Michigan Wetlands. Department of Environmental Quality



Similar documents
33 CFR PART 332 COMPENSATORY MITIGATION FOR LOSSES OF AQUATIC RESOURCES. Authority: 33 U.S.C. 401 et seq. ; 33 U.S.C. 1344; and Pub. L

2008 Compensatory Mitigation Rule: Overview and Highlights. Jenny Thomas U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Wetlands Division July 2014

Recognizing Wetlands. For additional information contact your local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers office. Pitcher plant.

Protecting Michigan s Wetlands A Guide for Local Governments

401 Water Quality Certification and Isolated Wetlands Permitting in Ohio. Tom Harcarik Division of Surface Water

Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Protection of Selected Wildlife Species and Habitat within Grassland and Parkland Natural Regions of Alberta

Rhode Island NRCS received approximately $2.4 million in ARRA funds to implement four floodplain easement projects.

How To Manage Water Resources In The Yakima Basin

Ecosystem Services in the Greater Houston Region. A case study analysis and recommendations for policy initiatives

Appendix A: Land Protection Plan

EFB / Online Wetland Restoration Techniques Class Syllabus

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SECTION B, ELEMENT 4 WATER RESOURCES. April 20, 2010 EXHIBIT 1

4.2 Buena Vista Creek Watershed

Restoration Planning and Development of a Restoration Bank

Wetlands in MN: Resource, Regulation, Restoration

Remaining Wetland Acreage 1,500, , ,040-39%

Series 2016A-2 (Green Bonds) Final Proceeds Allocation April 2016

Clean Water Services. Ecosystems Services Case Study: Tualatin River, Washington

Flood Plain Reclamation to Enhance Resiliency Conserving Land in Urban New Jersey

Chapter 3 Communities, Biomes, and Ecosystems

MULTI-AGENCY COMPENSATORY MITIGATION PLAN CHECKLIST 1

3. The submittal shall include a proposed scope of work to confirm the provided project description;

How To Plan A Buffer Zone

Backyard Buffers that Work for People and Nature by Restoring Ecological Function

Plan Groundwater Procurement, Implementation and Costs, prepared for the Brazos River Authority, July 2005.

Policy & Management Applications of Blue Carbon. fact SHEET

Section 5: Conserve to Enhance Program Goals What is Conserve to Enhance All About?

Wetlands and Climate Change: Considerations for Wetland Program Managers

Wildlife Habitat Conservation and Management Program

It s hard to avoid the word green these days.

As stewards of the land, farmers must protect the quality of our environment and conserve the natural resources that sustain it by implementing

1.7.0 Floodplain Modification Criteria

Addendum D. Nomination of Moody Wash ACEC

AN INITIATIVE TO IMPROVE

Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Capital Budget Approved by Legislature in June 2013

Oregon. Climate Change Adaptation Framework

Human Impact to Wetlands

Environmental Law Primer. Adapted from Vermont Law School s Environmental Law Primer for Journalists

Biodiversity Concepts

Briefing Paper on Lower Galveston Bay and Bayou Watersheds Lower Bay I: Armand Bayou to Moses Lake and Adjacent Bay Waters

Using an All lands Framework for Conservation of Ecosystem Services

Using the Carbon Market to Provide Financial Support for Coastal Restoration and Protection. fact SHEET

NATURAL RESOURCE RESTORATION LESSON PLAN Fix It!

Sustainability Brief: Water Quality and Watershed Integrity

Wetland Vocabulary Organizer

Restoring Ecosystems. Ecosystem Restoration Services

A Developer s Guide: Watershed-Wise Development

A Global View of Ecological Restoration and the Role of SER International

Lower Crooked Creek Watershed Conservation Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in the Far North of Ontario: Background information in support of land use planning

PROCEDURE. See: Great Lakes Coastal Wetlands (

Water management planning for Naurzum National Nature Reserve, Kazakhstan. Abstract. By Y. A. Bragin

NATURAL RESOURCES & NATURAL FEATURES

Using Aerial Photography to Measure Habitat Changes. Method

SUPERIOR CHARTER TOWNSHIP WASHTENAW COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO. 178

Water Quality Management

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS WATERS OF THE U.S. PROPOSAL

RESTORATION & REVITALIZATION

Appendix A. Lists of Accomplishments and Project Costs. UMRWD 10 Year Plan Update. Appendix A UPPER MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT

San Francisco Bay Area Wetlands Restoration Program Design Review Group. Project Summary Outline

Prepared By: Eric Chamberlain

SLOW ONSET EVENTS. climate change impacts on BIODIVERSITY

GLOSSARY OF TERMS CHAPTER 11 WORD DEFINITION SOURCE. Leopold

Flood Risk Management

Flood Risk Management

DECISION DOCUMENT NATIONWIDE PERMIT 27

WONDERFUL, WATERFUL WETLANDS

Using the voluntary carbon market to provide funding for natural capital projects in the UK. 6 th October 2015

13. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION/ RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

RED-TAIL CONSERVANCY ANNUAL REPORT 2005

Living on the Fox River

COMMUNITY CERTIFICATIONS

Connecting Science and Management for Virginia s Tidal Wetlands. In this issue...

