POLAND: PARTNERSHIPS EXCHANGE

POLAND: PARTNERSHIPS EXCHANGE
DRAFT OUTLINE 9-29-02
J. Glenn Eugster
National Park Service

EXCHANGE Goals:
presenting the methodology and tools for building partnerships
reflecting on motivations for cross-sector partnerships
sharing experiences through presentations of “partnerships in action”—case studies from Central European countries


Thursday (10 October 2002)

Morning
Introduction
What are cross-sector partnerships- some theory
The key concepts
Methodology of building partnerships
Experiences from the U.S. and U.K.
The Polish approach: the Polish Local Partnerships Network of the Polish Environmental Partnership Foundation


I. THEORY

PERSONAL THEORY:

EDUCATION + EXPERIENCE + RESEARCH + CONTEXT = BEST PRACTICE.

FORUMLAS:

OVERVIEW:
How do you think decisions are made? What are the ingredients of a good decision? What is your role in the decision-making process? How do things work?

PARTNERSHIPS & CONSERVATION MUST BE EXAMINED WITHIN A HOLLISTIC CONTEXT. THE LANDSCAPE, INCLUDING IT’S LIVING RESOURCES AND PEOPLE, HAVE INFORMATION YOU NEED TO DESIGN SUCCESSFUL PARTNERSHIPS.

THEORIES & PRACTICE:
Who did you learn from? My early influences were:
n Hubert Owens, UGA--Civic design and planning
n Phil Lewis, UWisconsin
n Lawrence Halprin, Take Part
n Ian McHarg, Design With Nature
n Ervin Zube, UAZ Scenic Evaluations
Jon Berger, Human Ecology and the Regional Plan

LATER, MY INFLUENCES HAVE BEEN SHAPED BY

RALPH NADER, AND IS ADVOCACY
FRANCES SEYMOUR, DESIGN AND DISCOVERY
CHRIS DURNEY, COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS
RICHARD WAKEFORD, “GIVE IT AWAY”
SIM VA DER RYN AND STUART COWAN, ECOLOGICAL DESIGN


Models/ Methods:

A formula for understanding how a place, or a culture, works; man’s relationship with nature; and how this understanding can help you provide better information to decision-makers.

What model do you use? Personal model is an important part of your practice. Whether you know it or not, you have one. (Slide A)

Eugster 1979 Model:

ZUME (Zube + McHarg + Eugster = ZUME)

ETOWAH RIVER 2001 MODEL:


Other More Recognized Models:

n McHarg: Layer Cake of Reality (Slide B)

n RIVERWORK: National Park Service Rivers Assistance Program (Slide C)

n Watershed Protection Approach: EPA Office of Water (Slide D)

n CBEP: Community-Based Environmental Protection Approach (Slide E)

WHAT IS YOUR MODEL?

n Yours’: Sketch it on one page and,or explain it to someone!
II. KEY CONCEPTS

Partnership Definition:

The NPS Partnership Council describes partnerships as “voluntary relationships through which each member of the relationship advances its own mission by working collaboratively with others to achieve congruent and overlapping objectives”.


Workgroup members believe that partnerships are created and used to:

h Improve and, or, sustain resource conditions.

· Improve service to the community by developing programs,
providing new opportunities to experience the parks, and other important places in communities.

· Encourage collaboration among park and recreation systems
at every level--international, federal, regional, state, local--to make the nations park, open space, historic place and outdoor recreation network accessible to all.

· Supplement funds appropriated by Congress, through the
assistance of the National Park Foundation, friends groups and other public and private sources.

· Build the capacity of all partners to shape their own
futures.

· Recognize parks as unique places for research and
learning.

· Communicate to residents and visitors alike about the
extensive system of State, local, National parks and conservation areas and how those resources directly impact the quality of their life.

· Inform and motivate the public to help ensure long-term
protection of resources under the care of the parks in this local, state, Tribal, and federal system of parks and conservation areas.

· Assist communities with the preservation of historic
places, open space, natural areas, and recreation resources outside of the national parks through a variety of partnership-based programs.






PARTNERSHIPS ARE LIKE THE LANDSCAPE THAT THEY ARE APPLIED TO.

D.W.MEINING WROTE,”THE BEHOLDING EYE: TEN VERSIONS OF THE

SAME SCENE” AND SAID, “THAT EVEN THOUGH WE GATHER TOGETHER

AND LOOK IN THE SAME DIRECTION AT THE SAME INSTANT, WE WILL

NOT—WE CANNOT—SEE THE SAME LANDSCAPE. WE WILL SEE MANY OF

THE SAME ELEMENTS, BUT SUCH FACTS TAKE ON MEANING ONLY

THROUGH ASSOCIATION; THEY MUST BE FITTED TOGETHER ACCORDING

TO SOME COHERENT BODY OF IDEAS”.

MEINING WENT FURTHER TO SAY, “ANY LANDSCAPE IS COMPOSED NOT

ONLY OF WHAT LIES BEFORE YOUR EYES BUT WHAT LIES WITHIN OUR

HEADS”.


INTERESTING PAPER. IT COMPARES TEN SCENES OF THE SAME VIEW

OF THE LANDSCAPE.



Ten Views of Landscapes

As nature
Habitat
Artifact
Ecosystem
People
Ideology
History
Recreation
Place
Aesthetic


THE SAME PERSPECTIVE IS RELEVANT PARTNERSHIPS.



PLACE-BASED AND PROCESS Assumptions ARE IMPORTANT TO CLARIFY, CONFIRM OR AGREE UPON AT THE OUTSET OF ANY COLLABORATION:


A watershed conservation strategy must be based on certain assumptions that you recognize and agree on. These assumptions form the basis for your strategy and the principles that you adhere to throughout your work.

Based on a variety of conservation experiences in watersheds throughout the U.S. the following are examples of watershed principles. Sample techniques are listed to help illustrate, or serve as an information source for each principle.

‚ Principle 1: The process must be locally led, open to the public, objective and inclusive.

Technique: Dialogue is a technique used to meet each other below our opinions. It relies on story, skill and experience. The core requirements for Dialogue are: 1) treating the other(s) as equal in every respect; 2) being willing and able to listen and respond empathically; and 3) being willing to bring one's own and others' assumptions into the open without judgement.

Reference: Martin, Daniel, Core Requirements for Dialogue, Interview with Anne and Andrew Pearson, Edgewater, (aplace@toad.net) MD 1999

‚ Principle 2: All partners are equally important.

Technique: Everyone is a designer! "Listen to everyone in the design process. No one is a participant only or a designer only: Everyone is a participant-designer. Honor the special knowledge that each person brings".

Reference: Cowan, Stuart, and others, Ecological Design, Island Press, Washington, DC, 1996

‚ Principle 3: All environmental, community and economic values must be recognized.

Technique: Mulitobjective: "To encourage comprehensive and cooperative planning among all individuals and institutions concerned with rivers and their adjacent lands, to facilitate decisions regarding such use which reflect a high degree of
consensus at all stages of decision making, which maximize public and private benefits with the least adverse impacts on significant river/ watershed values".

Reference: Riley, Ann, L., Restoring Streams in Cities: A Guide for Planners, Policymakers, and Citizens, Island Press, Washington, DC, 1998

‚ Principle 4: The process must be consensus-based and agreement should be secured at the beginning, and at every major decision-making point in the process. Deciding what action to take to conserve a river, a watershed, and specific sites within it requires a process--an equation, to decide what actions should be taken; by who; and how.

Technique: RIVERWORK BOOK: A reference manual for local watershed planning efforts. It presents a process that emphasizes citizen participation, networking and constituency building to develop grassroots river conservation efforts. The process encourages communities to consider a variety of factors and alternatives before choosing the best way to protect their river and watershed.

Reference: Eugster, J. Glenn, others, RIVERWORK Book, U.S. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA, 1988

Arnold, Matthew, B., and others, The Power of Environmental Partnerships, Management Institute for Environment & Business, The Dryden Press, Austin, Texas, 1995

Principle 5: Recognize and build upon existing traditions of stewardship, partnerships, consensus building and community initiative.

Technique: Discovery: Refers to efforts to identify and support conservation activities initiated by communities themselves. Project discoverers assume that appropriate local resource management regimes already exist and that the role of external actors is to assist in legitimizing them

Reference: Seymour, Frances, J., Are Successful Community-based Conservation Projects Designed or Discovered? Natural Connections, Island Press, Washington, DC, 1994

‚ Principle 6: Ultimately local governments make local decisions. All watersheds are local.

Home rule is a fundamental part of any watershed conservation strategy. Local officials are elected to represent different parts of the watershed and they have been empowered to make decisions about the future of the area. They must be involved in all aspects of the strategy for it to be successful.

Principle 7: Private property must be respected and recognized as a legitimate watershed value.

Technique: Private landowners value land in many different ways. In addition to using their land as a place to live, many landowners enjoy the natural and cultural resource values of their property for recreation purposes or to enhance the quality of their lives. Private landowners also value their land as an economic investment and source of income. Various conservation guides provide landowners with information on government and private sector programs and assistance they may be eligible for should their land possess certain values.

Reference: Wesley-Copeland, Jorie, Private Landowner's Wetlands Assistance Guide: Voluntary Options for Wetlands Stewardship in Maryland, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 1992.

Johnson, Andrew, A Handbook for the Landowner: The Use and Protection of Privately Held Natural Lands, The Natural Lands Trust, Inc. Media, PA, 1982


III. APPROACHES TO BUILDING PARTNERSHIPS


Elements of Watershed Conservation Strategies

Although each watershed conservation strategy should be tailored to the ecological, sociological, political environment of a particular place the typical elements to be considered are:

1. Develop a Pre-Planning Strategy
It's important to hold initial discussions with key leaders in order to introduce the idea, assess the amount of interest there is in pursuing the conservation effort, and if support exists, outline the approach to be used. Always summarize the understanding in writing.

