sponsorship of research at the mitigation site, contribution to a wetland graduate scholarship at the University of Guam, the provision of public access to the mitigation site and the installation of viewing platforms and interpretive signage.
The utilization of existing public and private media should be increased to maintain a level of public awareness of wetland issues. News releases should be required about on-going wetland and mitigation projects to keep the public informed.
A National Wetlands Month celebration on Guam should be implemented. This celebrations' purpose is to raise public awareness of wetlands and is recognized, though not specifically promoted, by the US Environmental Protection Agency.
5.4 WETLANDS CONSERVATION; SUSTAINABLE USE, MITIGATION, RESTORATION AND PRESERVATION
As discussed in Section 3.0, wetlands conservation uses a multiple-component approach for wetlands protection. In order to maintain or improve the condition of wetlands on Guam, this Plan presents a comprehensive, wetland-specific guide to protecting the resource. Conservation practices discussed below attempt to address a wide spectrum of wetland impacts, from permitted activities, to preservation, to rehabilitation of degraded sites.
There is presently no wetlands-specific management plan or management requirements that promote sustainable-use, for government or privately owned wetlands, on Guam. Current sustainable-use management practices are indirect, fragmented, or are coincidental with other resource management programs. Regulatory control includes enforcement of Guam EPA water quality standards, the provisions of the Clean Water Act, and the Guam Wetland Rules and Regulations against the unpermitted discharge of fill material. Other regulatory programs used as indirect wetlands management techniques include enforcement of local and federal wildlife protection regulations, clearing and grading regulations, and building permit requirements. Each of the above programs or regulations aim at their specific subject, but include wetlands coincidentally.
Sustainable-Use of Guam wetlands will be accomplished best by the identification of a lead wetlands agency, and the adoption of this Plan by that agency. The law and regulations regarding wetlands can only be changed slowly, correcting the fragmentary nature of wetland law will take time. However, a lead wetlands agency could be established immediately. The lead agency could be empowered through MOUs or MOAs between the various agencies that currently have regulatory authority for wetlands.
The Guam Department of Agriculture, DAWR, is currently recognized as the lead agency which provides technical advice to GLUC for the wetland permit program. Due to staff changes in recent years, this agency has reduced capacity to act as the lead agency with overall wetland management responsibilities. DAWR has indicated an interest in filling the role of lead wetlands agency, provided that staffing and budgets allow it. Establishment of a centralized wetlands agency, with comprehensive responsibilities, will improve the function and efficiency of the permit process, and will resolve many of the issues of gaps, overlap or duplication of effort among the various agencies that currently participate in wetlands management.
A primary concern among the wetlands agencies are the unpermitted activities that occur. This is especially true for unidentified wetlands. With the current de-centralized, regulatory responsibilities, resolution of the unpermitted activity takes time. A centralized lead wetlands agency could be empowered with enforcement authority, such as a simple, speedy way of citing unpermitted activities, to put the onus of responsibility on the offending party immediately. One mechanism proposed is something comparable to a littering citation (for minor violations).
Mitigation, in the regulatory sense, is required whenever there is a proposed loss of wetland values or functions resulting from activities regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The mitigation process requires that the applicant must first make every effort to avoid the impact. If they can demonstrate that this is not possible, they must then make reasonable efforts to minimize the proposed impact. Once an impact is proposed, the applicant is required to rectify the impact through mitigation. The Memorandum of Agreement between the USEPA and the Dept. of the Army, concerning the determination of mitigation under the CWA Sec. 404 Guidelines (1990), dictates the extent of mitigation once these steps have been taken. In most cases, the ACOE will require that mitigation must be completed before the project commences. In some cases, mitigation can take place concurrently while the project is underway.
Effective mitigation requires technical expertise on both sides of the regulatory process. The applicant must understand what is required of them, and the regulatory authority must be able to evaluate mitigation proposals. Both parties must be knowledgeable of the basics in current wetlands science, and must be competent in its application.
Historically, wetland mitigation efforts on Guam were directed towards the preservation or creation of habitat for the Mariana common moorhen, a federally listed endangered species. Mitigation has not considered other wetland functions. The mitigation objective of this Plan attempts to ensure no net loss of values and functions, in addition to endangered species, if a wetland is disturbed.
It is proposed that a wetland mitigation plan be required for any project that directly impacts wetlands. Ultimately, the content of the mitigation plan submitted by the applicant will be dependent on the severity of impact. It is proposed that a standard, mitigation guidelines and requirements package is to be developed by the lead wetlands agency. This will be issued as guidance at the time of the wetland permit application. The proposed mitigation guidelines and requirements should include the following features.
A generalized checklist of mitigation criteria, filled out and issued as project specific, as part of permit conditions.
Stringent mitigation schedules and performance standards, with fines levied for delays. Fines to be part of funding for a wetlands conservation fund. (see Preservation)
A list of technical documents applicable to wetlands mitigation, to be furnished to applicant and used as basis for mitigation design. For example, GEPA Water Quality Standards, and requirements of the 401 Water Quality Certificate.
For previously unidentified wetlands, requirement that any wetland proposed for development to be accurately characterized according to the accepted identification and classification system.
Requirement that mitigation proposals determine and demonstrate "no net loss" of wetland values and functions, and how values and functions will be transferred from the impact site to the mitigation site.
