2014 National Mitigation and Ecosystem Banking Conference, Session 1 – Aligning Agency Programs

Kicking off the educational track at this May’s National Mitigation & Ecosystem Banking conference, this session is classified as “advanced” but the presenters’ topics could not be of more importance in today’s changing world.

Moderator: Erik J. Meyers, The Conservation Fund
As a Vice President at The Conservation Fund, Erik Meyers works to advance business strategy for mitigation opportunities, mainly for projects that impact energy, water and transportation infrastructure. He also chairs the Board of Directors of the Natural Capital Investment Fund, advises companies on sustainability initiatives, manages relationships with water-related agencies, and oversees climate adaptation projects. Working with the Fund since 2004, Erik has led an array of efforts, including a pioneering climate adaptation project to help vital coastal ecosystems persist despite sea level rise. He holds a B.S.F.S. from Georgetown University and a J.D. from Fordham University School of Law.

Travis Hemmen, Westervelt Ecological Services, “Habitat Conservation Plans – A New Market or Challenge?”
Mr. Hemmen directs the Business and Market Development for WES. Mr. Hemmen coordinates with private and public clients on project specific mitigation and manages sales of existing bank credits. Mr. Hemmen identifies potential site acquisitions, analyzes market information to ensure the finished mitigation banks are a viable product. He has a background in environmental consulting and regulatory compliance planning for one of the national residential home builders. As a consultant, he has managed small- and large-scale projects, including state and federal permitting of projects by local water agencies, port redevelopment and dredging programs, and development of master planned communities. He has a B.A. degree in Biology with an emphasis in Ethics from the University of Northern Iowa, and a M.S. degree in Environmental Law and Policy with an emphasis in Alternative Dispute Resolution from Vermont Law School.

Roselle Henn, USACE North Atlantic Division, “Potential for Sage Mitigation Banking”
Ms. Hemm is Environmental Team Leader for the North Atlantic Division (NAD) of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) with primary responsibility for ecosystem restoration throughout the region and the Environmental Lead in the Hurricane Sandy North Atlantic Coast Comprehensive Study (NACCS), National Planning Center of Expertise for Coastal Storm Risk Management (PCX-CSRM). While compiling the study, scientists and engineers will consider future sea-level rise scenarios and integrate economic, climatological, engineering, environmental and societal data from Virginia to Maine to develop a comprehensive framework to reduce coastal flood risk and promote resiliency. The study will be collaborative, comprehensive and integrated, and conducted in partnership with federal, tribal, state and local government representatives as well as non-government organizations, academia, technical experts and interested parties.

Steve Glomb, US Department of the Interior, “National Resource Damage Assessment & Restoration and Other Opportunities”
The U.S. Department of the Interior’s (DOI) Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Program (NRDA Restoration Program) manages the confluence of the technical, ecological, biological, legal, and economic disciplines and coordinates the efforts of six bureaus and four other offices within DOI to accomplish the mission.  The NRDA Restoration Program has a nationwide presence encompassing nearly the full span of natural and cultural resources for which the Secretary of the Interior has trust responsibility and authority.  Each bureau has its unique natural resource trusteeship and brings its expertise to bear on relevant sites. The NRDA Restoration Program is a truly integrated Department-wide program, drawing upon the interdisciplinary strengths of its five bureaus (Indian Affairs, Land Management, Reclamation, Fish & Wildlife Service, and National Parks Service.)

I look forward to seeing you in Denver in May!

17,000 feet of stream restoration in Texas

Reach 5 of Warren Creek: 17,000 feet of stream restoration completed ahead of schedule by Restoration Systems for TxDOT  – 52,000 feet still to be done – compensation for impacts of under-construction segments of the Grand Parkway, Houston, Texas.

Gilinski on Nutrients

John Preyer and our partner in Virginia, Brent Fults, of the Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Land Trust, visited Duke University and Blue Devil country last week to see well regarded state and national water quality regulator Ellen Gilinski speak on nutrient problems.  Ellen is formerly the Director of the Water Division at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and now Senior Policy Advisor at the EPA.  She did not disappoint and gave a fine summary of the challenges and opportunities in water quality and nutrient regulation.

Very good as well to see Duke’s Nicholas School of the Environment place these visiting talks on the web.  Makes parking much easier.

Thar' She Blows: Condit Dam goes down ugly in Washington State

 

As readers know, RS loves blowing up old, useless dams. And apparently so does the federal government. Look here at the Condit Dam recently breeched by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to restore salmon waters in Washington State.

In North Carolina there is much gnashing of regulatory teeth and pulling of agency hair regarding the potential for a dam removal to make the water “turbid” (muddy) for some time during removal. As a result, and with some justification, RS dam removals have been managed with very little sediment released.  We drain the bathtub slooooowly.

Out West this did not appear to be much of a problem. My educated guess is that the sediment release pictured here at the Condit Dam would be considered “catastrophic” in the Old North State (by the same federal government that pulled the plug on Condit).

Each dam removal has its own special constraints and trade-offs. And I do not begrudge the federal sponsors their ability to break a few eggs when making an omelet of the White Salmon River. But it is amazing how one procedure can be employed in one area — and considered horrific in another.

SwampGate: Purchasing nutrients from a wetland bank prohibited by EEP's own rules

As an informational update on the brewing controversy concerning the state paying twice for work done once, “Stories from the Field” offers a snippet from the EEP‘s own rule book.  The rule specifically and unequivocally prohibits the dual use of a single mitigation site for wetland and nutrient mitigation, as was done at least once by a private contractor, and perhaps many times by the rule maker themselves:

Ecosystem Enhancement Program:
“Policies, Process, and Procedures Manual,” May 4, 2008

2.0 DEFINITIONS AND PROJECT REQUIREMENTS TO GENERATE RIPARIAN BUFFER MITIGATION CREDITS.

2.9 Wetland and Buffer Mitigation. Wetland mitigation may not overlap with riparian buffer mitigation. When wetland mitigation is implemented in a riparian zone using buffer restoration techniques that could also generate riparian buffer mitigation, a decision must be made as to which type of credit will be claimed from the project. A specific area on a project can generate either wetland mitigation credits or riparian buffer mitigation credits. Portions of a project can be designated as generating riparian buffer mitigation credits and portions generating wetland credit, but these areas cannot overlap.

2.10 Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation. Nutrient offset mitigation is required to be stand alone mitigation in order to generate nutrient offset mitigation. Any area being used for nutrient offset mitigation cannot be used to generate stream, wetland, or buffer mitigation credits. Similarly any area being used to generate riparian buffer mitigation credits cannot be used to generate nutrient offset mitigation.

SwampGate: News and Observer busts EBX for hitting the punch bowl twice

Quite a find on my porch this morning. The state’s paper of record revealed a long-stewing controversy in the obscure but important world of compensatory environmental mitigation policy.  [EBX paid twice for wetlands work, December 8, 2009]  RS’ principal competitor, Environmental Bank and Exchange (EBX), sold nutrient mitigation credits to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program subsequent to the site being banked, restored and previously paid for by the North Carolina Department of Transportation for wetland mitigation credit.  In industry parlance —  we call this a “double-dip.”

Read more