Technique: Memorandum of Agreement are regularly used to agree on key parties; role and function of each party; project goals; reason for the effort; public involvement opportunities; products; individual partner assignments; a conceptual description of how decision making will be handled; and a schedule.

2. Select a Leadership-Style
Typically there is a small core group of sponsoring organizations that organize the effort. Eventually a locally appointed Steering Committee will lead the effort and local coordinators and State government assistance will be required. The group will work best if there is a balance of private sector and government involvement.

Technique: In South Carolina a statewide watershed effort selected steering committee representatives to reflect all of the major values (i.e. farms, timber management areas; natural areas; etc.)

Identify, Understand and Characterize Resource Values
What are the natural, historic, cultural, recreational, tourism, economic, and other values which are important to the area, people, and living resources? How do they function? Where are they? What opportunities and constraints do they offer for future uses of the watershed?

Technique: There are many ways to identify important watershed values and functions. Successful efforts typically rely on good science and good civics. What areas do the scientists believe to be important to the health of the watershed and what are the opportunities and constraints for the use of these values? What areas do the different groups and interests, who care most about certain values (i.e. fish, forests, farms, etc.), believe are most important?

Reference: Thompson, George, E., Steiner, R. Frederick, Ecological Design and Planning, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, NY 1997

Eugster, Glenn, J. Statewide River Assessments, U.S. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA 1986


4. Identify who are the groups, agencies and organizations interested in these values and functions.

Technique: River Gods Analysis. Describe, by major river/ watershed value, the key private groups and government watershed-based organizations with representatives who speak for the river, its watershed, and the people and living resources that own, govern, use and enjoy it.

Reference: Eugster, Glenn, J., The River Gods, National Park Service, National Capital Region, Washington, D.C. October 2000

5. Involve a broad cross-section of interested individuals and organizations in all aspects of your planning and decision making

Technique: Public involvement is a primary means of building support and developing a constituency for the watershed conservation effort. The value of public involvement lies in the sponsor of the effort sharing responsibility with the communities, residents and interests who will influence the success or failure of the effort.

Reference: Eugster, Glenn, J. Steps in State & Local Greenway Conservation Plans: Public Involvement Plan Guidelines, U.S. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA 1988.

6. Describe the General Goals & Objectives

Technique: Goals are a means of guiding you toward specific accomplishments and of keeping you on track as you proceed. What does success look like to you and others? Start by asking key leaders, and others, what they think success will look like after one or two years of your effort?

Reference: RIVERWORK Book (see Principle #4)


7. Identify and Assess the Needs, Concerns and Issues

Technique: Normally different interests have different values and ideas about the future of the watershed. These local interests or issues are at the heart of watershed conservation and need to be recognized, described and briefly analyzed during the project.

Reference: RIVERWORK Book (see Principle #4)

8. Refine Goals & Objectives and Establish Measures of Success

Technique: Goals are based on resources values and functions and issues or matters of concern. Goals should be refined now to build on what you did in task #6 and to incorporate what you've learned from task #3 (values and functions) and #7. (needs, concerns and issues). This task helps to create consensus out of contrasting opinions, and to involve all the interests in the decision-making process.

Once the goals have been refined it is helpful to identify the specific environmental and organizational measures of success for each goal. This will enable you to measure your progress.

References: _______________, Measures of Success-Unpublished Discussion Paper, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, undated.


9. Consider All Alternatives
How can values be protected or promoted, issues resolved, and goals be achieved? What ideas do people have? What programs, tools, techniques, laws, and approaches are available? Where do you start looking?

Technique: Eugster, Glenn, J., Conservation Programs, Tools, Techniques & Resources, Prepared for The Conservation Fund's Land Conservation Training Course, Duke University, 1998.

Select Actions
Most people get involved with watershed conservation because they either want to keep things the same or get something accomplished. Action is key to watershed conservation!

Technique: What actions need to be taken? Who will take the action? How will the action be taken? When will the action be taken? The actions selected should:

a Conserve values
a Achieve goals
a Resolve issues
a Consider appropriate alternatives
a Reflect public attitudes
a Identify short and long-term actions
a Achieve desired results

Take Action
Select both short and long-term actions to carryout your strategy. Starting small and building incrementally creates momentum toward larger goals and visions.

Technique: The Pocomoke River Alliance in Maryland decided that they need to do something real to help get their new watershed group off the ground. They decided to create a Nature & Exercise Trail on some City land adjacent to the Pocomoke River. The project helped establish the group, raise funds, provide important public access to the river and increase regional awareness about the Alliance's work.

Document, Publicize & Celebrate Results
The success of any watershed conservation effort rests in its ability to demonstrate results. Measuring and publicizing tangible results is key to sustaining leadership commitment and public support. Track your progress and publicize results!

Technique: How is the river doing? Each year Maryland Representative Bernie Fowler uses his "Sneaker Index" to measure water quality on the Patuxent River. Other private organizations often hold a "River Day" celebration each year to go over results, and commitments, and recognize success. The Friends of the Potomac, for example, give six awards each year to recognize results.

Evaluate Progress and Refine Strategy
Periodically refine the strategy based on what you learn and current conditions.















IV. EXPERIENCES

Delmarva Peninsula: Community-Based Approaches to Environmental Protection
Glenn Eugster, NPS/ EPA Potomac American Heritage River

Summary:

Background:

Local initiative trends
Locally-driven efforts recognized.
Convergence of thinking about the need to link science and democracy; and environment, human ecology and economic activity.
c. Context. Tyranny of small decisions or the tyranny of small solutions. Adaptive strategies, the edge of chaos.


2. Community-Based Models:
Assistance Requests and Approaches
Requests versus what you do. Your agenda; Their agenda; Our agenda
Service responses: Money, technical advise; information and quiet enabling leadership. Hierarchy change to matrix management.
Increased interest in matching National priorities with local priorities.
Approaches and tools: Organizational; community; position; tools/ resources; language


3. Approaches, Tools & Techniques:
a. Design/ Tools tested outside the area:
--Watershed Protection Approach
--Community-Based Environmental Protection
--Riverwork
--Green Communities

b. Discovery/ Tools developed inside the area :
--Performance Based criteria (i.e. SDCG grants, CBEP Fund)
--Community Builders of HUD
--River Navigator, American Heritage Rivers
--Complex Adaptive Systems (i.e. ICF Kaiser Consulting Group; Eastward Ho!)


Case Study: Delmarva Peninsula

Regional Resources:
Chesapeake and Delaware Bay watersheds and Atlantic Ocean
Atlantic Flyway for migratory and neo-tropics
Productive agricultural lands
Wetlands and remnants of Southern Cypress swamps
e. Culture: Chesapeake Country, Beautiful Swimmers, etc.

Issues and Matters of Public Concern:
Struggling agriculture, shellfish, finfish and transportation economies
Agriculture, wetlands and water quality conflicts
Race relations
Resource value, amenity and quality of life attractions
Strong home rule, locally-driven interests

Design and Discovery Process
a.Design: Externally designed approaches/ methods to respond to internally or externally identified goals, or problems. Project design assumes that existing approaches are less-than-adequate to solve problems or achieve objectives. Outside leadership given prominence.

b.Discovery: Locally developed and initiated conservation approaches/ methods. Assumes that local ideas and activities exist which can be used to achieve goals or respond to problems. Outside interests assist and or legitimize community efforts and ideas.


Delmarva Experience and Results: “Fish-Bone” Chart

Sequence:

a. Region recognized for values and functions related to agency priorities
b.Request from Mayor of Pocomoke City
Discussion with Lower Eastern Shore Mayor’s group
Field visit to discuss needs/ services
Proposal to local officials for assistance
Program support sought (i.e. federal funds, wetlands grant, NPS-RTCA Program, State of MD, others)

Inputs:
Portion of federal staff person’s time and travel funds
Small EPA Wetlands Protection grant for ecotourism ($25,000)
Small EPA Chesapeake Bay Program grant for seed grants ($22,000)
Printing documents

Results:
Communication: Workshops, forums, newsletters, alliances, steering committees.
Technical Assistance: Capacity building, grants, referrals, peer exchanges, project design.
Recognition: Designations, documentation of values, attitudes, goals
Research: Community forums, expert presentations, natural resource histories, new approaches/ technologies
Planning: Strategic plans, business plans for leadership groups, local priorities, Conservation, protection and action: Hotels preserved; wetlands purchased; tourism centers opened; nature trails created; habitat protected;
Problem Solving: charettes for collaborative problem solving, revision of Agency approaches to protection


Lessons Learned

Principles

Agreement on resource values comes first
Familiarity with region (i.e. listen and learn before talking. Their interests come before yours)
Timing and readiness
Regions knowledge of and fit with the person (i.e. style, experience level, entry, perception of motivation, etc.)
e. Follow-through (i.e. service, leadership
f. Not about money but rather support and agreement.
g. Put yourself in a position to be in a position to make a difference.


Conclusion

Community-based and locally-driven processes are advancing to another level quickly.
New skills and attitudes required for supporting locally-driven efforts.
Link with agency/ National goals and local goals is key.
Considerable resistance to matrix management
Funding tends to assume that partnerships are formed and local capability exists
Results far exceed investments and will leverage significant non-federal contributions.
Everyone is a participant and a designer—and the outsiders and insiders educate each others on how these approaches work.




































Afternoon
Workshop I: Why do we need each other?
v Identifying the role of each sector in the partnership
Public sector
Business
NGOs
Case study: Bochnia Region Partnership
v Working with the representatives of the three sectors.
Summing up afternoon workshop




WORKSHOP I: WHY DO WE NEED EACH OTHER?