Fees. A disincentive/incentive-based fee schedule is discussed in detail below.
Wetlands protection can be encouraged through incentives or disincentives, as applied through the mitigation requirements. Permit fees can be revised to carry a specific mitigation surcharge. The surcharge can be structured in an Inclining Block-type rate schedule. This type of fee schedule has become increasingly common in many areas of conservation over the past ten years. Essentially, the Inclining Block rate structure says "the more you use the more you pay". This is most typical in water use rates, which provides an apt analogy. As an example, an Inclining Block water rate would charge $0.10 per gallon for the first 1000 gallons used. The second 1000 gallons would cost $0.20 per gallon. Thus, the user is discouraged from using more water because of the higher cost per unit used. A fee schedule structured similarly for wetlands mitigation would escalate based on the amount of mitigation required. This would create a disincentive to develop projects that require extensive mitigation. Conversely, this would be an incentive for reducing impacts. The fee structure could be applied on an acreage basis, or on a rank/priority basis. An acreage-based fee schedule would work similar to the water example used above. The applicant would be assessed a fee based on inclining blocks of area (square footage) of wetland impacted. A rank/priority-based fee schedule would impose fees based on the value of the wetland. Higher valued wetlands would have correspondingly higher fees for mitigation.
Making applicants accountable for timely submittal and implementation of mitigation plans is also a concern. A strong incentive to submit mitigation plans in a timely manner would be to withhold release of other, related permits for a project, pending review and approval of the mitigation plan. Examples of these are building permits, grading permits, and occupancy permits.
For projects that propose extensive disturbance of wetlands, where mitigation is cost prohibitive or impossible, wetlands mitigation banking was explored as an alternative. A mitigation bank for Guam is judged to have low potential, and was rejected for consideration at this time. A mitigation bank requires relatively large areas of land that must be designated as undevelopable, in perpetuity. This would be difficult to achieve on a small island with a growing population.
On Guam there are three categories of land ownership: land controlled by the federal government; land controlled by the Government of Guam; and privately owned land. Land controlled by the federal government is primarily military land. Much of the Government of Guam-controlled land is part of the Chamorro Land Trust. Land held by the governments are not subject to the same development pressures as privately owned land, and conservation efforts are more likely to succeed there than on private property.
Federal Executive Order 11990 required that projects on federal lands make every effort to assure that wetlands are not adversely impacted. This Order, and the strict mitigation requirements of the Clean Water Act, are a strong incentive for wetland conservation on federal property. On lands controlled by the Navy, a Natural Resources Conservation Plan is being drafted.
Historically, Government of Guam development within wetlands, or on lands which affect wetlands, is limited to projects where no practicable alternative has existed; these projects typically include road and other utility crossings and the location of infrastructure such as sewer pump stations which must be located in low areas within the surrounding topography.
Destruction of wetlands on federal property occurred mainly in the period following World War Two, when facilities were built for the Naval Station. These projects impacted coastal mangroves and, during the construction of the fuel farms and housing in the Piti and Agat areas, affected freshwater wetlands as well. In recent years, the Military has made efforts to avoid projects in wetland areas because of the requirements of the Clean Water Act and Federal Executive Order 11990.
Large-scale wetlands loss from private projects has a history similar to that of the military. The most severe impacts to wetlands on privately held Guam land occurred prior to the passage of the Clean Water Act. Relatively large areas within the Agana Swamp (shopping center) and within wetlands in the Piti and Agat (housing projects and the GORCO refinery) were filled in.
In more recent years, wetland impacts on private land took place during the construction boom, which occurred in the late 1980's and early 1990's, when there was an increase in the construction of golf courses. At this time the regulatory and development communities were less sophisticated and some unpermitted fills occurred due to a variety of reasons. In some cases the violations were corrected, and later developments learned from these mistakes. Another source of pressure to fill wetlands occurred in southern Guam where small fills occurred during the construction of family residences, road construction, and from clean up activities following typhoons.
The following alternatives for wetlands preservation were considered and are thought to be realistically achievable.
Government acquisition of wetlands located on private lands by purchase, land exchange, or eminent domain. A land exchange program for single family home construction, for landowners without alternatives to development within wetlands, is especially attractive.
The Government of Guam implements additional tax and other incentives for conservation of privately held wetlands.
The Government of Guam establishes conservation areas that include wetlands on Government of Guam owned land and land transferred from the military.
There exists a number of wetlands on Guam that are not fully functional. This degradation is a result of natural disturbances (floods, typhoons, etc.) or man-induced impacts (filling, changes in hydrology, etc.). In some cases, the wetlands could be restored with varying degrees of effort. There is presently no incentive or mechanism to restore degraded wetlands. Restoration efforts are undertaken only when an incident (oil spill, illegal fill) occurs and the violator is forced to restore the damaged wetland. For degraded wetlands, where there is no easily identifiable cause or violation of environmental laws, the wetlands are typically left in their degraded condition.
As a first step towards restoration efforts, it would be necessary to determine which of Guam's wetlands are degraded and not performing all of the functions which they would perform, prior to disturbance. Following this, it would be necessary to prioritize degraded wetlands and prepare restoration strategies. Components of strategies should include a restoration plan, cost estimates, and potential sources of funding. Funding may be available from federal agencies such as CZM or USEPA. A restoration fund(or wetland conservation fund) established from fines for wetlands violations is another potential funding source.
