Part 2. Critically Evaluating the (Sub)watershed Plan (3 pages)

Choose three of the following topics: a) Does the plan reflect all of the IWM principles? Which ones do not appear to have been omitted? Is the plan comprehensive enough to suggest that implementation will successfully address problems in the (sub)watershed? (Note: you might be able to glean some information from the size and depth of the report). Justify your answers. b) Was the governance structure inclusive? Were all stakeholders properly identified and included? How often did/do they meet? Is there a website for public communication? Is there evidence of inter-government (e.g., municipal – provincial) collaboration? Is there evidence of extensive public consultation through the planning phase? Justify your answers. c) Are the milestones and objectives sufficient? Were future monitoring and reporting requirements adequately described? Is there an implementation plan? Is it financed? Who is responsible for carrying it out? Justify your answers. d) Are existing legislation and regulations adequate to achieve targets? If not, what recommendations can be made, e.g., is new legislation needed to enable new policies & programs? Justify your answers. Some Useful References Shrubsole, D., D. Walters, B. Veale & Bruce Mitchell (2016). Integrated Water Resources Management in Canada: the experience of watershed agencies. International Journal of Water Resources Development. Scott, P., B. Tayler & D. Walters (2016) Lessons from implementing integrated water resource management: a case study of the North Bay-Mattawa Conservation Authority, Ontario. International Journal of Water Resources Development. Environment Canada (2010) Integrated Watershed Management. Conservation Ontario (2018). Website on ‘Watershed Management Futures for Ontario’ has several relevant reports to help you understand IWM:

Place New Order
It's Free, Fast & Safe

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get a Discount!