WHY DO WE NEED PARTNERS?

Why Partnerships? There are many reasons why NPS staff and managers and their partners choose to work together to accomplish overlapping goals. In many cases partnerships will:

h Improve Effectiveness: Each partner will be better able to achieve its mission by working with a variety of other organizations and agencies to solve problems, share ideas, pool resources, and share responsibilities.

h Increase Efficiency: Partnerships can help share information and intentions to reduce the timeframe needed to implement critical plans, lower execution costs, and reduce expected resistance by affected stakeholders.

h Enhance Equity: Higher levels of participation through partnerships tend to improve the equity inherent in collaboration and enhance the perception of fairness and impartiality.

h Fulfill Missions More Effectively: Partnerships offer unique access to organizations that have similar interests.

h Gain Access to a Larger Resource Base: Working through partnerships gives each organization expanded access to resources of other partner organizations.

h Increase Predictability: Partnerships help avoid surprises and disputes that delay core operations or lead to litigation.

hIncrease Public Support: When partnerships expand participation to include others, the process and the partners tend to have more credibility with the public.

h Improve Employee Morale and Public Attitudes:
Partnerships that involve employees and employees, stakeholders, and other members of the public in the decision-making process enhance skills and morale of all participants, thus improving the performance of individuals, groups and agencies.


II. IDENTIFYING THE ROLE OF EACH SECTOR IN THE PARTNERSHIP?


TRADITIONAL ROLES VS COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS

TRADITIONAL ROLES: For the last three decades, the standard model for much federal action has been a national system of top-down control and regulation, with predictable, uniform implementation and enforcement. Effective for use with organizations with essentially similar designs, functions, and concerns, this system resulted in significant community, quality of life, and environmental improvements over the years and it is still the backbone of most of the core programs at federal agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Departments of Energy, Housing and Urban Development, Agriculture, Transportation, Justice, Treasury, and the Federal Emergency Management Administration.
However, the achievement of additional societal and environmental gains now requires a new, complementary blueprint for federal involvement. Faced with a rapidly evolving electronic environment and the greater demand for partnerships and empowerment of local decision makers, the regulatory, deterministic approaches that have been employed up to now by many agencies are no longer sufficient.

COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEM: In a complex adaptive system, each part is an individual agent that acts in parallel with other agents to create a result that is greater than any of the individual parts. For instance, in South Florida’s Everglades initiative (in our evaluation window we looked at the period from 1995 – 1999, although the initiative continues to evolve today), multiple players¾dozens of local communities, five counties, multiple state and federal agencies (with both headquarters and regional offices), and a variety of not-for-profit organizations¾were coming together to achieve the goal of ensuring a healthy future for the Everglades and the economically thriving communities that surround it. Each of the players had their own vision and mission, their own reason for becoming involved in the initiative. In addition, various discrete “named” initiatives¾Eastward Ho!, Brownfields, Showcase Community, the Governor’s Commission, and so on¾also existed as independent agents within the larger Everglades movement with overlap of resources and people. And the social, economic, and environmental issues that must be addressed to ensure that the future of the Everglades is adequately addressed also have their own individual logic and structures that in turn are intricately interrelated with each other.
EXPERIENCES




The River Gods
Glenn Eugster, National Park Service, National Capital Region
October 12, 2000

In Dublin there is a Custom's House which has been designed with keystones which represent the principal rivers of Ireland. The keystones, which decorate the ground floor arches, are the thirteen principal rivers of Ireland, with the Atlantic Ocean thrown in for good measure. These keystones have come to be known as "The River Gods".

In the Potomac River watershed there are a number of key private groups and government watershed-based organizations with representatives who speak for the river, its watershed, and the people and living resources who own, govern, use and enjoy it.

Traditionally within the Potomac basin, as in many other river valleys, place-based groups have organized around various resource values, recreational activities, or land use or management activity. In some ways Potomac River groups have claimed certain specific values of the watershed as the focus of their organizations efforts.

These Potomac groups are important to any discussion about the past, present or future of the watershed because of the perspective they have and the local interests they represent. In some way these groups are the keystones of leadership in the Potomac River watershed. Their goals and interests represent the principal values of the Potomac. These values, and the groups that support them, can be viewed as The River Gods.

The principal values, and The River God organizations, of the Potomac River watershed, from the perspective of the Partnerships Office of NCR include:

· Land Conservation: Potomac Conservancy
· Heritage Tourism: Potomac Heritage Partnership, DC Heritage Tourism Coalition
· Heritage River: Friends of the Potomac, National Park Service
· Recreation Fishing: American Sportfishing Association, Bass Masters
· Hiking: Potomac National Scenic Heritage Trail Committee, Appalachian Trail Conference
· Recreation & Open Space: National Capital Planning Commission, Trust for Public Lands, Washington Parks for People
· Nature Protection: The Nature Conservancy
· Water Quality & Quantity: Interstate Commission for the Potomac River Basin, Potomac Basin Consortium
· Public Lands: National Park Service, Forest Service, Fish & Wildlife Service, etc.
· Agriculture: Farm Bureau
· Timber: ???
· Land Use Management: Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments
· Living Resources: Chesapeake Bay Program, Ducks Unlimited, Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay
· Cultural Diversity/ Equity: International Network to Freedom Association, Muncaster Challenge
· Education: Alice Ferguson Foundation
· Stewardship: Canaan Valley Institute, Blue Ridge Center for Environmental Stewardship, Institute for Conservation Leadership

Also, certain individuals have been assigned to work in, on and around the Potomac and its tributaries. These include: Anacostia River Keeper, Potomac River Keeper, Potomac American Heritage River Navigator.

In addition there are a number of watershed-wide conservation efforts underway within the Potomac River valley. They include:

· Potomac Heritage Tourism Initiative, Potomac Heritage Partnership
· Potomac River Partnership, U.S. Forest Service
· Potomac American Heritage River Initiative, Friends of the Potomac
· Potomac Watershed Collaboration, The Wilderness Society and White Cloud Council
· Potomac National Scenic Heritage Trail

References:

Healy, Elizabeth, The Wolfhound Guide to The River Gods, 1998, Wolfhound Press, Dublin Ireland

Remembering Evelyn

Remembering Evelyn
J. Glenn Eugster
Undated

Overtime we connect with many unique people and places. Some of us have the good fortune to have jobs that send us into communities and landscapes, to work with people of all sorts, on designs, plans, and strategies for conservation, protection, and sustainable use. Looking back over the years the people and places I have worked with seem to meld together inseperably. More often than not, as I travel from one city to another, I see the people I have worked with in the places we practiced landscape architecture and ecological planning in.

On March 15, 1982 Evelyn Swimmer called me about employment with the National Park Service. Evelyn and I had both attended the University of Pennsylvania and she had heard of the office that I managed from Ms. Lenore Sagan, the Office Director for Professor Ian McHarg at the Graduate School of Landscape Architecture & Regional Planning. Lenore looked for people that were interested in public service and pointed them in our direction. Overtime Lenore helped the NPS hire more than 65 landscape architects, city planners, and ecological planners.

Ms. Swimmer explained that she was a recent graduate of Penn and was looking for a job and was interested in the National Park Service. She explained that she had been successfully working for years in interior design and had made a career change to landscape architecture.

The call was similar to many others that came in and we arranged a time for Evelyn to visit the office. Little did she know when she called that our Division, a part of the larger regional office, was in the midst of chaos as the Reagan Administration was in the process of cutting domestic programs and reducing the size of the federal workforce. I scheduled Evelyn’s meeting around appointments I had made to interview for positions in Washington, DC with the American Land Forum and the American Rivers Conservation Council. Although I didn’t mention it to Evelyn, the times were not the best to be looking for a federal job.

On March 26, 1982 I met with Evelyn and we talked of her interest in NPS and the work we did with parks, landscapes, communities and rivers. There are times when you feel fortunate to have someone walk into your office and be interested in your practice and the day we met was one of those occasions. Ms. Swimmer made an excellent first impression with her warm smile, easy conversational style of communicating, and her resume. The interview revealed her interests in landscape architecture, commitments to a brave career change, and a type of professionalism that I was frankly not use to.

The Division of Park and Resource Planning, in two years had gone from an office of promise and optimism to one laced with insecurity and hopelessness. The work of NPS was like nowhere else and when you could concentrate on the job, it was the best work there is. Unfortunately each day was punctured by some news about “Reductions in Force” budget cuts, competing priorities, and sharp ideological shifts. In 1969 Allen Stovall a professor at the University of Georgia once told me that “landscape architecture was 70% political”. Although I didn’t believe him then I surely did in 1982.

Near the end of my interview with Evelyn I borke the news that I didn’t have any vacancies at the moment but hoped that we could work together. Much to my surprise Evelyn indicated that she was willing to volunteer for a month-or-two and wondered if she could begin on May 1. I told her I would check her references and if they were supportive she could join our office.

That evening as I lingered over cut-rate imported beer at the Kyber Pass Pub I thought about Evelyn Swimmer and our meeting. It wasn’t so much that NPS had hired Evelyn that day, it was more like she decided that this is where she decided that she would practice land architecture. More than twenty years later, as I reflect on her time with us, I’m thankful for her decision.

Evelyn was a wonderful addition to the group of people that I worked with. She was professional, slightly understated in her approach, mature, giving, and motivated. She told me her interests were in reclamation, the Lower Schuylkill, historic preservation, design, and social science. We talked of how she might spend her time with NPS and how I would try to match her interests with our needs. Our needs were many and Evelyn’s appreciation for the work we did made it easier for me turn away from the divisive activities that permeated the regional office and threatened the Division’s fuute.