5.5 REGULATORY AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROVEMENTS
Though Guam is constrained by the requirements of the Clean Water Act, there is an opportunity to champion the goal and objectives of the Guam Wetland Conservation Plan through better use of the existing federal regulations and programs and by updating the Guam regulations and programs. On Guam, there also exists opportunities to institute changes, within the existing laws and regulations, and in the ways that the various Government of Guam resource and regulatory agencies administrate existing programs.
The existing Guam Wetland Rules and Regulations are outdated and vague. The current regulations, drafted in 1978, do not provide specific requirements for permit applications, do not provide adequate guidance on mitigation requirements, and do not require that the applicant adequately justify the need for the project, to impact wetlands through a strict analysis of alternatives. Additionally, the decision making process, whether to issue or deny a development proposal, appears inconsistent and not necessarily based upon scientific knowledge or public benefit.
5.5.2 Regulatory And Administrative Alternatives
To update and/or replace the regulations which currently affect activities impacting wetlands on Guam, the following alternatives were considered:
5.5.2.1 Regulatory Alternatives
Write amended Guam Wetland Rules and Regulations to maintain a complete and independent Guam wetland law, as a part of a new land use plan, or as a number of separate laws and regulations. Amendments to the law(s) should include the following:
Transfer permit decision making authority from the Guam Land Use Commission to a technical permit review board. The decision, to issue (with or without conditions) or deny the permit, should be made by the resource management agencies of the Government of Guam (GEPA, DAWR, BOP, DLM) in consultation with knowledgeable experts and with public input.
Require that wetland permit applications be submitted to the Government of Guam agencies prior to submittal of the federal 404 permit application.
Require honest analysis of alternatives in order to justify any activity that may adversely affect wetlands.
Provide clear, strict environmental assessment standards for wetland areas which accurately describe the existing (pre-project) values and functions, the environmental consequences (both during project construction and after completion) of the action, and the mitigation measures that will be taken to assure that the action will comply with the goal and objectives of the Guam Wetland Conservation Plan.
Provide wetland delineation standards including delineators' qualifications, mapping standards, and time frame of validity.
Require that mitigation plans be simple and attainable, and include a public education component, monitoring, reporting, and a list of developer responsibilities.
Require strict environmental protection measures to be undertaken during construction in wetlands.
Enact a permanent Guam Endangered Species law which includes protection/conservation requirements for wetland species.
Explore the feasibility of a land exchange program (with Chamorro Land Trust for those who qualify) for small property owners who presently have no other option but to develop wetland areas for single family construction. This program must discourage speculation.
Create tax reductions and other incentives for protection of wetlands on private properties.
5.5.2.2 Administrative Alternatives
Most Government of Guam line and autonomous agencies have to deal with wetland issues. The utilities (Guam Power Authority, Guam Telephone Authority, Guam Waterworks Agency, and Department of Public Works) frequently construct projects which must cross or otherwise impact wetlands. Government owned parks, schools and other institutions have wetlands on their facilities. Though the planning and resource agencies are familiar with wetland issues, the degree of knowledge concerning wetlands at other agencies varies and often, individuals who possess this knowledge do not pass it on when they leave their position. There presently exists no formal mechanism within some agencies which assures that wetland regulations will be followed when the need arises. The following paragraphs suggest improvements to more clearly define agency functions and personnel requirements within each Government of Guam agency relating to wetland issues.
Guam Department of Agriculture, Division of Aquatic and Wildlife Resources (DAWR): Establish a wetland position at the Biologist III level or higher whose responsibilities include; review of Guam and federal permit applications, field verification of wetland sites for grading, clearing, Guam Land Use Commission (GLUC) actions, and wetland delineation maps, maintenance of a set of delineation maps and a Guam wetland data base (biological materials), preparation of DAWR position statements for GLUC related activities, preparation of comments/ review of US Army Corps of Engineers permit applications, point of contact for US Fish and Wildlife Service activities related to wetland resources, participation in enforcement of violations, and support of public education activities, such as guest speaking at public schools.
Guam Environmental Protection Agency (GEPA): Identify an existing position to be the wetland expert whose responsibilities include; preparation of Section 401 documents, reviews of delineation maps, maintenance of a set of delineation maps, preparation of GEPA position statements for GLUC related activities, point of contact for US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) activities related to wetland resources, participation in enforcement of wetland violations.
Guam Department of Land Management (DLM): Identify an existing position to be the wetland contact whose responsibilities include: maintenance of a set of delineation maps, preparation (for chief planner) of DLM position statements for GLUC related activities.
Guam Bureau of Planning (BOP): Identify an existing position to be the wetland contact whose responsibilities include; review of Guam Coastal Zone Management Program (GCZM) consistency applications, preparation of GCZM documentation, participation in educational efforts through in-place newsletter and television show, identification of funding possibilities through federal Office of Coastal Zone Management.
The Guam Department of Public Works (DPW) , the Guam Waterworks Authority ( GWA), the Guam Telephone Authority (GTA), the Guam Power Authority (GPA) , the Port Authority of Guam (PAG): Establish an environmental compliance position at each agency (some agencies have such a person in place) whose responsibilities include, though are not limited to, wetlands; inspection of construction sites to assure that unpermitted activities are not taking place in wetlands, assurance that wetland violations are not made by agency (including contractors) when constructing and maintaining public infrastructure.