Multiple Species Conservation Program County of San Diego. A Case Study in Environmental Planning & The Economic Value of Open Space

Kristina Veidemane, Baltic Environmental Forum Panevezys,

Using Green Infrastructure to Manage Combined Sewer Overflows and Flooding

The Albert J. and Mary Jane Black Institute for Environmental Studies

Federal Research and Development in South Dakota

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Environmental Assessment

STANDARDS FOR RANGELAND HEALTH ASSESSMENT FOR SAGEHEN ALLOTMENT #0208

Subactivity: Habitat Conservation Program Element: National Wetlands Inventory

High Conservation Value Forests 3.1. Old Growth Forests. Management & Monitoring Framework

Markets for Ecosystem Services on Agricultural Lands: Experience and Outlook in the United States

PUBLIC NOTICE Application for Permit

Colorado Natural Heritage Program

A Cost Analysis of Stream Compensatory Mitigation Projects in the Southern Appalachian Region 1

Applying HUD s Floodplain Management and Wetlands Protection Standards U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Environment and

United States Army Corps of Engineers, Civil Works

Upper Des Plaines River & Tributaries, IL & WI Feasibility Study

Curt Kerns, M.S., R.P.Bio., C.F.S. WetlandsPacific Corp

Global Water Resources

US Army Corps of Engineers Authorities and Programs

Transcription:

Department of Environmental Quality

Wetlands are a significant component of Michigan s landscape, covering roughly 5.5 million acres, or 15 percent of the land area of the state. This represents about half of the wetland resources that existed prior to European Settlement.

A high percentage of Michigan residents responding to a recent survey recognized the multiple benefits provided by wetlands. Percent of Michigan residents who view various wetland services as very important or extremely important: Wildlife habitat 87% Fish habitat 78% Flood control 75% Wildflower habitat 73% Water filtration 73% - Michael D. Kaplowitz and John Kerr, Michigan residents perceptions of wetlands and mitigation. Wetlands, Vol. 23, No. 2 June 2003

In 1979, Michigan s Legislature clearly recognized the functions and values of wetlands in legislative findings incorporated into the Goemaere-Anderson Wetland Protection Act, now Part 303, Wetlands Protection, of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act.

The legislature finds that: A loss of a wetland may deprive the people of the state of some or all of the following benefits to be derived from the wetland: Flood and storm control Wildlife habitat Protection of subsurface water resources and recharging ground water supplies Pollution treatment Erosion control Nursery grounds and sanctuaries for fish

Types of Wetlands

Emergent marshes. These areas are frequently or continuously flooded, and often occur at the fringes of lakes or rivers. Marshes are among the most productive ecosystems on earth - rivaling tropical rainforests.

Great Lakes coastal marshes are a special type of emergent wetland. These extremely productive, and rare systems are critical to North America s migratory waterfowl populations. Estimated expenditures in Michigan for migratory bird hunting in 2001 totaled $30,892,000. 32 of 36 species of Great Lakes fish depend upon coastal marshes for reproductive success.

Deciduous swamps. Swamplands are forested wetlands, and may be flooded for a only a portion of the year. In southern Michigan, deciduous swamps are the most common type of wetland.

Deciduous Swamps/Forested Wetlands

Bogs and fens. Often located in pockets within coniferous swamps, or along the shores of lakes or streams, bogs and fens are both peatlands.

Frequently found in floodplains, swamplands provide a natural buffer against changing water levels on an annual basis. Pictures of floodplain wetland taken two Michigan weeks Wetlands apart

Irreplaceable Wetlands Bogs such as these developed over several thousand years.

Wetlands provide a haven for some of Michigan s rarest plants and animals. Eastern Box Turtle Mitchell Satyr Photo by Larry West Small White Lady s Slipper

At least 41 state listed, threatened, and endangered species of animals depend upon wetlands at some point in their life cycle. Photo by James H. Harding Photo by Mary Rabe Karner Blue Eastern Fox Snake Photo by Don Baccus Short-eared Owl An additional 10 listed species prefer wetland habitat, although they may survive in upland.

It is estimated that 49% of the state s rare plant species are dependent upon wetlands. English Sundew Tall Beak-rush Seedbox

Highly specialized plants including the carnivorous pitcher plant and sundew are found in bog environments where the chemistry of the soils limits the availability of plant nutrients.

In addition, the conservation and restoration of wetlands may reduce future flooding

Headwater wetlands These wetlands maintain the flow and quality of headwater trout streams and other waters, gradually discharging cool, clear water throughout the summer months.