The Division was slowly going through a regeneration. When Evelyn joined us we had a handful of permanent staff, a secretary, and two other “volunteers”. Our staff levels had plumented from 15 to 3 and our Associate Regional Director was encouraging us to “seriously consider other job offers”. Those of us in the Division had decided to try to see if we could ride out this turmoil. Most of our work focused on river conservation and it had been the reason we joined public service. Each day it was love-hate relationship between the work and organizational politics. We used our projects to retain our focus and draw satisfaction and joy from our work.

The first project I asked Evelyn to help with was a study we were doing to help communities, help themselves to protect the Farmington River in CT and MA. I had been doing stay work on the project and needed help to meet requests being made by the communities and then-Congressman Toby Moffit. The river was beautiful and the community was very supportive of our assistance. It seemed like a good project to involve Evelyn in.

She quickly took on the task of preparing an assessment of the rivers values and issues, and developed a system to classify its landscapes. Evelyn quickly proved that she loved to learn about new places, was a more than able researcher, could express herself graphically, and was comfortable calling other experts for information on her analysis. She also responded to the short-deadlines that were the nature of our operation. We worked well together developing a method for river conservation and shared the hard-work, excitement and satisfaction of what would become a successful river protection project.

Unfortunately Evelyn and the other “volunteers” found working for free to be problematic. Her interest was stronger than ever, and her value to the unit was obvious. She had impressed her peers, our partners, and the managers who weren’t trying to dismantle our office. However, positions were impossible to find and I was desperate to find a way to keep Evelyn and the others working for NPS. Creativity was our only hope so I appealed to management and asked that our “volunteers” be hired through 30-60-day special need appointments.

The 60-day window gave me time to look for other ways to keep Evelyn and the others on the staff. In July I found a supportive administrative assistant who suggested the idea of using small contracts—under $5,000, and done through a University, to hire people to help do our office’s work. Although I was position broke I had cash that our headquarters office was providing to us to do state and local river conservation assistance. By the end of July, as Evelyn and I presented her Farmington River evaluation to community leaders throughout the watershed, we were able to put through a series of small contracts to keep her working for the NPS. People along the Farmington and in our office in Philadelphia knew by then that Evelyn was a keeper and there had to be a way for her to keep working with us as long as she wanted to.

MESSAGING + FRIENDS-RAISING AND PARTNERSHIPS = FUNDRAISING

MESSAGING + FRIENDS-RAISING AND PARTNERSHIPS = FUNDRAISING
November 17, 2005
J. Glenn Eugster
National Park Service

Messaging

WHAT IS IT? COMPUTER JARGON? BOUTIQUE HEADQUARTERS PROGRAM? SLICK MARKETING AND ADVERTISING?

SIMPLIST FORM:

COMMUNICATIONS FROM ONE GROUP TO ANOTHER

TOP-OF-THE-MIND CONSCIOUSNESS AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE NPS AND ITS WORK IN THE REGION AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY
IMPROVE COMMUNICATION TO INCREASE OPPORTUNITIES TO BUILD LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVE RELATIONSHIPS WITH COMMUNITIES AND THE INDIVIDUALS WHO LIVE NEAR OR VISIT THE NATIONAL PARKS OF THE NATION'S CAPITAL

2) THE BASIC THEME OR THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SOMETHING

CONNECTING WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF NPS

ATTEMPTS TO GET AT WHO WE ARE AND WHO WE THINK WE ARE?
PUBLIC DISCONNECT, HERE AND NATIONWIDE
379 NATIONAL PARKS OR 5 WESTERN PARKS, NATURAL WONDERS AND VACATION DESTINATIONS
NO AWARENESS OF PROGRAMS IN AND VALUE TO MANY COMMUNITIES


WHY DOES THIS MATTER?
PUBLICALLY SUPPORTED AGENCY
MORE THAN VACATION DESTINATIONS (ESSENTIAL VS NICE TO HAVE IF WE HAVE FUNDS)
PUBLIC SUPPORT AND INVOLVEMENT IMPORTANT TO ACHIEVING OUR MISSION


WHAT IS THE GOAL?: MOVE THE NATIONAL PARKS OF THE NATION'S CAPITAL TO THE FOREFRONT OF THEIR NEIGHBORS' CONSCIOUSNESS WHEN THEY THINK OF RECREATION, ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERSHIP, SUPERIOR EDUCATION, CULTURAL PRESERVATION, STEWARDSHIP, AND DIVERSE NATURAL RESOURCES--THE MYRIAD OF ELEMENTS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO AN EXCELLENT QUALITY OF LIFE.


WHAT IS THE FOCUS
OUR MATERIALS--SIGNS, PARK NEWSPAPERS, BUSINESS CARDS, ETC.

LOGO--ARROWHEAD USED INCONSISTENTLY

THIS PARK FOCUS--RARE CONNECTION TO OTHER PARKS, REGION AS A WHOLE OR NPS SYSTEM.

THE WAY WE COMMUNICATE WITH PEOPLE


WHAT ARE WE BE DOING?

WORKING WITH HEADQUARTERS, NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION TO:

UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE ALL MESSAGERS

"YOU CANNOT NOT COMMUNICATE"--PHIL MUSSELWHITE

STRESS THE NEED TO EMPHASIZE OUR SPECIAL PLACES; MEANINGFUL EXPERIENCES; AND PROTECTION

" THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE CARES FOR SPECIAL PLACES SAVED BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE SO THAT ALL MAY EXPERIENCE OUR HERITAGE".

TEST MESSAGES WITH NCR FOCUS GROUPS

DEVELOP CONSISTENT VISUAL IDENTITY

INCREASE PUBLIC INFORMATION CAPACITY

STYLE GUIDE UNDER DEVELOPMENT. TOOLS AND TRAINING TO BE PROVIDED

7) LINK TO FUNDRAISING EFFORTS

NOT ABOUT SPENDING MORE TIME OR MONEY BUT RATHER, LEARNING HOW TO DO THINGS WE ALREADY DO MORE EFFECTIVELY.

COMMUNICATE THE IMPORTANCE OF OUR PLACES AND STORIES IN A WAY THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS, FINDS COMPELLING, AND SEES AS AN INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE.


WHERE ARE WE?

CLUSTER STEERING COMMITTEE MET AND DISCUSSED:

a DESIGN A VISION. BROAD VISION OF WHO ARE AND WHAT WE DO. CLUSTER STEERING COMMITTEE TO TAKE THE LEAD--DOUG FARIS TO FOLLOW.

ICONS/ LOGOS FOR MESSAGING AND REVENUE GENERATION

a DEVELOPING A STRATEGIC MESSAGE FOR NCR PARKS.

a PARKS TO PURSUE MESSAGING OPPORTUNITIES (I.E. SIGNS, NEWSLETTERS, BROCHURES, ETC.) SHOW SAMPLES OF ADS FOR NCR PARKS AND THE WHITEHOUSE LIASION BROCHURE.

TRYING TO FUNCTION MORE AS A NETWORKED ORGANIZATION
Groups of companies, NGO's and governments are linking together for a common purpose or cause. These groups are often referred to as networks, clusters, constellations, virtual corporations, or Networked Organizations (NO's). These are groups of government or private sector organizations that are joined together in a larger overarching relationship. Although these networks are being developed in all areas of endeavor, they seem appropriate and especially strong in environmental governance.


a REVISE THE NCR MAP. HEADQUARTERS HAS PROVIDED US WITH A SMALL AMOUNT OF FUNDS. LL BEAN ASSISTANCE

a TIE NCR PARKS INTERPRETIVE STRATEGY TO MESSAGING EFFORT--FOR LONG-TERM MESSAGING.

a REVISE THE NCR WEB-SITE.

a NCF TRAINING CONDUCTED IN JULY

a LINK ALL OF THESE TO NCR FUNDRAISING EFFORT. GREATER WASHINGTON NATIONAL PARKS FUND.

CREATION OF FUNDS: TREES AND TRAILS; UMBRELLA FUND WITH 34 SUB-FUNDS

PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS: UNILEVER-LIPTON—HEALTHY PARKS-HEALTHY LIVING; NATIONAL CHERRY BLOSSOM FESTIVAL; US PARK POLICE HORSE MOUNTED UNIT; ETC.

Potomac Partnerships Report

Potomac Partnerships Report
National Park Service, National Capital Region,
June 25, 2002



















NPS Partnerships Office Purpose: To find ways to use partnerships to help National Park Service (NPS) park and program managers, and community leaders meet National, State and local goals and objectives within the Potomac River watershed and metropolitan Washington region.

Park Partnerships

a. Greater Washington National Parks (GWNP) Fund: Attended the May 7 Greater Washington National Parks Fund Parks Council Meeting. Discussions included proposed Trustees, revenue from soda machines, collaboration with LL Bean Co., and icons for messaging.

On May 22 Nancy Sturm, Executive Director of the Greater Washington National Parks Fund and the National Park Foundation (NPF) and Fran Mainella Director of the National Park Service (NPS) accepted a cash donation to plant Cherry trees along the Potomac River near the Tidal Basin and East Potomac Park. The donation was arranged by Kurt Kumagai, Board Member of the National Cherry Blossom Festival and made by the five largest Sushi Companies in the metropolitan Washington Region.