Guam has little leeway in terms of changing federal regulations pertaining to wetlands. Within some programs, however, there exist ways that states (and territories) can tailor the regulations to suit local circumstances. This is done through state assumption of programs such as the Section 404 wetland permitting authority, the Section 401 water quality certification, creation of a local Coastal Zone Management Plan, and requesting regional modifications to the Corps Nationwide Permit program. At the present time, Guam administers its own 401 Water Quality Certification and Coastal Zone Management programs. Guam has recently requested that the Corps modify or delete some of the newly proposed Nationwide Permits to protect Guam's limited resource base.
During the preparation of this Plan, the idea of Guam's assumption of the Section 404 wetland permitting authority was considered and rejected because: the Corps administration of the program has been generally good; the small size and interrelatedness of the island community subjects the local administration to potential political or other influence; and because of Guam's current economic situation, administration of the program would be too expensive.
Alternatives that have been considered and accepted by the preparers of this Plan to accommodate federal program requirements and better protect island resources are as follows:
Draft a set of wetland specific water quality standards that recognize a more complete range of wetland functions. These new standards would establish requirements for the issuance or denial of section 401 certification as administered by the Government of Guam.
Consider the establishment of a formal Memorandum of Agreement between the Guam Environmental Protection Agency and the U S Army Corps of Engineers to clearly define and balance the burden of work between the two agencies.
Evaluate the present application of the CZM consistency program in order to determine if it can better address wetland issues; explore availability of grants and other CZM sponsored programs to support the goals of the Guam Wetland Conservation Plan.
Explore feasibility of Guam assumption of Sectional 404 permit program as a long term objective.
6.0 WETLANDS PLAN implementation Strategies
6.1 Introduction 6.2 Organization and Schedule of Implementation 6.3 Administrative Implementation 6.4 Technical Implementation 6.5 Outreach Implementation
The strategies described in this section will promote the practical implementation of the Wetlands Conservation Plan. The implementation schedule identifies an organizational structure, as well as specific responsibilities for agencies involved in wetlands protection. Guam EPA is selected as the agency responsible for initially implementing and monitoring the Plan. Monitoring and Evaluation will be discussed in Section 7.0. Implementation of the Plan is proposed in three sequential phases. The phases are Administrative Implementation, Technical Implementation, and Outreach Implementation. The first two phases have an estimated implementation schedule of two years each. Third phase implementation is estimated to take one year. A Wetlands Task Force will be formed to guide Plan implementation, monitoring and evaluation. The Task Force will include members from GEPA, DAWR and BOP. The Wetland's Task Force may be integrated as a sub-committee of the Water Planning Committee which is headed by GEPA and has planning jurisdiction over many water resources management issues.
6.2 Organization and schedule of implementation
Implementation will commence upon completion of the Plan. Formal adoption of the Plan is not required for implementation, but would be an advantage when negotiating Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) between the various agencies. As the lead implementation and monitoring agency initially, Guam EPA will follow the schedule shown in Fig. 6.1. (Implementation Schedule). This section of the Plan will serve as an implementation guide. Subsections following contain much of the information that is presented earlier in the Plan, but information will be abbreviated and formatted to make reference easy. As an implementation guide this section will identify each agency, and position/personnel if possible, that has responsibility to carry out specific action items of the Plan.
Administrative implementation is essentially an in-house task for each agency involved, and will be completed by existing agency personnel. It is anticipated that consultants will complete certain tasks under the technical and comprehensive implementation phases, and therefore, funding sources will be required for these. For each task there are numerous funding sources that could apply. A comprehensive list of funding sources is given in (document from R. Sablan).
6.3 Administrative Implementation
Administrative implementation is the first step for practical implementation of the Plan. The various Guam and Federal agencies must negotiate respective tentative responsibilities, and embody them in an MOU. Each participating agency should be a signatory to this document.
Concurrent with preparation of the MOU, amended wetlands rules and regulations should be drafted that reflect the content of the MOU.
Formal amendment of the Department of Land Management, Wetlands Rules and Regulations is expected to take six months. The process is shown in Fig. 6.2. (Rules & Regs. amendment flowchart). The process begins with a proposed amendment by the agency. Following this is a public review and comment period, a review by the Attorney General's Office, and a legislative review. Once the amended rules and regulations become law, agencies that are part of the MOU will be empowered to implement technical aspects of the Plan, as discussed below.
The MOU and amended rules and regulations will clarify and define duties of the various agencies for wetlands protection, as outlined in the Plan. Technical implementation primarily includes the items in Section 5.0 that deal with identification and characterization of Guam's wetlands. Once these items are completed, professional training sessions can be initiated to provide the new information to target audiences.
Technical implementation should commence with production of the Guam Wetlands Identification Map (GWIM). The intention is to develop the GWIM, and provide it to the appropriate agencies. It is understood that the GWIM will not be a complete and comprehensive document. The GWIM will be prepared in a format that allows periodic updates and revisions as additional information becomes available. It is anticipated that this mapping project will be contracted to consultants. The map is expected to take four to six months to complete. For timely completion, some advance effort will be required to procure funding, and negotiate and finalize contracts. These preparations for the mapping project can be made while amendments to regulations are pending. Once the GWIM is completed, work on the qualitative aspects of the wetlands, such as rank and priority, can begin.
