WSP06003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ES ENGINEERING-SCIENCE permit action. Regardless, the MOA establishes a strategy for determining appropriate and practicable mitigation measures for unavoidable impacts. The strategy establishes a hierarchy of conditions that must be satisfied in sequence before mitigation can be considered. First, the project must demonstrate that measures have been taken to avoid wetland impacts to the maximum extent practicable and that there are no other less damaging alternatives available. This requirement usually means demonstrating a need for an action of the level proposed, presenting the results of an alternatives analysis showing that the proposed action damages the least amount of wetlands, and describing measures that have been incorporated in the project to avoid wetland losses to the maximum extent practicable. Second, the project must demonstrate measures that have been taken to minimize impacts to wetlands that cannot be avoided. Subpart H of the Section 404 (b)(I) guidelines lists examples of potential minimization measures. With one exception, the measures deal directly with the discharge of dredged or fill materials into wetlands, rather than with impoundment-related effects. The exception identifies timing dam releases to benefit fish and wildlife resources (Section '230.77 (b)). . Finally, compensation (i.e., mitigation) for wetland values is considered for unavoidable adverse losses which remain only after all appropriate and applicable minimi7ation has been incorporated. Guidelines for the compensation stipulate preferences for implementing mitigation adjacent to the impacted area (onsite); providing in-kind functional value replacement; implementing wetland restoration rather than wetland creation or habitat development; and requiring a minimum one- to-one acreage replacement ratio as a surrogate for no net loss of functions and values when such information is unavailable for specific wetland sites. The guidelines also leave the mitigation banking option open and strongly discourage the purchase of existing wetlands as suitable mitigation measures. The purchase and protection of existing wetlands receive a relatively low priority among most Corps and EPA regulatory personnel as a satisfactory mitigation measure because this approach does not prevent or reduce the loss of wetland values associated with the wetland acreage impacted. Even though other wetlands may be purchased and protected from other future projects, a ~ loss of the total wetland acreage that existed before the project was implemented still occurs. The wetlands purchased as "mitigation" already provided their own environmental values before the project and would continue to do so whether the project is implemented or not. The purchase option only ensures that a portion of the remaining post-project wetland resource is protected from potential future losses associated with other projects. Most regulatory personnel consider that the functions and values of the project-impacted wetlands have not actually been replaced or compensated by simply purchasing and protecting other existing wetlands. However, if existing wetlands are purchased, protected, and then actively managed to either produce a higher-quality habitat or to provide functions and values that did not exist or existed at a lower level prior to management, then the -14- 816-3-3