Provided a proposal to the GWNP Fund for the development of a Film for the Greater Washington National Parks. The film is being developed for NPS, through the “Proud Partner Program”, by the Discovery Channel and will be completed by the end of 2002.

b. NCR Tree & Shrub Replacement Fund: Met with Nancy Sturm and David Crowley of NPF, and Rob DeFeo, Regional Horticulturist for NPS-NCR, to revise the donor guidelines for the NCR Tree & Shrub Replacement Fund. Nancy Sturm and NPF is assisting NPS create an endowment for tree and shrub replacement for all twelve of the Greater Washington National Parks.

c. National Park Foundation Collaboration: Met with Jill Nicoll, Hedrick Belin, Edie Gonzalez and Jackie Lowey of NPF to discuss non-NPS opportunities for securing federal government funding to support National Park projects, activities and park partners.

d. National Park Foundation Program Implementation: Participated on a National NPF Advisory Committee to help design an implementation strategy for the Foundation’s new program areas. The new strategy targets NPF assistance to NPS for education, interpretive services, volunteers, and outreach. The effort is intended to establish priority areas for fundraising assistance and link NPF’s program strategies to targeted outcomes. For additional information on the NPF program strategies contact the Foundation or this office.

e. Discovery Film: Participated in a teleconference call with representatives from the Discovery Channel about a film they will do for NPS and the Greater Washington National Parks Fund on the National Capital Region Parks. The film is in response to a proposal that NCR prepared with NPF last summer. The filming will be done in September and the film is expected to be completed by the end of December.

f. East Coast Partnerships Seminar: Nearly 300 persons participated in the May 22, 23 and 24 East Coast In-Park Partnership Seminar. Hosted by NPS-National Capital Region, park and park-partnership leaders from the Northeast, Southeast, National Capital, Inter Mountain, Pacific West, and Midwest Regions travel to the Channel Inn Hotel, selected sites within Greater Washington National Parks and the “Cherry Blossom River Boat” to share information on the art of partnering and fundraising.

The Seminar included remarks by NPS Director Mainella, a panel session of “Hill” appropriation staff leaders, a panel session with the Eastern NPS Regional Directors, remarks by NPS Deputy Director Murphy, public and private fundraising and partnership experts, and closing remarks by the Assistant Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks Craig Manson. The Seminar activities included three case study field trips and four walking tours, a Park Partners Reception—attended by more than 225 persons, on the Potomac River.

The Seminar sessions were video-taped and will be available for partnership training in the future. Should you be interested in copies of the presentations contact this office.

The event was also used to sign an East Coast Partnership Agreement between the Southeast, Northeast and National Capital Regions and the National Partnership Office to continue to share information, collaborate and work together on selected projects and activities. A copy of the East Coast Partnership Agreement is attached. For further information about how your organization can join the East Coast Partnership contact Glenn Eugster at: glenn_eugster@nps.gov

e. Save the Jaeger Property: The appraisal of the Jaeger property is being re-examined, at the request of the owners, to make sure that it has established fair value for the property. NPS, the National Park Trust and local governments are seeking to match federal funds provided by Congress to acquire the property for parkland. The City of Greenbelt is preparing a land acquisition proposal for State of Maryland funds.

f. Arlington House Save America’s Treasures: Met with Superintendent Coleman of the George Washington Memorial Parkway, Dr. Talmadge Williams and ??? to discuss collaborative efforts related to the Arlington House and African American Heritage. NPS and private groups are working with the Greater Washington National Parks Fund to match a federal grant that was made for the Arlington House through the “Save America’s Treasure’s” initiative.

g. Green Infrastructure: The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG) and NPS held a Green Infrastructure Forum on April 2 in Washington, DC. Bob Yaro, President of the Regional Plan Association of the NY-NJ-CT Region was the keynote speaker. Following Yaro’s remarks, which highlighted his region’s “Greensward Plan”, a panel of regional experts discussed green infrastructure activities in the metropolitan Washington area. David Burke of MD’s Department of Natural resources discussed their “Greenprint Program”; Todd Bolton of Fairfax County discussed their green infrastructure effort; and Sheila Hogan of Casey Tree Endowment and Mark Buscaino of the District of Columbia discussed local efforts to protect and maintain the City’s trees and tree cover.

NPS and COG have completed and formally approved a five-year Cooperative Agreement, to help support the Green Infrastructure project.

Discussed a collaborative effort with the Center for Neighborhood Technology and the Urban ????? that would focus on Government Accounting Standards for green infrastructure.

Met with Nanine Bilski, Executive Director of the America the Beautiful Fund to discuss a workshop in the fall focusing on community-lead “Freedom Gardens”.

Met with Anne Pearson of the Alliance for Community Education about collaborating on community-lead forums and workshops for the Green Infrastructure Demonstration project.

Discussed future green infrastructure workshops and forums with: Leslie Sauer from Andropogon Associates; Katrin Sholz-Barth of HOK; and Lee Epstein of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.


Plans for a second Green Infrastructure Forum, on Green Infrastructure Mapping, are underway. For additional information on the Green Infrastructure effort contact this office or Brian LeCouteur of COG at (202) 962-3393.

h. Sustainability Fair: The first annual NPS Sustainability Fair—“Sustaining America’s Special Places: Your Parks, Your Communities” was held on May 3-4, 2002 on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. More than 1,000 persons attended the Fair, braving high winds and some Spring showers, to listen to twenty speakers and visit fifty exhibits on sustainable practices. Exhibits featured sustainability work going on in the Greater Washington national Parks and in Potomac River watershed communities. The Fair featured electric-hybrid vehicles, native plants, smart growth, youth education, non-vehicular transportation, green roofs, recycling, and green buildings.

Speakers included NPS Associate Director Dick Ring, Kateri Callahan of the Electric Vehicles Association of the Americas, Ron O’Brien of Sylvania, Don Edwards of Justice & Sustainability Associates, Brenda Richardson, Jim Shulman and Warren Flint of Sustainable DC, J.R. Pope of the West Virginia Department of Parks, Superintendent Adrienne Applewaithe Coleman of Rock Creek Park, ???? of the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, and others.

Met with the NCR Sustainable Practices team on June 5 to discuss plans for the May 2-3, 2003 Sustainability Fair on the National Mall. A proposal for the 2003 Fair is being prepared for discussion with the Regional Director. For further information about sponsorship, exhibition space or attendance, contact this office.

g. NPS Partnership Council Meets in Washington, DC: The newly created NPS Partnerships Council met in Washington, DC on May 20-21 to develop a Charter, vision, and an action plan for the group and its activities. The purpose of the Council is to help NPS leaders guide and assist existing and future partnership activities. The Council includes representatives from the NPS National Partnerships Office, headquarter programs, regional offices, parks, Service Centers, and the National Park Foundation.

The Council Charter has been proposed to the NPS National Leadership Council, and the Director for approval. If approved, the Council will hold its next meeting on the West Coast on ???????. Additional meetings will be held by teleconference between now and the meeting in the fall.

The Council will be Co-Chaired, for the first year, by the National Partnership Office and the National Capital Region. The Intermountain Region will serve as the “back-up” Regional Office Co-Chair, for the first year, and Co-Chair the second year.

A summary of the Partnership Council Meeting is available from this office. For more information on the NPS Partnerships Council contact this office, or Chris Neiwold of the National Partnership Office; or Peggy Halderman of the Intermountain Regional Office.


h. NCR Park Superintendent’s Meeting: Briefed NCR Superintendents and Regional Office management on the status of partnership activities at the May 7-8, 2002 meeting in Hagerstown, MD. During the meeting the superintendents elected Superintendent Doug Faris of CHOH to serve as the NCR park representative on the NPS Partnership Council. Superintendent Briggs of PHNST is alternate.

i. General Accounting Office Research on Partnerships: Assisted NCR’s Concessions Office with a response to a request for information about park partner organizations


Potomac American Heritage River Initiative (AHRI)

a. Potomac River Day 2002: Plans are underway for the annual Potomac River Day celebration. The celebration will be held on July 27, 2002 at Piscataway Park in MD. This year’s event will include awards for local success, announcement of the new Potomac AHRI River Navigator, recognition of federal and non-federal accomplishments, as well as plans for the future.

b. 3rd Annual Nation’s River Bass Tournament Held: The Friend’s of the Potomac, and a variety of local governments, nonprofit organizations, corporations and private sportsmen’s groups held the 3rd Annual Nation’s River Bass Tournament on June 15. Hosted by the National Park Service’s George Washington Memorial Parkway and the regenerated Potomac River, this year’s event brought more than one hundred and fifty Bass-Masters, students from Delaware, and river conservation advocates together to celebrate and enjoy the benefits of state and federal clean water efforts.

The Friend’s held a reception at the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill on June 14 to kick-off this year’s event and closed the Tournament with an awards ceremony. Thirty-five boats with eight-one fishermen, students and advocates competed for an array of donated prizes. An employee of L.L. Bean, from their Tyson’s Corner store, won the prize for catching the largest Small mouth bass of the Tournament. All of the fish that were caught were released after the weigh-in.

Plans for next year’s Tournament are underway. For information about sponsorship of or participation in the 4th Annual Nation’s River Bass Tournament contact the Friends of the Potomac at (202)467-4000.

c. Friends of the Potomac to Hire Executive Director: The Board of the Friends of the Potomac continues to search to fill their vacant Executive Director position. The position is being advertised in the Washington Post’s employment section on Sunday June 23 and Job Site the following week. Interested individuals should contact the Friends office at (202) 467-4000 for further information.


d. River Navigator Search Completed: The Friends of the Potomac and the National park Service have selected a new Potomac AHRI River Navigator. The nominee is a federal employee with considerable experience in community-based partnerships and heritage. Arrangements are being made to detail the new Navigator to the NPS with an anticipated announcement to be made on July 27 at Potomac River Day.


e. Meeting with Friends Board Chair: Met with Lynn Brownley, newly elected Chair of the Board of the Friends of the Potomac on May 31 to discuss the Potomac AHRI and partnering with NPS. Discussions included space, the existing Cooperative and Task Agreements, the Youth Education Project, status of the River Navigator, and collaboration with CEQ and the AHRI Task Force.

h. Potomac Heritage Tourism Initiative: Discussions continue with the Potomac Heritage Partnership about a Cooperative Agreement focused on heritage tourism, the “Culture of Water Project”, and other Potomac watershed activities.

i. Potomac River Center: The General Services Administration (GSA) is working with NPS and the Friends of the Potomac to arrange for a new office for the Potomac River Center. Current space, held by NPS and being used by the Friends of the Potomac and their member organizations at 17th & K Street, NW, has been sold and will be used for another purpose and will be vacated in September 2002.