When wetlands are lost, our waters, and our watersheds, and our wildlife suffer: With the loss of flood storage, damage to agricultural and urban lands increases. With the loss of summer recharge from wetlands, stream flow declines and water tables drop. As the wetland buffers between uplands and our open waters are lost, shoreline erosion and pollution of those waters increases.

And, of Course, Loss of Fish and Wildlife Habitat

Wetland Permitting

A wetland permit is required from the DEQ to: Place fill material in a wetland Dredge soil or minerals from a wetland Construct, operate or maintain a use or development in a wetland Drain surface water from a wetland

Widening the Road Impacts to wetlands outside the existing road footprint/ditch requires a permit

In general, a permit applicant must follow these regulatory principles: 1. Avoidance Do feasible and prudent alternatives exist? Different location, configuration, size, or method. 2. Minimization Minimize impacts to wetland. Different location, configuration, size, or method. 3. Mitigation Replace unavoidably lost wetland resources with created or restored wetlands Ensure no net loss of wetland functions and values.

Avoidance The NO impact option Planning the project to avoid any and all wetland impacts. This requires good baseline information during the initial planning phases of the project

DEQ Wetland Map Viewer

Facilitating DEQ Review Correctly identify the location of the wetlands Provide an assessment of the functions and values of the wetlands, including impact areas Provide a detailed review of the steps that were taken to avoid and minimize the impacts to the wetlands Provide an appropriate mitigation proposal

No Two Projects are the Same River vs. Stream

Marsh vs. Bog

Swamp vs. Swamp Some forested wetlands can be hard to recognize

Wetland Mitigation

In general, a permit applicant must follow these regulatory principles: 1. Avoidance Do feasible and prudent alternatives exist? Different location, configuration, size, or method. 2. Minimization Minimize impacts to wetland. Different location, configuration, size, or method. 3. Mitigation Replace unavoidably lost wetland resources with created or restored wetlands Ensure no net loss of wetland functions and values.

Once the DEQ determines that an impact is acceptable, then, and only then, can mitigation be discussed.

Ratios for in-kind mitigation required by the administrative rules: 5:1 ratio for impacts to rare or imperiled wetland types. 2:1 ratio for impacts to forested wetlands, coastal wetlands (not covered above), and wetlands that border upon inland lakes. 1.5:1 ratio for impacts to all other wetland types. 10:1 ratio when mitigation is preservation. The ratios are doubled for after-the-fact permits. Ratios are increased for out-of-kind Mitigation.

Mitigation- Continued < 0.1 acre None Required 0.1-1/3 acre per wetland complex and less than 1 acre per project (1:1 Ratio, any kind any where, for projects that meet the minor project category) > 1/3 acre Standard Ratios MDOT mitigates all impacts

The administrative rules require that mitigation should be on-site or in the same watershed.

Restoration The restoration of previously existing wetlands is preferred over the creation of new wetlands where none previously existed. Areas with drained hydric soils offer the best opportunity for wetland restoration

Restoration In these areas, hydrology re-establishment can be relatively easy by breaking tiles, filling in drains, and/or re-establishing the wetlands watershed Seed Source may still exist, but supplemental seeding is recommended and may be required Habitat Structures will be required in most instances Areas with drained hydric soils offer the best opportunity for wetland restoration

Wetland Creation Traditional wetland creation project: Difficult to establish appropriate hydrology (groundwater levels) No existing seed source or hydric soil Expensive (lots of excavation)

Mitigation Follow-up Prior to releasing the financial assurance bond/letter of credit, applicant must provide evidence that the following criteria has been met: Compliance with Permit Conditions Acceptable Monitoring Reports Submitted Met Goals Outlined in Performance Standards

Mitigation banking Acquisition of wetland mitigation bank credits may be approved as mitigation by the DEQ. Mitigation banking: establishes mitigation in advance of loss. consolidates small mitigation projects. can reduce uncertainty regarding mitigation availability. can encourage integration of mitigation and watershed planning. Transportation Agencies can establish their own mitigation banks.

Preservation of Existing Wetlands May be considered as mitigation only if the wetlands: perform exceptional physical or biological functions or are an ecological type that is rare or endangered, are under a demonstrable threat of loss or substantial degradation not under the control of the applicant and that are not otherwise restricted by state law, and permanent protection of the wetlands is provided.

Preservation of Existing Wetlands Although rarely used, opportunities do exist to preserve wetlands, particularly with Rare and Imperiled Wetlands Habitats Troll Bog, Luce County

Prairie Fen

Lakeplain Prairie

Coastal Plain Marsh

Long-term Management and Protection May be Required

Michigan Natural Features Inventory http://web4.msue.msu.edu/mnfi/ Information relating to Michigan s special plants, animals, and communities Good resource for information on how to recognize these special features

32 Years after passage of the Wetlands Protection Act, better scientific understanding of wetlands is supporting more efficient and effective management of Michigan s wetland resources.

Questions? www.michigan.gov/wetlands