(List of References)
It is a requirement of permitting for a particular project; it all
goes back to the National Environmental Policy Act and State Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) locally which required us to assess the impacts of any
action and mitigate its impacts on the envirnoment. We can mitigate for
wetland loss (Clean Water Act (CWA) requirement) as well as mitigate for
loss of sensitve species habitat (Endangered Species Act (ESA)).
To soften the effect of development with a loss or impact by creating,
restoring, or enhancing wetlands, on or off-site.
Placing mitigation in ecological context: mitigation in space and time
• local laws and ordinances
• condition of approval of permit
• SEPA requirements
fully functional wetland/native plant/habitat system, connected to
all its links (riparian, estuarine, lakes, watershed, ground water aquifers)
Considering that less than 20% are successful, 1:1 equates with a
net wetlands loss. Ratios must be developed in the future that are realistic
b. in kind:
e.g. forested -- forested; open water -- open water; bog -- bog? (sometimes not possible)
3. Hydrogeomorphic method
4. Biological diversity model
2. Linkages/watersheds/corridors/location["location is everything"]
b. Target Site
G. REFERENCE SITES
2. History of disturbance
3. Parameters to measure
a. Native species from local sources to insure genetic purity
b. Salvage vs. grown material
2. Criteria: Enough for the job; over plant; replace; maintain density
to the end.
3. Minimize human disturbance; not a park, but functional wetlands.
3. The players change: owners, contractors, agency representatives.
4. What are the priorities? not $.
5. Follow up by agency is not funded/available nor even mentioned.
2. Attend the hearings with clear and concise points regarding the
proposed text, e.g. are the ratios realistic?
3. Get on SEPA review list
4. Get on local mailing lists
5. Watch for posted notices on proposed land use actions
6. Ask to see the review by agencies and conditions of approval
7. Review the results of the annual monitoring
A statistical design is worth 10,000 words
4. Was the design of monitoring randomly selected (i.e. scientific
5. How do we evaluate monitoring; what are the results telling us?
Do we have agency support?
NO » prepare review to go before a Hearing Examiner and SEPA
7. Volunteer assistance; attempt to get access to the site throughout
Survival (e.g. woody species)
Population Size (Counts)
Hydrology Seasonal saturation (ground water wells)
Topography Slopes Contours
a. Oversight of permit conditions
b. Design of SAO/CAO and criteria
c. Use of native local material
2. Monitoring (All phases)
4. Monitoring must be required at the permit approval level.
Work to insure this!
Currently less than 53% of permits require monitoring.
5. The nightmare of buffer width averaging; the weakest link is the narrowest point.
II. NATIVE PLANTS IN RESTORATION
A. KNOW YOUR SITE
2. Reference sites: see what they can tell you
3. Soils: Use county soil survey information
4. Review background reports
2. On-site nurseries can help, especially in urban, highly disturbed
3. Seed use: Caution on source. Lodgepole pine example. Animal predation.
H. Total Failure
To replant or redesign entire system.