![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() The intent is to look beyond the stream channel to promote the long-term health and viability of a full range of ecosystem services with physical, biological and habitat improvements. Army Corps of Engineers has recently updated their stream mitigation framework to provide additional credit for multi-threaded channel systems as well as support riparian wetland mitigation within the stream/wetland complex approach.Īlso, Pennsylvania’s DEP has recently developed a function-based mitigation model that breaks river systems into land-coverages that focus on the stream and floodplain. Second, compensatory mitigation for stream, wetland and aquatic resources in the Bay region has been evolving to align with the paradigm shift. The research shows that the project is highly effective in reducing sediment output and promoting denitrification, results directly tied to the boost in organic carbon sources within the restored wetland mosaic. ![]() The revised guidance encourages ecosystem rehabilitation by emphasizing floodplain reconnection to wetlands, connecting restored floodplain wetlands to groundwater, and retaining and treating sediment and nutrients within the restored stream/wetland complex.Īpproximately 15 years of comprehensive research and monitoring by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and academic, government and nongovernmental partners on the Big Spring Run project in Lancaster County, PA, were instrumental in advancing these protocols. The state-federal Chesapeake Bay Program and Chesapeake Stormwater Network have facilitated these efforts.Ī series of expert panels met in 2019–20 to review, assess and incorporate the latest research and project outcomes to improve the existing stream restoration protocols. Here we offer several interrelated areas where policy and practice are helping to accelerate this paradigm shift.įirst, rewilding approaches have been incentivized by refinements in pollution removal credits for towns and counties that upgrade to separate stormwater/sewer systems (MS4 upgrades, to use the lingo) and for municipal efforts to reduce nonpoint nutrient and sediment runoff into waterways. This record of constructed restoration projects has helped lead the effort to promote more ecologically beneficial rewilding approaches. Collectively, they show how this approach addresses widespread historic and contemporary impacts created by deforestation, damming, legacy sediment, channelization and floodplain encroachment. The result has been many successful rural and urban stream-wetland restorations, particularly in Maryland and Pennsylvania. These practitioners have benefitted greatly from collaboration with academic researchers and cooperation and support from forward-looking landowners and open-minded regulators. The major paradigm shift referenced by the author is not new it’s the result of more than 20 years of continued innovation by restoration practitioners and contractors who have designed and conducted projects to reestablish stream-wetland complexes or “messy streams.” This is an important topic that needs more attention, context and recognition as a restoration approach that has become well-established in the Chesapeake watershed. We commend the Bay Journal for publishing the recent opinion piece, Rewilding our streams to save the Chesapeake Bay. The area protects 810 acres of woods, wetlands and wildlife along the James River. The smokestacks of the Chesterfield Power Station rise above Dutch Gap Conservation Area at sunset in Chesterfield County, VA. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |