Compensatory Mitigation Site Protection Instrument Handbook for ...
AQUATIC RESOURCES MITIGATION IN OREGON: WHAT …...Feb 23, 2018 · Final Federal Compensatory...
Transcript of AQUATIC RESOURCES MITIGATION IN OREGON: WHAT …...Feb 23, 2018 · Final Federal Compensatory...
217217217
200200200
255255255
000
163163163
131132122
2396553
110135120
1129256
62102130
1025648
130120111
237237237
8011927
252174.59
8336118
Project support is provided through
EPA Wetland Program
Development Grants
AQUATIC RESOURCES MITIGATION IN OREGON:
WHAT PROBLEMS ARE WE ADDRESSING?
Tom Taylor
Mitigation Program Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
Portland District
PRESENTATION OBJECTIVES
Review some fundamentals of wetland and stream mitigation
Review current Federal and State of Oregon regulations
Explain current compensatory mitigation in Oregon
Identify deficiencies in Oregon’s compensatory mitigation programs
Introduce mitigation program changes
WHAT ARE WETLANDS AND WATERS?
Vary widely by location and “look”
May not have permanent water
May be managed for other uses such as crop production
Photo: USDA Photo: OSU
ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS AND VALUES
Water quality improvement
Water storage and delay
Habitat for native plant diversity
Habitat for fish and wildlife
Amenity values for open space, recreation, education
4
REGULATION OF WATERS IN OREGON
Federal Program
– Dredge and fill of waters of the US are permitted by the Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act.
– EPA, along with the Corps, co-administers the 404 program.
State Program
DSL requires a permit for most projects that remove or fill materials in waters of the state under Oregon’s
Removal-Fill Law (ORS 196.795 to 196.990.
MITIGATION
Reduction of a proposed project’s adverse effects to
aquatic resources
Mitigation Sequence
– Avoid impacts
– Minimize impacts
– Rectify impacts
– Compensate for unavoidable impacts
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION GOALS
Replace the functions and values that are lost through the creation, restoration or enhancement of aquatic
resources
– at an appropriate scale relative to local significance
– in a way that is self-sustaining and minimizes long-term maintenance needs
– at ecologically suitable locations
Photo courtesy of Ecological Resource Consultants, Inc.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION OPTIONS
Credit purchase
– Mitigation bank
– In-lieu fee credits
Permittee-responsible project
Payment in-lieu (DSL only)
HOW IS COMPENSATORY MITIGATION CURRENTLY HANDLED?
DSL requires use of various wetland function
assessment methods; no specific method required by
the Corps
Wetland mitigation is currently acreage-based
Mitigation for non-wetland waters is inconsistent
Oregon has no consistent stream function
assessment method for regulatory use
A watershed approach is lacking in Oregon
PROBLEM STATEMENT AND FEDERAL POLICY
Core Issues
Wetland acreage is being replaced but wetland functions are not
Mitigation for other waters (like streams) is not consistent
Final Federal Compensatory Mitigation Rule (2008)
Compensatory mitigation decision-making in a watershed context
Replace loss of functions due to unavoidable impacts to all aquatic
resources
Use of function or condition assessment to determine compensatory
mitigation
Consistent requirements for all forms of mitigation (banks, In-lieu Fee,
permittee-responsible)
CURRENT MITIGATION PROGRAM DEFICIENCIES AND PROPOSED
CHANGES UNDER FRAMEWORK
Deficiencies
Wetland functions not being replaced
Inconsistent mitigation for other waters (like streams)
Unavailable function or condition assessment for
determining compensatory stream mitigation
Inconsistent decision-making in a watershed context
Proposed Changes
Replace wetland functions and services, plus aquatic
area
Replace loss of functions and services due to
unavoidable impacts to all aquatic resources
Develop new stream assessment tools
Make compensatory mitigation decisions using a
watershed approach
CHALLENGE OF THE 2008 COMPENSATORY MITIGATION RULE
No alteration of general mitigation regulations
No alteration of the circumstances under which
compensatory mitigation is required
No new authority to require the new proposed
compensatory mitigation strategy
Challenges us to improve compensation for aquatic
resource functions lost as result of permitted activities
Photo courtesy of Federal Highway Administration
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers photo
NEED MORE INFORMATION?
Tom Taylor
Mitigation Program Manager
Portland District, USACE
503-808-4386
Also:
http://www.oregon.gov/dsl/WW/Pages/Aquatic-Resources-Mitigation-Framework.aspx