GSA has identified possible space for the Center in Northern Virginia.
NPS will work with Kevin Miller of the Friends Board to visit the Northern Virginia space, and if appropriate, develop an agreement for the new office.

Chesapeake Bay Program

a. Director’s Briefing on the Bay: Participated in a briefing for Director Mainella on NPS Chesapeake Bay activities.


Potomac Urban Watershed Management Exchange

a. US-German Exchange Held: A team of Potomac leaders, including Regional Hydrologist, Doug Curtis from NPS-NCR, Lynn Brownley from the Friends of the Potomac, Judy Noritake from The Wilderness Society, and Uwe Brandeis from the District of Columbia, visited Germany last week to study urban watershed "best management practices.

b. Lessons Learned Forum Planned: Met with Jayne Daly and Virginia Kasinki of the Glynwood Center to discuss the design of a “Lessons Learned Forum” to share and discuss the U.S.-Germany Exchange experience with the public and private leaders from the Potomac River watershed.

For further information on the US-Germany Potomac Exchange, or plans for the Lessons Learned Forum, contact Virginia Kasinski, Program Manager, Training & Support, Glynwood Center, PO Box 157, Cold Spring NY 10516. By telephone: 845 265-3338 Ext. 125. By e-mail: http://www.glynwood.org

Heritage Areas

a. National Trust Meeting: Presented a status report on National Heritage Areas, at the request of Brenda Barrett of the NPS National Heritage Areas Office, at a meeting organized by the National Trust and Maryland Trust for Historic Preservation in Annapolis, MD.


Miscellaneous Assistance

A variety of consultations and meetings were held during this period including:

May

· Discussions with City of Greenbelt, MD, National Park Trust, National Park Foundation, College Park Friends School, and NPS staff regarding efforts to acquire the Jaeger property at Greenbelt Park. · Met with Anne White of Friends of the Potomac to discuss nation’s River Bass Tournament, space for the Potomac River Center, Potomac River Day, the Youth Education Project and the Potomac Calendar. · Held discussions with Jeff Bernstein of the Department’s Solicitor’s Office regarding soda machine revenue generation. · Met with Director Mainella, Associate Director Stevenson and Chris Niewold of the NPS Partnerships Office on May 13 to discuss the NPS partnership Council. · Met with Kurt Kumagai, Board Member of the National Cherry Blossom Festival to discuss donations to the Greater Washington National Parks Fund. · Met with Allan Comp of the Office of Surface Mining to discuss the Potomac AHRI. · Met with Fran Eargle of EPA to discuss possible NCR involvement in the National Watershed Roundtable. · Discussion with Gail Hendrickson of the Electric Vehicles Association of the Americas about NPS feedback on the performance of the Ford “Think Vehicles”. • Discussions with Mary Costa, Monica Seyes, and Johanna White of GSA to discuss office space for the Friends of the Potomac. • Discussion with Tom Downs of Patton Boggs & Associates regarding a proposal for Fort Foote and the National Environmental Policy Institute. • Meeting with Sue Hansen and Bill Line of NPS regarding development of a Greater Washington national Parks display for an International Tourism Conference in London, England in November 2002.• Facilitated the May 28 St. Leonard, MD. Community Vision Meeting. • Meeting with Georgina Sanger of ????? regarding a proposal to create a Trust for the National Mall.



June

· Provided a status of partnership activities at monthly NCR Squad Meeting. · Discussed the proposed Trust for the National Mall with Ann Bowman Smith, Acting Superintendent of the White House Liaison, Arnold Goldstein, Superintendent of National Capital Parks-Central, Nancy Sturm, Executive Director of Greater Washington National Parks Fund, and NCR Regional Office leadership. · Provided a status report on partnership activities at the NCR General Staff Meeting on June 5. · Met with Harry Belin and Scott Gerloff of Potomac Heritage Partnership regarding the Potomac AHRI. · Discussed tracking and monitoring of the NPS partnership Council efforts with Associate Director Stevenson, Peggy Halderman of Inter Mountain region, Chris Niewold and Jennifer Mummart of the National partnership Office, and Ellen Cull, consultant to the Council. • Prepared a summary of a paper from a presentation at the Fall 2001 “Reconstructing Conservation Conference” for the NER Conservation Study Institute. · Met with Erik Meyers of the Environmental Law Institute regarding a fall field trip on Four Mile Run, Potomac River access and possible future collaboration. • Met with Fran Eargle of EPA to outline a possible approach for a National Watershed Roundtable Meeting. • Met with Hedrick Belin of the National Park Foundation regarding the Potomac AHRI. • Responded to a request from Amos Ilan, who is working for NER on the design of the World Trade Center Memorial, regarding visitor information. • Discussed with Deanna Wheeler possible assistance to the Nanjemoy Vision Project. • Discussed with Jeff Berstein of the Department’s Solicitor’s Office, his review of an agreement between NPS and the State of WV for possible transportation funds for Harpers Ferry. • Discussed a possible collaboration with the Northeast Region and Kronsport to secure hybrid electric vehicles for NPS park units.• Discussed with Brent O’Neill of NPS-GWMP a potential detail. • Participated, by teleconference call, in a Friends of the Potomac Board Meeting. • Participated in a telephone interview with Mary Means as part of an evaluation of the International Countryside Stewardship Exchange.



Upcoming Meetings & Events

June 2002
22-28 National Park Week
25 Teleconference call with friends of the Potomac regarding plans for Potomac River Day.
25 Meeting with the Greater Washington national Parks Fund Parks Council, Manassas, VA.
26 Meeting with Greater Washington National Park Fund Trustees.
27 Meeting with the Friends of the Potomac and America the Beautiful to inspect a potential location for the Potomac River Center.
28 Meeting with NCR leaders to discuss the proposed Trust for the National Mall.

July 2002
1 NCR Squad Meeting
1 Meeting with Janet Bearden and Warren Flint of Sustainable DC, Washington, DC
9 NCR Monitoring Workshop, Shepardstown, WV
16 The Wilderness Society Potomac River Meeting, Washington, DC
22, 23, 24 NPS Heritage Areas Meeting, Denver, CO
27 Potomac River Day, Piscataway National Park, Accokeek, MD

August 2002
14 National Park Foundation Program Strategy Advisory Committee Meeting

September 2002
13 Friends of the Potomac Board Meeting



Good & Reads

b Harnik, Peter, Inside City Parks, 2000, Urban Land Institute, Washington, D.C. 214 pp.


Something to CROW about:
a Nation’s River Bass Tournament: The 3rd Annual Nation’s River Bass Tournament was a great success on June 14. Thanks and a “tip-of-the-hat” to the Friends of the Potomac-—the leader of the effort, thirty-five sportsmen that made their boats, insights and expertise available, the private interests that contributed their money and time to hold the celebration, the Young Marines students that traveled from Dover, Delaware to participate, and the staff and management from the George Washington Memorial Parkway for hosting the event.

a Donation for Cherry Trees: A partnership between the Cherry Blossom Festival, the Greater Washington National Parks Fund, the National Park Service, and five major Sushi companies, has resulted in a donation to plant new Cherry trees along the Potomac River. The donation underscores the relationship, and importance, between trees, tourism, and the unique qualities that make up the Potomac River area.


For further information contact:

Glenn Eugster, Assistant Regional Director, Partnerships Office, NPS-NCR, 1100 Ohio Drive, SW, Room 350, Washington, DC 20242. By telephone call (202) 619-7492. By fax: (202) 619-7220. By e-mail: glenn_eugster@nps.gov



Partnerships Office JGE/NPS/NCR/DC/06/24/02

Greening Growth: A Regional Action Plan

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE
Prepared for Greening Growth: A Regional Action Plan
Alliance for Sustainable Communities
J. Glenn Eugster, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water—Policy Office, Washington, D.C.
12/6/99

SUSTAINABILITY EQUATION
SDCG Program: Sustainability?

Meet multiple objectives simultaneously—an equation.

Issues: Development process/ natural resources residual

Healthful/ healthy communities require a healthy relationship between people and environmental (human ecology is the approach we use to understand the relationship)

PCSD: Metropolitan and Rural Strategies Task Force; Green Infrastructure Approach. Evolved from Chesapeake Bay Program Priorities for Land, Growth & Stewardship and Metropolitan Ecosystems Action Strategy in EPA—Swati Sheladia research.


THE ENVIRONMENTAL LEG
Within a sustainability context, what are the environmental values?

Values and functions: Physical, biological and natural; also social, psychological/ sacred. Place-based context.

How does the environmental piece get integrated into the sustainability equation? Current approach often “Tyranny of Small Solutions” and natural resources which are taken out of a landscape or ecological context.

“Other Infrastructure” Idea. Systems approach to determine what is important; essential; absolutely necessary for a healthful/ healthy community. Dwight D. Eisenhower had
something when he looked at the Nation’s road system and said we need a system of interstate highways!

Green Lunacy you say? A return to the wetlands delineation manual? A disciple of Ian McHarg and a believer of environmental determinism?


EXAMPLES
The answers are on the ground and in the work of landowners; developers; local government officials; land trusts; and State governments.