Classification and priority ranking for Guam wetlands can be accomplished simultaneously. Potentially, these tasks can be completed by existing personnel within DAWR or GEPA. These agencies have the necessary qualified personnel, but workload will determine if they are available for this task. Alternatively, consultants can complete classification and ranking. In that case, it would be efficient to incorporate classification and ranking within the mapping project.
The final task of technical implementation is to begin the professional training programs discussed in Section 5.0. Professional training will be an on-going part of wetlands conservation and management on Guam. It is proposed as a cascade-effect type task, where first priority will be given to training professionals who can then train other professionals. An example of this would be to first train resource agency personnel, who could then provide training to teachers or to the consultant community. Teacher training programs, as discussed under the wetlands education section of 5.0, will function in a similar manner.
Once the administrative and technical elements of the Plan are in place, outrach implementation of the Plan will begin. These will be on-going efforts to promote the Wetlands Conservation Plan towards the goal of "no net loss".
Outreach implementation of the Plan is expected to begin in the fifth year of implementation. The lead wetlands agency will be responsible for the on-going administration and promotion of the Wetlands Conservation Plan. At this time the lead wetlands agency is identified as DAWR. DAWR has indicated an interest in maintaining this function. However, there may be a change of status depending on the outcome of MOU negotiations and amendments to the regulations. The primary on-going implementation responsibilities will be to promote the programs for conservation and management, public education, and agency enhancement, as discussed in Section 5.0.
7.0 WETLANDS PLAN MONITORING AND EVALUATION STRATEGIES
7.1 Introduction 7.2 Monitoring Plan 7.3 Evaluation Plan
An effective monitoring and evaluation procedure is required in order to assess the success or failure of the plan to realize its goals and objectives. Additionally, the frequency of the monitoring effort must be low enough so as not to overly burden the monitoring body, but often enough to allow for an accurate assessment of the Plan success. The parameters which are monitored must be the key elements of the Plan. The format of the evaluation of the monitoring results must be simple and easily understood. It must be consistent from monitoring period to monitoring period so that the plans success (or failure) can be accurately assessed.
Different elements of the Plan require different monitoring and evaluation techniques. For instance, a plan element such as the determination of the Plan lead agency, requires an essentially yes/no determination, while other elements such as the mapping or classification efforts will require a quantitative measurement (say, in terms of percentage of completion of the effort) of their success.
The results of the monitoring and evaluation of the Plan will be used to substantiate program performance when seeking funding or other resources such as personnel assignment.
Monitoring will be done on all of the Plan components that have been selected and recommended by the Plan. Some of these components can be measured quantitatively in terms of dollars spent, percentage of completion, or acres of mitigation constructed. Other elements will require a more qualitative measurement technique such as the progress towards reaching preestablished project milestones. Following is a list of plan components that will be monitored:
Identification:
1. Status of wetland map.2. Status of wetland library.
3. Status (percentage of completion) of classification system.
4. Status of wetland priority list.
Education and Outreach:
1. Status of establishment of classroom curriculum; progress towards a number of established milestones; a. development of curriculum; b. acceptance by DOE continuing education program; c. curriculum taught to science teachers; d. curriculum taught to students.2. Status of professional training according to milestones as #1.
3. Status of Guam Wetland park.
4. Status of public outreach program.
Conservation:
1. Status/tracking of wetland permit applications.2. Status of mitigation efforts (by acre).
3. Net loss or net gain in Guam wetland resources (by acre).
4. Status of restoration priority list.
5. Success of restoration efforts (by acre).
Legislation and Administration:
1. Status of MOU between GEPA and ACOE.2. Status of other federal involvement.
3. Status of MOU between various Gov. Guam agencies.
4. Status of new legislation.
7.2.2 MONITORING/ TRACKING MECHANISM
Monitoring will be done on an established schedule. The actual mechanism will depend upon the component measured. Some Plan components will likely be assigned to various agencies, consultants, or other entities. A part of the responsibility of whoever receives the assignment will be reporting to the Plan monitor, the progress of the particular Plan element. For instance, the Department of Land Management will be responsible to report permit activity within the agency. Other aspects of the monitoring will be the responsibility of the Plan monitor to compile and later evaluate.
Measurement techniques for plan monitoring will vary depending upon the Plan component being monitored. For some elements of the plan, such as the implementation of classroom curricula and the establishment of a Guam Wetland Park, there will be a number of milestones which must be achieved along the way to their becoming reality. For other Plan elements, such as the tracking of permit applications and the determination of success towards the goal of no net loss, the monitoring effort will consist of reporting (and quantitative description of) events which have occurred during the monitoring period.
Following the Plan completion and acceptance by the Guam Environmental Protection Agency and its federal counterpart, there remains considerable effort to assure that the plan will be implemented. During these early stages of the plans implementation, monitoring should occur quarterly for the first year then every six months thereafter.
It is not necessary that the entity which performs the monitoring effort be the same as the lead agency which administers (or promotes) the Plan. Because the Plan has been written under the auspices, and with funding from, the Guam Environmental Protection Agency, it is logical that GEPA play a lead role in monitoring the plans success or failure.
