Wetland Science

[freeztar]

Anyone interested/involved in this field? I'm an ecologist/consultant working for a large, international engineering firm in Atlanta and am curious if anyone on here has a similar occupation, or at least interest. I mainly survey streams and wetlands on proposed construction sites and write technical memos. In the US, wetland determination has specific guidelines that are administered through the Army Corp of Engineers. How is wetland determination made in your part of the world? What criteria do you use and what is your permitting process, if any?

I'd also be interested in any pictures/info you have on wetlands in your part of the world.

I'm also a plant lover so I'd be interested in any endemic species and special relationships.

 

Wetlands are one of the most productive ecosystems in the world and are becoming increasingly important as we witness fresh water diminishing throughout the world.

[Monomer]

Out at Salisbury here in South Australia there are some wetlands. I don't know much about them, as it's not really a big interest of mine, but I've found some information you might be interested in:

 

City of Salisbury - Wetlands

[freeztar]

Out at Salisbury here in South Australia there are some wetlands. I don't know much about them, as it's not really a big interest of mine, but I've found some information you might be interested in:

 

City of Salisbury - Wetlands

 

Very nice link Monomer! :hihi:

 

I tend to picture Australia as an arid place from stereotype, but there is actually a good abundance of water there. Australia is one of the places on my list of "must go there".

[Monomer]

Australia is certainly arid, but it also has so many beautiful places.

 

The northern territory also has wetlands, so check this out as well:

 

Arid wetlands - Territory environments - Nature of the NT - Wildlife - NRETA - NT Government - Australia

[maikeru]

Anyone interested/involved in this field? I'm an ecologist/consultant working for a large, international engineering firm in Atlanta and am curious if anyone on here has a similar occupation, or at least interest. I mainly survey streams and wetlands on proposed construction sites and write technical memos. In the US, wetland determination has specific guidelines that are administered through the Army Corp of Engineers. How is wetland determination made in your part of the world? What criteria do you use and what is your permitting process, if any?

I'd also be interested in any pictures/info you have on wetlands in your part of the world.

I'm also a plant lover so I'd be interested in any endemic species and special relationships.

 

Wetlands are one of the most productive ecosystems in the world and are becoming increasingly important as we witness fresh water diminishing throughout the world.

 

My own hobbies (gardening, nature, etc.) and studies (microbiology) do tie in with it a bit. Ever since I saw a show on "artificial wetlands" which can be used to clean grey and waste water from households a few months ago, I've been reading more material about that, and also generally, about how wetlands contribute to the health and functioning of other ecoysystems.

 

The closest wetlands are those of Utah Lake, which I live about 10 minutes from, and even larger than the wetlands and marshes of Utah Lake are those of the Great Salt Lake. I've gone to Utah Lake quite a bit, and used to fish there (although I definitely would not now! Given what I know about the poor water quality and the history of the lake...), so I've had a chance to see some of the wetlands. I was also surprised to learn that the cattails so common in the wetlands around here are not native; they're an invasive/alien species, much like the carp which have so muddied the lake.

 

deseretnews.com | New battle is brewing over land for a highway (Battles over local wetlands)

Utah Lake - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

I feel sad to say that Utah Lake probably is an example of horrible abuse of the environment and wetlands, although most locals are not aware of the extent of degradation. Likewise, I don't fish there. PCBs are not cool.

 

It would be nice if people could see that cleaning up the lake and enhancing its beauty would benefit us all...

[freeztar]

Thanks for the info!

 

Here's an interesting quote from the first link you posted:

 

"Under the federal Clean Water Act, a state transportation agency must choose the "least damaging" route for a road if it goes through the wetlands. But the Clean Water Act also allows an agency to pick an alignment that impacts wetlands if it serves a necessary purpose that has been well-studied."

 

While this is true in theory, it is seldom actualized.

How it should read, according to how it is enforced, is something like this:

 

"Under the federal Clean Water Act, a state transportation agency should choose the "least damaging" route for a road if it goes through the wetlands. But the Clean Water Act also allows an agency to pick an alignment that impacts wetlands if it serves a necessary purpose that has been well-studied." (in other words if it saves a significant amount of money)

 

It's pretty sad really...

 

I wouldn't sweat the PCBs too much as they are almost omnipresent these days. Heck, DDT is still detectable in anyone alive today and it was banned decades ago. :hihi:

[Tormod]

Don't know if this has any use but here is a list of some wetland areas in Norway:

 

The Annotated Ramsar List: Norway

[freeztar]

I must admit that I'm fascinated by the Nordic regions and the life that flourishes there. Reading some of the descriptions from the link, I yearn to explore the headwaters of a major fjord.

 

Thanks for the link!