Let’s look closer:

Private Landowners Master Planning: Natural Lands Trust Work
Individual property owner—Andy Johnson; Private Landowner Master Plans
Cluster of property owners—Fortescue Glades, NJ
Subdivision process—Randal Arendt and PA Growing Greener

2. Planned Unit Developments: Woodlands Development Corporation, Texas

Small to Medium Size Cities:
West Eugene Wetlands Plan, Oregon
Eckernforde Landscape Plan, Eckernforde, Germany

4. Watershed Strategies:
Charles River Non-Structural Flood Loss Reduction Strategy, Charles River Watershed Association and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Boston, Massachusetts
Lower Potomac Watershed: Building Green Infrastructure, Trust for Public Land, Virginia and Maryland
Catskill Mountain-New York City Water Supply Protection Strategy, New York
Nine-Mile Run Greenway, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

5. Metropolitan Regions:
Toronto Portlands; Toronto Waterfront Regeneration Trust, Toronto, Canada
Stuttgart Clean Air Flow Zones, Verband Region, Stuttgart, Germany
Emscher Park Region, Kommunalverband Ruhrgebiet,
Rhur Valley, Essen, Germany


6. States:
Florida Greenways Plan; Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee, Florida
Maryland Natural Infrastructure; Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, Maryland


CLOSING

For further Information:

Contact J. Glenn Eugster at (202)619-7492 or by e-mail: glenn_eugster@nps.gov until 1/28/2000 and eugster.glenn@epamail.epa.gov afterward.

Also, see “Green Infrastructure Tool Kit” at the U.S. Forest Service Cooperative Forestry web site: http://www.fs.fed.us/spf/coop/

Trails Forever Forum

--Save the Date--


Trails Forever Forum





This event is one in a series of Trails Forever Forums to discuss the planning, design, restoration, maintenance, interpretation, protection, use and enjoyment of hiking, biking, horseback riding, and water trails within, and connecting to, the Greater Washington National Parks.
Featured at this forum will be:

A brief overview of the National Park Service’s Trails Forever Campaign, the Greater Washington National Parks Fund and the National Park Foundation.

Remarks by Trish Zenobi, Marketing Director of Lipton® Tea on the Unilever/Lipton Tea and the National Park Service’s Healthy Parks-Healthy Living Program which is designed to highlight the vitality, wellness and outdoor recreation benefits inherent in National Parks.

Remarks by Bob and Barbara Lamborn of Chesapeake Country Cycling of Maryland on bicycling, fitness, and positive life styles, and their design of a 2,500-mile bicycle route network connecting trails, parks, forests, fish and wildlife lands and other sites throughout the Delmarva Peninsula in Delaware, Maryland and Virginia.

A question and answer session will follow the remarks. Refreshments will be served.



To attend: Please RSVP with Glenn Eugster via e-mail at glenn_eugster@nps.gov. Or call NPS at (202) 619-7492. Please respond by no later than September 16, 2005.


For Directions: Please visit:
http://www.mwcog.org/contact/directions/default.asp








About Healthy Parks-Healthy Living: Healthy Parks-Healthy Living
is a program of the National Park Service designed to raise
public awareness of the recreation resources inherent in America’s
National Parks and to promote wellness and vitality. The
program, which supports the Greater Washington National Park’s
Trails Forever Campaign and other urban National Park initiatives
across the country, is helping to raise awareness for the
National Park Service’s “daily minimum recreation requirement™.”
Healthy Parks-Healthy Living is made possible in part by a grant
from the National Park Foundation through the generous support of
Lipton® Tea, a brand of Unilever, a Proud Partner of America’s
National Parks.

About Bob and Barbara Lamborn: Bob and Barbara Lamborn are bicyclists, writers, speakers and operators of Chesapeake Country Cycling. Since they began cycling in the summer of 1984, the Lamborns have ridden their bicycles over 48,000 miles in 42 states and 10 foreign countries. Bob is a certified cyclist and cycling instructor by The League of American Bicyclists and served as Advisor for the League’s Effective Cycling Program for Maryland and Delaware. Bob and Barbara have conducted cycling clinics and workshops and have designed a 2,500-mile bicycle route network connecting selected parks, fish and wildlife areas, forests and other ecological points of interest throughout Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia’s Delmarva Peninsula. They also assisted with the publication of the Great Delmarva Bicycling Trail.

About Trails Forever: The Greater Washington National Parks are
working to strengthen the connection between the communities of
Greater Washington and more than 100 National Park sites in the
region by raising private funds, creating partnerships and making
strategic grants to parks and their partners. The Trails Forever
Campaign invites area citizens to reacquaint themselves with the
717 miles of National Park trails down the road, across the
street or around the corner. More than 88,000 acres of parkland
offer residents and visitors hundreds of activities from biking,
hiking, paddling, horseback riding, and volunteering, and 250
miles of waterfront in 14 parks.

About the National Park Foundation: The National Park Foundation
(NPF) is the Congressionally-chartered nonprofit partner of
America’s National Parks. The mission of the National Park
Foundation is to strengthen the enduring connection between the
American people and their National Parks by raising private
funds, making strategic grants, creating innovative partnerships
and increasing public awareness.

Green Roofs and Community Greens

SAVE THIS DATE
FOR

Green Roofs & Community Greens



This event is the 13th in a series of Green Infrastructure Forums and Workshops to discuss park, forest cover, open space, and recreational land approaches within the metropolitan Washington region. Featured at this forum will be:

h Remarks by guest speakers Katrin Scholz-Barth, civil engineer and educator from Washington, DC, and Kate Herrod, Director of Community Greens of Arlington, VA and

Ms. Scholz-Barth will provide an introduction to green roofs and the local benefits of this approach. Katrin will tie green roofs into the green infrastructure program, identifying buildings in metropolitan DC area suitable to retrofit with some concrete outcomes and brief case studies.

Ms. Herrod will discuss the work of Community Greens and how she is being a catalyst for creating community greens in residential neighborhoods. Kate will describe how she is working with, and looking for, developers, public officials, and other community leaders who are interested in piloting the Community Green approach in their cities and neighborhoods.

h A brief status report on the "Metropolitan Washington Green
Infrastructure Demonstration Project” partnership including news about the Green Infrastructure Conference being planned for September 2004.


Background Information:

Katrin Scholz-Barth is a Washington, DC-based civil engineer and a nationally recognized expert in Green Roof technology. She helped this design phenomenon gain momentum in the United States and advocates its use as an innovative stormwater management tool to ease stormwater permitting and as a tool to earn multiple LEED credits when pursuing a U.S. Green Building certification.



Katrin Scholz-Barth leads efforts in ecological planning and design. Her work demonstrates how Green Roofs can become an integral, performing and cost-effective building element to reduce their environmental footprint and to protect waterways while increasing biodiversity and quality of living in urban areas. She teaches "Ecological Landscape Design for Watershed Protection" a graduate course at the University of Pennsylvania.

Katrin was the former Director of Sustainable Design at the HOK Planning Group--one of the world's largest architectural planning firms. Her work was featured in 2003 at the "Potomac International Urban Watershed Management Exchange at the Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany in Washington, DC.


Kate Herrod is the Director of the Northern Virginia-based "Community Greens: Shared Parks in Urban Blocks".
http://www.communitygreens.org/

Community Greens is a partnership between Ashoka: Innovators for the Public and The National Trust for Historic Preservation. The mission of her organization is to catalyze the development of community greens in residential neighborhoods across the United States.

Kate has worked in both the for-profit and non-profit worlds. Prior to establishing her own consulting practice, Ms. Herrod served as the Deputy Director of Development for The Nature Conservancy, overseeing Planned Giving, Trade Lands, Conservation Fundraising, as well as Foundation and Corporate Support. She was also Vice President of commercial real estate at Citibank, Chemical Bank, and Security Pacific Bank in New York City and San Francisco where she underwrote large, commercial real estate projects. Her consulting clients have included the California Center for Land Recycling (formerly a division of The Trust for Public Land), the International Sustainable Development Foundation, Ashoka: Innovators for the Public, and the Cameroon Conservation Foundation.


TO RSVP AND FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Contact either Brian LeCouteur via e-mail at: blecouteur@mwcog.org, or Glenn Eugster at: Glenn_Eugster@nps.gov or call COG (202) 962-3393 or NPS (202) 619-7492.

Directions:
The Nannie J. Lee Memorial Recreation Center is west of US 1/ Patrick Street just before Route 1 crosses Interstate-395 near the Wilson Bridge. From US 1, going south, make a right on Gibbon Street and then turn left on Fayette Street and Jefferson Street.
The forum will be in the auditorium. For more information:
http://www.tapestrytheatre.com/njlee.html

Securing the Region’s Green Infrastructure

“Securing the Region’s Green Infrastructure:
The Challenge, The Tools”
September 9, 2004
12 noon to 1:45 p.m.

Sponsored by the Environmental Law Institute Forum
1616 P Street, NW
Washington, DC

Twelve Things We Could Do for Green Infrastructure in Metropolitan Washington, DC
Glenn Eugster, Assistant Regional Director, Partnerships Office, National Capital Region, National Park Service

Background

As we look at the metropolitan Washington, DC region, its watersheds, cities and communities, and the condition of our parks, open spaces and recreation areas, we need to ask ourselves four questions.

1. What is the current park, open space and recreation area situation? (i.e. How much green infrastructure is your metropolitan, or micropolitan, region losing per day?)

What alternatives are possible?

What can cities and other government agencies and
private sector organizations do to protect, manage and use parks, open space, recreation areas and sustainable practices?