The monitoring reports will follow the evaluation reports. The format of the monitoring reports will be simple and consistent from report to the following report, with revisions (to the format), when deemed necessary. The report will consist of a brief introduction and summary, followed by an item by item description of monitoring results. The report will be in the form of a questionnaire/spreadsheet where the monitor can simply fill in the blanks or check off an item on a checklist. For some elements monitored, there will be a need for narrative.
All aspects of the Plan which have been monitored will be subject to evaluation. Some Plan elements such as the measurement of permit activity will require little analysis, while other components will need more attention.
Evaluation methodology will vary according to plan elements under evaluation. Methodology will be the analysis of the simple numerical data for those elements where such numbers are available. These include; number of permit applications, acres proposed for development, and number of acres of mitigation or restoration accomplished. Other Plan elements will require the establishment of milestones (see implementation section) which must be reached for that Plan element to be implemented. Evaluation of those elements will be the measure of the success towards reaching the milestone.
Evaluating implementation of monitoring will occur following each monitoring cycle; biannually for the first year, then yearly thereafter. The results of the evaluation will be distributed to the Wetland Task Force within three months. An exception to this schedule may be made if there is some important issue or event that specifically affects the Plan or one of its key elements that may merit more immediate evaluation. Such an event may be the occurrence of a devastating typhoon or other natural disaster that severely affects elements of the plan or Guam's wetland resources or the imminent passage of wetland legislation by the Guam Legislature.
Evaluation will be performed by the Guam Environmental Protection Agency which is the lead agency in the monitoring effort. Other agencies and members of the Wetland Task Force will provide input and review of the evaluation report and, most importantly, in making recommendations for rectifying those Plan elements which are not on track.
The evaluation report will be a natural extension of the monitoring report. It will contain the results of the monitoring effort and an analysis of its contents. Evaluation will measure the success (or failure) of the various plan elements in terms of percentage completion according to the predetermined milestones or quantitative measurements for those elements of the plan where measurement is possible. The most important part of the evaluation report will be the "Feedback and Action Recommendations" component which makes recommendations for improving the performance of those Plan elements which are not successful.
7.3.6 Implementation of Evaluation Results
Thirty days following each evaluation report, the various Wetland Task Force agencies will meet to discuss ways to implement recommendations made in the evaluation report.
8.0 Other Management Scenarios
8.1 404 Assumption 8.2 Status quo 8.3 Phase-out of local programs
Appendix 1 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations
Appendix 2 Inventory of Published Resources Pertaining to Guam's Wetlands
Appendix 7 Summary of Public Comments/Review
Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations
a1.1. Introduction
Like many scientific and technical subjects, wetlands ecology has a specialized vocabulary. In addition to this, the discussion of government agencies, government programs, policies, and laws introduces many acronyms into the writing. This section presents definitions for terms and acronyms that are in general use in the wetlands literature, plus those that are specific to Guam.
A1.2 DEFINITIONS OF TERMS
A1.3 ABBREVIATIONS
INVENTORY OF PUBLISHED RESOURCES PERTAINING TO GUAM WETLANDS
A2.1 INTRODUCTION
This section presents an inventory of published information applicable to the conservation of Guam's wetlands. This is the resource base on which the Plan is developed. The materials listed are mainly technical in content. The majority of the works were prepared from research and investigations by members of Guam's academic community. Others were produced by Government of Guam agencies or officials, with assistance from Federal agencies or mainland universities. A few were prepared by visiting scientists affiliated with foreign universities.
Selected works are limited to the period from 1970 and later. This does not assume that useful data is not available from before that time. The time period imposed is arbitrary, but encompasses the period where most wetland related scientific research and study were undertaken on the island of Guam.
Plan users will find that reference materials range in their degree of specificity, both to Guam wetlands, and to wetlands overall. Some generality will be found, and a small number of historical or superseded documents, as well. Also, a certain amount of peripheral reference material is included. This is desirable when compiling a list of scientific works on a broad subject. Wetlands ecology is fundamentally multi-disciplined, and the basis for effective management and conservation of wetlands must be structured accordingly. This inventory was compiled to accommodate users with diverse backgrounds, where expertise and technical or scientific training may vary widely.
Most materials listed below are readily available locally, though the reader may find that some are occasionally out of print. This is especially true for older documents. If a resource is unavailable, archived material can usually be retrieved for a modest fee.
The inventory is structured according to sources; first government, then sub-classification by agency or institution, and finally, alphabetically by title. Some references will fall outside these categories. These are included at the end of the listing under "Others". Complete bibliographical information is provided to the extent it was available at the time of writing.
A2.2 INVENTORY OF PUBLISHED WETLANDS RESOURCES
Government of Guam
Bureau of Planning
Guam Comprehensive Development Plan. 1978: 207 pp.
Guam's Natural and Manmade Constraints. 1982.
Procedures Guide for Achieving Consistency with Federal and Guam Coastal Management Programs. 1982.
The Wetlands of Guam. Cruz, G.M., M.L. Ham, M.J. Cruzand and P.P. Leon Guerrero. 1991: 72 pp.
Wetlands of Guam (delineation map). Duenas & Associates/NOAA. 1996. 1 sheet.
Department of Agriculture; Division of Aquatics and Wildlife Resources
List of Terrestrial Vertebrates and Selected Terrestrial Invertebrates of Guam. 1992: 6 pp.
Department of Parks and Recreation
Guam Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. 1986: 46 pp.