[Tormod]

I must admit that I'm fascinated by the Nordic regions and the life that flourishes there. Reading some of the descriptions from the link, I yearn to explore the headwaters of a major fjord.

 

You're welcome to our fjords anytime! :(

 

http://hypography.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=8&c=11

[Cedars]

In Minnesota, we are supposed to protect the wetlands but when it comes to the roads, it seems there is little done in the lines of altering projects to reduce impact. Costs too much.

 

But it isnt roads that are the major impact I see, its the unrestrained development. There have been several housing developments around me and each contractor has applied for and received variences that reduce the effectivness of the laws to protect.

 

One example. There is a five acre minimum for new homes. When the farm across the street went into development, the farmhouse and 13 acres was sold as one unit. There is a stream that runs thru there. The contractor whined about how this land compensates for the five acres and put pressure on the county government for his varience and ended up getting 20 additional houses on the fields above the stream on 2 acre lots. It didnt matter that the there are significant numbers of Blandings turtles using these fields for nesting (a threatened specie). I have done what I can to educate the people living there now on this one type of turtle and how to keep the turtles safe.

 

Now there is a new development going in north of me that is even more devestating to the wildlife. This development will border the shores of a lake and housing is being built on less than one acre lots. Again the 5 acre minimum should apply but thru pressures put on the local government by the contractor, the rules were changed again. The only bonus is the slowing of the housing market has delayed the building of these homes some. But its only a matter of time.

[maikeru]

Thanks for the info!

 

Here's an interesting quote from the first link you posted:

 

"Under the federal Clean Water Act, a state transportation agency must choose the "least damaging" route for a road if it goes through the wetlands. But the Clean Water Act also allows an agency to pick an alignment that impacts wetlands if it serves a necessary purpose that has been well-studied."

 

While this is true in theory, it is seldom actualized.

How it should read, according to how it is enforced, is something like this:

 

"Under the federal Clean Water Act, a state transportation agency should choose the "least damaging" route for a road if it goes through the wetlands. But the Clean Water Act also allows an agency to pick an alignment that impacts wetlands if it serves a necessary purpose that has been well-studied." (in other words if it saves a significant amount of money)

 

It's pretty sad really...

 

It's a bit worse in Utah in that business, politics, and religion are tied up in one neat, corrupt bundle, IMO. There is very little regard for the environment here, in general, even if Utahns do make much ado about the wonderful snow, outdoors, and hunting. (This is an aside, but according to the evening news, the Wasatch Front's air quality--from Salt Lake City to Orem, which is the area in which I live--was considered the worst in the nation. This is the third or fourth time we've gotten that designation since the fall.)

 

I wouldn't sweat the PCBs too much as they are almost omnipresent these days. Heck, DDT is still detectable in anyone alive today and it was banned decades ago. :)

 

:) Anyway, I still wouldn't eat the carp from the lake. They taste just about the same as the mud.

[freeztar]

In Minnesota, we are supposed to protect the wetlands but when it comes to the roads, it seems there is little done in the lines of altering projects to reduce impact. Costs too much.

 

Yes, that is the common reason, cost. The ironic part is that biodiversity loss and ecosystem functionality loss are never considered a "cost" themselves.

 

But it isnt roads that are the major impact I see, its the unrestrained development. There have been several housing developments around me and each contractor has applied for and received variences that reduce the effectivness of the laws to protect.

 

In the US this is a very common and acceptable practice. The contractor must pay mitigation fees that go into a mitigation bank. Mitigation banks are parcels of land that are set aside for wetland restoration. The payment the contractor makes goes directly to the mitigation bank and pays for establishment and upkeep of part of the mitigation bank, which is determined by a credit system. The idea is that the destruction of one system is emeliorated by the creation of a slightly larger system elsewhere. I don't totally agree with the way this works and how it is (not) enforced, but it is a much better system than we had 30 years ago which was literally nothing.

 

Furthermore, in Georgia, any encroachment within 25 feet of a streams edge (technically: high water mark) requires a stream buffer variance from the Georgia Environmental Protection Division. The buffer variance only allows for up to 300 feet of impacts to the stream (impacts being filling, piping, etc.). The applicant for the the buffer variance must print a notice in the local paper and the public is given a thirty day period to look over the proposed plans and state any objections. In rural areas, there are generally no objections as the only people that notice or care are those that border the project. Who reads public notices in newspapers anyways??

 

What I find even more disturbing is how contractors will go beyond their permits and completely mess up aquatic systems that were supposed to be temporarily impacted to a much less degree (there are different mitigation credits depending on permanent/temporary impacts). The funny (:() part is that the Army Corp of Engineers, which administrates the permitting process nationwide, is almost apathetic about performing compliance inspections. I've only seen them check something once, and that was a shocker.