4. Most importantly, what are we, as individuals, prepared to do about the current situation?

In metropolitan Washington, DC Congress, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, NPS-National Capital Region, and others, decided to create a “Green Infrastructure Demonstration Project” to respond to the situation, explore alternatives and take action. (http://www.mwcog.org/committee/committee/)

During this two-year effort we learned:

h Metropolitan Washington DC will lose 28 to 43 acres of open space everyday from 1997 to 2020.

h Normal metropolitan growth does not provide open space although land is abundant. Parks, open space and recreation areas are often the residual product of the development process.

h Experience reveals that parks, open space and recreation area planning, protection, management and use should emphasize the total green space system, rather than individual isolated parks, natural areas, greenways, trails and recreation areas.

h A green infrastructure approach to parks, open space and recreation areas is a way to recognize land for it’s ecological, recreational, cultural, economic, and conservation values and functions. It seeks to prevent, rather than ameliorate, the degradation of natural lands, air, water, the countryside, parks, recreation areas, farms and forests. Green infrastructure can be used to clean land, water, and air, replenish the human spirit, and help to sustain and regenerate the economy.

The project partnership involved seven primary organizations and more than 600 representatives from various local, states, regional, and federal government agencies and private groups and businesses. It used a variety of forums, workshops, technical assistance, and status reports to share information and communicate.

The following list of twelve alternatives has been prepared based on input from the participants in the demonstration project. These actions offer promise for “Securing the Region’s Green Infrastructure".


Things We Could Do

Build an integrated GIS green infrastructure database.
The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments "Green Mapping Forum" idea was developed to catalogue existing mapping efforts in the region. COG is planning a forum this fall.
National Capital Planning Commission, Casey Trees and DC are putting together a data atlas that would be the first step in a "state of the District" report for a spring symposium. Basically, it's pulling together all the data that various groups have collected, getting agreement on what we have, and figuring out what else needs to be developed.

Establish locally relevant indicators to monitor green
infrastructure gains and loses.
The Chesapeake Bay Program has a system of indicators that are used to monitor the progress of the Bay protection and restoration effort. The Bay indicators could be used as a model for parks, open space and recreation areas.
The Trust for Public Land has identified "Measurables to Determine the Excellence of an Urban Park System". Their recently published survey includes Washington, DC parks.

Put a face on green space loses!
Analysis reveals that we lose somewhere between 28-43 acres of green space per day in the metropolitan Washington, DC region and this trend will continue at least until 2020. Yet, there is rarely a public outcry. Loses need to be converted from abstract statistics to more personal-values. Loses need to be documented and publicized using a "poster-child" approach that draws attention to the losses and encourages action to prevent further loss of green space.

Eat your green space!
Do your food purchases help to protect the scenery? Does the money you spend on food benefit local producers? Do our purchasing practices encourage closer links between the consumer and the local products they buy? Are there ways that we can recognize the need to encourage and sustain vital rural agricultural and fisheries industries now, and for future generations?
The Local Food Project at Airlie, VA. works to link food buyers and producers in the same geographic region.
The Business Alliance For Local Living Economies (BALLE), with a chapter in Baltimore, helps promote locally owned independent businesses through marketing, networking and advocacy, and sharing information about socially and environmentally responsible business practices.

Showcase and demonstrate on the ground success.
Many leaders have interest in learning more about green infrastructure approaches being used in the metropolitan region. Close-to-home success stories are a way to demonstrate the benefits of green infrastructure and highlight the implementation process. The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments has designed a 13-stop tour of various examples of existing "best Management Practices (BMP's)" that are helping to sustain our green infrastructure.

Equip all advocates and decision-makers with basic green
infrastructure protection, restoration, management, funding tools.
As leaders respond to public concerns about the loss of green infrastructure communities are increasingly interested in focusing on tools and solutions to the loss of open space and the types of open space or green infrastructure that are most needed for a healthy community and region. Jim McElfish of the Environmental Law Institute is the lead author of a new ELI guide -"Nature Friendly Ordinances" - that is one of the sources of information that people can use to help themselves save and protect green space.


Build a network of green infrastructure practitioners,
at all levels of the government and the private sector, with depth and breadth.
The future of the region's green infrastructure depends on people. Knowing who the key decision-makers, practitioners, community advocates, subject matters experts, public land managers, and civic associations leaders are can help protect and manage green space. The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments has produced a printable version of a "Who's Who in Green Infrastructure" directory" for regional community parks, green space and recreational agencies and organizations. The directory lists the names, addresses, telephone, telefax and e-mail contact information numbers of the most important green infrastructure contacts in the region. The directory is indexed by green infrastructure category and will be accessible on COG’s website through a download format.

Create a public-private Metropolitan Washington Green
Space/ Green Infrastructure Alliance.
The metropolitan Washington, DC region doesn't lack government agencies or private groups with an interest or a responsibility for green space. Hundreds of organizations and agencies are involved in making decisions that affect the region's green infrastructure. Unfortunately no one group or government speaks for green infrastructure or all the green space interests.
The San Francisco Bay communities in California created a Greenbelt Alliance "to make the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area a better place to live by protecting the region's greenbelt and improving the livability of its cities and towns". Since 1958 they have worked in partnership with diverse coalitions on public policy development, advocacy and education.


9. Continue to afford leaders with an open and non-judgmental platform to discuss green infrastructure status and trends, techniques, programs, etc.
Nearly 500 community, government and private sector leaders participated in a series of green infrastructure forums over the last two years. Participants indicated that the forums had value and were a no-decision-making platform for discussing common interests and innovative solutions to regional problems and opportunities. The forums proved to be a way to showcase local experts and those from afar.

Link together related green infrastructure campaigns
The region's green space agenda has many related but seemingly disconnected pieces to it. Different agendas often draw energy, resources and attention away from the common aspects of green infrastructure and blur priorities. Different but related green space campaigns for parks, green roofs, low-impact development, invasive plants, submerged aquatic vegetation, greenways, cultural landscapes, forest buffers, wildlife habitat, wetlands protection, and trail corridors, would benefit from being linked as part of a larger green infrastructure system.

Support and participate in regional green
infrastructure events.
Success is often a state-of-mind and our green space work is often influenced by the perception of what is going on. Periodic green infrastructure events, such as conferences, workshops, forums, or special activity events (i.e. tree plantings, etc.) are a way to create synergy and send a message to service providers that things are happening in metropolitan Washington. As partners convene these gatherings it is important to show support and participate.

For example, DC will host the Third Annual "Greening Rooftops for Sustainable Communities Conference, Awards, & Trade Show" on May 4-6th, 2005 in Washington, D.C. This event will bring together experts from diverse fields across North America, and around the world. The conference will raise awareness of the many benefits of green roofs, share new research findings and provide information on the latest designs, implementation techniques and products. It will be a great opportunity to broaden networks and develop new business contacts while building more sustainable cities through green roof implementation.

Celebrate green infrastructure.
Panel discussions, meetings, conferences, reports and resolutions don't mean anything unless they lead to actions that make a difference. Creating opportunities to celebrate the many varied values and functions of green infrastructure is essential to the green infrastructure movement. It creates a connection with the places that need protection and management and the people that care about them.
For example, events such as the Potomac Conservancy's "Growing Native: Get Nuts for Clean Water" effort, the Committee of 100's special "Tour of the Fort Circle Parks-Civil War Defenses of Washington" and Washington Park's and People's "Washington Ridge Crossing" walk are but a few of the ways that people are taking action, sharing success and celebrating the values of green infrastructure.

For Further Information: For information on the Metropolitan Washington Green Infrastructure Demonstration Project and this list of alternatives contact: Glenn Eugster at NPS, National Capital Region, 1100 Ohio Drive, SW, Room 350, Washington, DC 20242. By telephone call (202) 619-7492. By e-mail write: glenn_eugster@nps.gov

Virtual Green Infrastructure Tour

Dear Colleagues,

The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments and the National Park Service have prepared the attached “Virtual Green Infrastructure Tour of the Washington Metropolitan Area” The tour is available at in the attached file and at:

http://www.mwcog.org/environment/green/

The tour provides residents and visitors with fourteen examples of existing best management practices that are helping to sustain our local green infrastructure and protect and restore our natural and living resources.

The Virtual Green Infrastructure Tour was developed as part of the Metropolitan Washington Green Infrastructure Demonstration Project, a collaborative effort between the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments and the National Park Service’s National Capital Region. For additional information contact me or Brian LeCouteur of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments at(202)962-3393 or by e-mail at: blecouteur@mwcog.org

The State of the Metropolitan Washington, DC Region’s Green Infrastructure

The State of the Metropolitan Washington, DC Region’s Green Infrastructure
February 3, 2005

Forum Summary

A forum on the "State of the Metro-Washington DC Region's Green
Infrastructure" is planned for June 6 and 7, 2005 in Washington, DC by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments and National Park Service, National Capital Region. The forum will be held at 777 North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, DC.

This event will be a two-day forum focusing on the status and trends of green infrastructure in the Metropolitan Washington, DC area. Presenters will speak to the condition of green infrastructure resources and on the local and private sector efforts to protect, restore, manage, conserve, and enjoy green infrastructure. Topics covered will include those who are mapping, collecting data on land cover change, habitat fragmentation, population growth and resource protection, restoration and stewardship.

Day one will feature presentations from those who have conducted ecological, land use, or other related research and have developed statistically analyzed and cartographically characterized historical, static or projections / predictions of regional green infrastructure. The purpose of these presentations would be to show the patterns of change in the green space of our landscape, reveal historical trends and hear expert projections on what these trends may ultimately mean for regional green infrastructure loss, conservation, protection and restoration alike.

Day two will feature government and private sector green infrastructure planning, protection and restoration efforts that have and are occurring throughout the region. Also featured will be those who are examining the effect of the anthropogenic influence affecting green infrastructure throughout our region, such as urbanization, new road construction, greenway establishment and park creation.

In addition, public and private leaders with a national or international perspective on green infrastructure planning, management, and protection will be invited to speak.

Contact Glenn Eugster at: glenn_eugster@nps.gov or Brian LeCouteur at: blecouteur@mwcog.org for more information.