Topic 5: Mitigation. Today Reminder about the class project Introduce our guest Quick intro lecture Class discussion

Transcription

1 Topic 5: Mitigation Today Reminder about the class project Introduce our guest Quick intro lecture Class discussion

2 Key Wetland Regulations (similar for streams) Table from Pruitt (2010)

3 Clean Water Act Goal: restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation s waters Impacts to aquatic resources must be mitigated Historical focus on wetlands. Shift to wetlands AND streams. George H.W. Bush no net loss of functions Usually measured as quantity and quality of habitat Figures from EPA & USGS

4 Mitigation Hierarchy 404 (b)(1) Guidelines: Avoid, minimize, THEN mitigate Proposed Impact Avoid / Minimize Mitigate

5 Types of Compensatory Mitigation Permittee-responsible: Impact and restoration conducted by the same entity Mitigation bank: Restoring ecosystems for sale by impacting group In-lieu fee option: Developers are assessed fees, which are used for local restoration Players involved in mitigation: USACE regulatory authority for impacts to aquatic resources EPA veto authority and oversight State DNRs Can be regulatory authority? Interagency Review Team (IRT) USACE, EPA, State Bankers restore and sell Developers impact and buy

6 Key challenges extracted from readings See common causes of failure in Pruitt (2013) Direct v. indirect impacts (cumulative effects) Hydrology Connectivity via Rapanos Kennedy s significant nexus Scalia s relatively permanent waters On-site v. off-site mitigation Timing the return of ecological function (credit release schedule) How much is enough? Minimum mitigation bank size? Mitigation:impact ratios Restoration v. Enhancement v. Creation Assumption of the replacement of functions by restoration Assumption of fungibility (i.e., trading functions) What is success relative to physical, chemical, and biological integrity? Developing the counter-factual (i.e., should we monitor a reference?) Interim impacts during restoration (no lasting harm) Non-traditional mitigation (e.g., dam removal) What counts? Dam removal? Sewer leak repair? Where do the credits occur? Only the dam removal site? Downstream? Upstream?

7 Mountaintop Mining

8 MTM Valley Fill

9 MTM on Colbert Report Download Colbert Report video here:

10 Other Reading Stream Mitigation Bronner C.E. et al An assessment of U.S. stream compensatory mitigation policy: Necessary changes to protect ecosystem functions and services. JAWRA, 49 (2), Sapp et al From fields of Runnymede to the Water of the United States: A historical review of the Clean Water Act and the term navigable waters. ELR News & Analysis. Sapp et al The float a boat test: How to use it to advantage in this post-rapanos world. ELR News & Analysis. Mountaintop Mining Bernhardt and Palmer The environmental costs of mountaintop mining valley fill operations for aquatic ecosystems of the Central Appalachians. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, doi: /j x. Bernhardt E.S., Lutz B.D., King R.S., Fay J.P., Carter C.E., Helton A.M., Campagna D., and Amos J How many mountains can we mine? Assessing the regional degradation of Central Appalachian Rivers by surface coal mining. Environmental Science and Technology, 46, dx.doi.org/ /es301144q. Fritz K.M., Fulton S., Johnson B.R., Barton C.D., Jack J.D., Word D.A., and Burke R.A Structural and functional characteristics of natural and constructed channels draining a reclaimed mountaintop removal and valley fill coal mine. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 29 (2), Lindberg T.T., Bernhardt E.S., Bier R., Helton A.M., Merola R.B., Vengosh A., and Giulio R.T.D Cumulative impacts of mountaintop mining on an Appalachian watershed. Proceedings of the National Academies of Science, 108 (52), Palmer M.A., Bernhardt E.S., Schlesinger W.H., Eshleman K.N., Foufoula-Georgiou E., Hendryx M.S., Lemly A.D., Likens G.E., Loucks O.L., Power M.E., White P.S., and Wilcock P.R Mountaintop mining consequences. Science, 327, Pond G.J., Passmore M.E., Borsuk F.A., Reynolds L., and Rose C.J Downstream effects of mountaintop coal mining: Comparing biological conditions using family- and genus-level macroinvertebrate bioassessment tools. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 27 (3),

11 Next week (Feb 16) Hydrology, hydraulics, and geomorphology Scientific underpinning Application in design and river engineering Reading assignments Shields et al. (2003) Resop et al. (2014) Schwartz et al. (In press) Leaders: Joel, Seth, Alan Visitors: Rhett Jackson, Todd Rasmussen