Guam Wetlands Priority Plan. Addendum to Guam Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. 1988.
Guam Environmental Protection Agency
Biological Effects of the GORCO Oil Spill on the Laguas Mangrove Community. Stillberger, G.L. and D.M. Rowley. 1980.
Northern Lens Study, Summary Report. 1982: 52pp.
Wetland Mapping Policy. 1995.
Guam Water Quality Standards. 1992: 34pp.
University of Guam
College of Agriculture and Life Sciences
Common Weeds of Guam. Chin-Tian Lee. Guam Experiment Station. 1985. 64pp.
Plants of Guam. Moore, P.H. and P.D. McMakin. Cooperative Extension Service. 1979: 186pp.
Field and Garden Plants of Guam. Moore, P.H. and R.D. Krizman. Cooperative Extension Service. 1981: 183pp.
Marine Laboratory
Nutrient flux through soils and aquifers to the coastal zone of Guam (Mariana Islands). 1993. Matson, E.A. ML Contribution No. 335. Limnology and Oceanography 38:361-371.
Distributions and habitats of Micronesian stream fishes. 1997. Nelson, S.G., F.A. Camacho, J.E. Parham, R.B. Tibbatts, T. Leberer and B.D. Smith. ML Contribution No. 389. Micronesica 30:83-91.
Nitrogen uptake by tropical freshwater macrophytes. 1980. Nelson, S.G., B.D. Smith and B.R. Best. ML Technical Report No. 56: 21 pp.
Inventory and atlas of the inland aquatic ecosystems of the Marianas Archipelago. 1981. Best B.R. and C.E. Davidson. Technical Report No. 75: 226 pp.
Environmental survey of a proposed fill site in Agana Swamp. 1978. Smith, B.D. and S.E. Hedlund. 27 pp.
Field ecological survey of the Agana-Chaot River basin. 1974. Randall, R.H., R.T. Tsuda, M. Gawel, R. Rechebei and J. Case. ML Technical Report No. 12: 64 pp.
Talofofo Bay coastal survey. 1974. Randall, R.H. ML Technical Report No. 13: 77pp.
The effects of land clearing on a small watershed in southern Guam. 1983. Neubauer, C.P. ML Masters Thesis No. 54: 55 pp.
Habitat use by a tropical oceanic island streamfish assemblage. 1995. Parham, J.E. ML Masters Thesis No. 88: 54 pp.
Water and Environment Research Institute
Aqueous Chemistry of A Perennial Wetland in Southern Guam. H. Galt Siegrist, Jr., Gary R.W. Denton, H. Rick Wood, Lucrina P. Concepcion and R. Russell Lewis. 1997. WERI Technical Report No. 79.
Concentrations of Aluminum, Manganese, Iron and Calcium in Four Southern Guam Rivers. William J. Zolan and Leigh Ellis-Neill. 1986. WERI Technical Report No. 64:75p.
Effects of Land-Clearing on a Small Watershed in Southern Guam. Clifford P. Neubauer. 1981. WERI Technical Report No. 24:40p.
Estimate of Recharge to the Freshwater Lens of Northern Guam. Jerry F. Ayers. 1981. WERI Technical Report No. 21:25p.
Feasibility Study of Developing Valley-fill Aquifers for Village Water Supplies in Southern Guam. Jerry F. Ayers and Russell N. Clayshulte. 1983. WERI Technical Report No. 41:95p.
Freshwater Use Customs on Guam: An Exploratory Study. Rebecca A. Stephenson (ed). 1979. WRRC Technical Report No. 8:150p.
Groundwater Analysis by Tritium Techniques: A Preliminary Evaluation. John F. Mink and L. Stephen Lau. 1977. WRRC Technical Report No. 2:35p.
Groundwater Resources of Guam: Occurrence and Developments. John F. Mink. 1976. WRRC Technical Report No. 1:285p.
Guam Hydrologic Survey Program Hydrologic Data Collection on Guam: FY 1998 Report. John W. Jenson and John M.U. Jocson. 1998. WERI Technical Report No. 83:46p.
Hydrogeologic Investigation of Agana Swamp, Northern Guam. Jerry F. Ayers and Russell N. Clayshulte. 1983. WERI Technical Report No. 40:30p.
Indigenous Fresh Water Management Technologies of Truk, Pohnpei and Kosrae, Eastern Caroline Islands, Guam, Mariana Islands and Micronesia. Rosalind L. Hunter-Anderson. 1987. WERI Technical Report No. 65:70p.
Influence of Modern Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Systems on Water Quality in Micronesia. Peter A. Cowan. 1982. WERI Technical Report No. 36:95p.
Meteorological Factors Associated with Drought on Guam. Mark A. Lander. 1997. WERI Technical Report No. 75.
Occurrence of Certain Pesticides in Ground and Surface Waters Associated with Ordot Landfill in the Pago River Basin, Guam, Mariana Islands. Harold R. Wood. 1989. WERI Technical Report No. 72:20p.
Preliminary Study of Natural Aquifer Discharge on Guam. William J. Zolan. 1982. WERI Technical Report No. 44:170p.
Preliminary Study of the Hydrogeology of Northern Guam. Jerry F. Ayers and Russell N. Clayshulte. 1984. WERI Technical Report No. 56:80p.