One example. There is a five acre minimum for new homes. When the farm across the street went into development, the farmhouse and 13 acres was sold as one unit. There is a stream that runs thru there. The contractor whined about how this land compensates for the five acres and put pressure on the county government for his varience and ended up getting 20 additional houses on the fields above the stream on 2 acre lots. It didnt matter that the there are significant numbers of Blandings turtles using these fields for nesting (a threatened specie). I have done what I can to educate the people living there now on this one type of turtle and how to keep the turtles safe.

 

This contractor must have had some serious weight to be able to pressure the gov't like that! (In other words his proposition would bring big money to the county)

I'm not too familiar with zoning, but I do know that it is a shady business.

 

The turtles are state listed threatened, but are not listed as federal status. Hence, it's up to Minnesota State on how they handled the situation. In Georgia, the species is most often relocated by a permitted handler, or FWS.

 

Now there is a new development going in north of me that is even more devestating to the wildlife. This development will border the shores of a lake and housing is being built on less than one acre lots. Again the 5 acre minimum should apply but thru pressures put on the local government by the contractor, the rules were changed again. The only bonus is the slowing of the housing market has delayed the building of these homes some. But its only a matter of time.

 

Sorry for you mate. I guess the consolation prize is that it will raise the value of your property significantly so when you are ready to burrow further away from the sprawl, you'll have better means. :shrug:

It's sad really. Unchecked development fragments precious ecotones and wildlife passageways. It's obviously not too popular with the natives either.

[freeztar]

@Maikeru

 

Utah is one of my favorite states geologically, but I am put off by the weirdness of the native culture, in general.

 

Even if the state isn't looking after it's resources too well, at least the feds (Clinton) put in the Grand Staircase-Escalantes National Monument (even amid controversy :?). Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[maikeru]

The weirdness was and is a bit too much for me also. We're *in* the American West but not exactly *part* of it.

 

Part of the problem I see here is, as Cedars mentioned, rampant, almost seemingly unrestrained development, along Utah Lake's shores and up in the mountains and canyons, which has impacted the environment, mostly the streams, lake, and its wetlands. The more beautiful it is, the better, because it can host a few more condos, cabins, or housing developments with a great view (even if the houses slip down the sides of the hills and mountains after heavy rain, as seems increasingly common in the news). This is fueled largely by the high birthrate and population growth (which is religiously influenced).

 

Not everyone needs to own a large home, an SUV, a boat, hunting rifles, and have 7-12 kids, thanks. This seems pretty common in Utah Valley. There's got to be a limit...and if people won't limit themselves, the land, environment, and resources will.

[Cedars]

This contractor must have had some serious weight to be able to pressure the gov't like that! (In other words his proposition would bring big money to the county)

I'm not too familiar with zoning, but I do know that it is a shady business.

 

The turtles are state listed threatened, but are not listed as federal status. Hence, it's up to Minnesota State on how they handled the situation. In Georgia, the species is most often relocated by a permitted handler, or FWS.

 

This was an amazing example of manipulation that I had never seen before. The county I grew up in is a stickler for the 5 acre minimum. With this current residence and county, I listened with amazement as the contractor used the plat maps of the area and insisted that because the surrounding acreage was higher (still farmland), the density of the housing allowed for him to place more than his maximums. The people in the crowd pointed out that you cannot allow a higher density for this one parcel because there is no way you can or should be allowed to prevent the neighboring acreage from being developed under the 5 acre minimums.

 

There was one county commissioner on the locals side and took the development issues seriously. But a majority still voted to allow this under a "whats one development gonna hurt" and we were told by the pro commissioner side "we dont care about a few turtles". No one in the crowd wanted to deny the development, but we all wanted them to adhere to the five acre standard that everyone else in that room lived by.

[freeztar]

But a majority still voted to allow this under a "whats one development gonna hurt" and we were told by the pro commissioner side "we dont care about a few turtles". No one in the crowd wanted to deny the development, but we all wanted them to adhere to the five acre standard that everyone else in that room lived by.

 

Heh! The pro-commissioner side might not care about "a few turtles" (did this include the commissioners?!?!), but I gaurantee you the Dept. of Natural Resources and Fish and Wildlife Service do! All it would have taken was a call to DNR to let them know about the presence of the turtles and they would have slapped a cease and desist order on the project so fast it would have made heads spin.

 

I wonder if the commissioners realized that it is a pretty grave offense to intentionally kill threatened and endangered species, including jail time and very hefty fines.

[freeztar]

In the news...

American Scientist Online - Banking on Mitigation

 

I have several issues with this article, but I'd like to hear some other takes on the subject before I dissect the article.