Environment Goals Improving the Environment in the Lake Tahoe Basin
Main Menu
Improving the Environment in the Lake Tahoe Basin
|
|
The way to further improve the environment at Tahoe is known. Is there the will?
The Environmental Improvement Program (EIP) is a public private partnership that enables coordinated implementation of environmental programs at Lake Tahoe. |
The EIP identifies specific projects and programs. It also identifies partners, including federal, state and local agencies and the private sector.
In the period from 1997 to 2006 the federal government invested $293 million in the EIP. Nevada and California invested $528 million. Local agencies invested $53.4 million and the private sector contributed $216 million. The combined contribution was $1.1 billion for EIP projects and programs in the first 9 years. As of 2010 approximately 270 projects were on the ground and hundreds were in the planning and implementation stages. These projects are improving the health of Tahoe forests and watersheds, reducing traffic congestion and air pollution and increasing public access to the Lake and other recreation areas.
EIP priorities for the next decade include improving water clarity, addressing the potential impacts of climate change, achieving fuels reduction targets, restoring watersheds and streams, adopting and implementing a comprehensive aquatic invasive species management plan (see [link to Aquatic Invasive Species]), expanding transit facilities and the bike and pedestrian trail network, achieving Lahontan Cutthroat Trout and Yellow Cress Recovery milestones, and improving Lake access and recreational facilities.
Resources are becoming more limited even as science and applied knowledge are improving the efficacy of the EIP. In order to meet the objectives set for environmental accomplishment more has to be done with less. As author Tom Friedman put it “We need everyone at every level to get smarter”. Or in other words we need everyone to think about the opportunities and challenges facing Tahoe and to be more involved in making environmental improvement. Further improvement of the environment at Tahoe is possible given the knowledge that has been acquired in the past decade. However, there are many variables at play. How will Tahoe negotiate the current recession (see [Link to Prosperity Plan article])? How will Nevada and California transition into a new kind of relationship at Tahoe (see [SB 271 article])? How much is society willing to pay to reduce the impact (see [link to Answers at Hand]) of urban stormwater on Lake clarity? All of these questions and more lie before the community that cares about Tahoe. These are tough questions. To the extent that Tahoe can negotiate toward productive outcomes through positive discourse on these issues, communities with similar issues worldwide can benefit.
Source
Restoration in Progress, Environmental Improvement Program Update, published by the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency. 2010.
Link:www.trpa.org/documents/docdwnlds/EIP/EIPBook_FINAL_1-31.pdf
Comments
That plan included regulations to limit coverage, make better use of development capacities (rather than adding to such capacities), and to assure the universal implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs). The EIP itself included a regional revenue element to assure that federal & state public investment would be protected by appropriate operations & maintenance.
All those elements have been abandoned.
The new model is to secure fed/state funding while offering development inducements to get BMPs on a very small number of properties, so they can be 'counted' as local contributions to the EIP.
This may be great politics but it is really terrible public policy. Throwing money at Tahoe's problems won't solve them. Some folks will benefit financially, but in the long run the Lake, the taxpayers, and the public will suffer.
But key environmental issues including aquatic invasive species, wildfire risk, and nearshore conditions all currently lack meaningful thresholds. TPRA needs a 'threshold-centric' approach to restore coherence to its work and fulfill its mission.
Where we might disagree: 'improving the community' is a VERY different project from saving the lake. Communities around the lake vary dramatically in their issues, needs, and perspectives.
TRPA should focus on achieving thresholds, while maximizing choices available to local communities within its framework - not try to impose its own vision of 'improvement' basinwide.
However, the thresholds do not provide the direct relationship to EIP project-scale investments. How the thresholds respond over time to projects and other forces (e.g. climate change) is an important item to research and improve our understanding of how to improve our projects. We need project-specific performance measures to make the thresholds meaningful in the project selection, design and implementation decisions.
Defining and reporting these performance measures creates the feedback that drives accountability and learning.