Significance of Runoff and Terrestrial Erosion to Nutrient Status of the Estuaries of Guam. Ernest A. Matson. 1990. WERI Technical Report No. 70:30p.
Sizing of Surface Water Runoff Detention Ponds for Water Quality Improvement. Sharham Khosrowpanah, Leroy F. Heitz and Jay Nelson. 1997. WERI Technical Report No. 80.
Water Quality Assessment for Agana Springs. Thomas L. Smalley and William J. Zolan. 1981. WERI Technical Report No.22:40p.
Wetlands Resources in the Ugum Watershed Guam. H. Galt Siegrist, Jr. 1997. WERI Technical Report No. 76:49p.
Herbarium
Obligate and Faculative Wetland Plants of Guam. Raulerson, L. and A. Rinehart. University of Guam Herbarium Contribution. No. 18:23p.
Inventory and Mapping of Wetlands Vegetation in Guam, Tinian, Saipan, and the Mariana Islands. Moore, P., L. Raulerson, M. Chernin and P. McMakin. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1977: 253 pp.
United States Government
Army Corps of Engineers
Pacific Islands Wetlands Mapping Conventions. 1994.
A Guide to the Pacific Wetlands Plants. Stemmermann, L. 1981.
Department of Agriculture; Natural Resource Conservation Service
Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States; A Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils. Hurt, G.W., P.M. Whitehead and R.F. Pringle. 1996: 27 pp.
Soil Survey of Territory of Guam. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1988: 165p.
Department of the Interior; Fish and Wildlife Service
Characteristics of Mariana common moorhens and wetland habitats within the U.S. Department of the Navy's military lease area and exclusive military use area on the island of Tinian, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, July 1994 - August 1995. Fish and Wildlife service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Honolulu, HI. 1996: 56 pp.
Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. L. M. Cowardin, V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E. T. Laroe. 1979. FWS/OBS-79-31: 103 pp.
Micronesian Forest Bird Survey; Saipan, Tinian, Agiguan and Rota. Engbring, John, Ramsey, Fred L., and V. J. Wildman. 1986: 142 pp.
National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Hawaii (Region H). P.B. Reed Jr. Biology Report 88(26.13). 1988: 88pp.
National Wetlands Inventory Map for Guam. 1989: 8 Sheets.
Recovery Plan for the Mariana Common Moorhen. Gallinula chloropus guami. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1992. Portland, OR. 55p.
Environmental Protection Agency
Wetlands Fact Sheets. 1995.
Others
Ecology and extinction of the Mariana mallard. Reichel, J.D. and T.O. Lemke. Journal of Wildlife Management. 1994; 58 (2): pp. 199-205.
Fruit bat research. Worthington, D.J. and E.M. Taisacan. In: Division of Fish and Wildlife Progress Report: 1994. Saipan, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Division of Fish and Wildlife. 1994: pp. 414-417.
Saipan Comprehensive Wetlands Management Plan. 1991. ERC Environmental and Energy Services Co.; prepared for CNMI Coastal Resources Management Office.
Journal of the Society of Wetlands Scientists. Society of Wetlands Scientists, Wilmington, NC. ISSN 0277-5212.
Wetlands Related Legislation in the United States. Stepien, W.P. and S.J. Fernandez. University of Miami Law School, Coral Gables, FL, 1977
Law of Wetlands Regulation. Want, W.L. Clark Boardman Environmental Law Series, NY, NY, 1989.
Mariana common moorhen. In: Division of Fish and Wildlife Progress Report: 1987 - 1992. Saipan, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Division of Fish and Wildlife. 1992: pp. 283-291.
Migratory bird surveys. In: Division of Fish and Wildlife Progress Report: 1987 - 1992. Saipan, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Division of Fish and Wildlife. 1992: pp. 87-133.
Migratory bird surveys. Rice, C.G. and V.A. Camacho. In: Division of Fish and Wildlife Progress Report: 1990. Saipan, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Division of Fish and Wildlife. 1990: pp. 20-25.
Nightingale reed-warbler research. In: Division of Fish and Wildlife Progress Report: 1987 - 1992. Saipan, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Division of Fish and Wildlife. 1992: pp. 257-281.
Notes on nesting and growth of Mariana common moorhen on Guam. Ritter, M.W. Micronesica. 1994; 27(_): pp. 127-132.
Wetlands. Mitsch, W.J. and J.G. Gosselink. Van Nostrand Reinhold, NY, NY, 1986: 539 pp.
A Directory of Wetlands in Oceania. Scott, D.A. (ed.). Kuala Lumpur. 1993: 444 pp., 16 maps.
The Birds of Hawaii and the Tropical Pacific. Pratt, H.D., P.L. Bruner and D.G. Berett. Pinceton University Press. 1987: 404 pp, 45 pl.
The Mariana common moorhen: decline of an island endemic. Stinson, D.W., M.W. Ritter and J.D. Riechel. The Condor. 1991; 93: pp.38-43.
Trees and Shrubs of the Northern Marianas Islands. Raulerson, L. and A. Rinehart. Coastal Resources Management, Office of the Governor. 1991: 120pp.
Ferns and Orchids of the Marianas Islands. Raulerson, L. and A. Rinehart. Lynn Raulerson and Agnes Rinehart. 1992: 138pp.
The Flora of Guam. B.C. Stone. 1970. Micronesia 6:1-167.
