Principals' Staff Committee
903R90110
Chesapeake Bay
Wetlands Policy
Implementation Plan
Chesapeake
Bay
Program
Implementation Plan
December 1990
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Chesapeake Bay
Wetlands Policy Implementation Plan
A Commitment Implementation Plan from
the Principals' Staff Committee
Annapolis, Maryland
December 1990
Printed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency
for the
Chesapeake Bay Program
-------
Table of Contents
I. Summary 1
n. Introduction 8
ffl. Implementation Plan 9
A. Plan Framework 9
B. Plan Tasks, Implementors and Schedules 10
1. Defining the Resource: Inventory and Mapping 12
2. Holding the Line: Protecting Existing Wetlands 19
3. Building the Base: Rehabilitating, Restoring and
Creating Wetlands 27
4. Extending the Vision: Education 31
5. Extending the Vision: Research 37
IV. Financing 41
Glossary 42
-------
CHAPTER I. SUMMARY
Background
In recognition of the importance of wetlands to the environmental and economic health of the
Bay, the Chesapeake Bay Executive Council adopted the Chesapeake Bav Wetlands Policy (the
"Policy") in December 1988. The Policy includes a commitment by the Executive Council to
adopt implementation plans by June 1990. The Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy Implementation
Plan (the"Plan'") is prepared in response to that commitment.
The Policy establishes an immediate goal of no net loss with a long term goal of a net resource
gain for tidal and nontidal wetlands. It defines four areas in which proposed actions are to be
accomplished. These four focus areas are:
Defining the Resource: Inventory and Mapping Activities,
Holding the Line: Protecting Existing Wetlands,
Building the Base: Rehabilitating, Restoring and Creating Wetlands,
and
Extending the Vision: Education and Research.
In the Plan, education and research are treated as distinct categories, thereby forming five
implementation focus areas.
The Policy stipulates, and the Plan incorporates time periods for implementation, particularly
with regard to mapping, status and trends analysis, and cumulative impact assessment.
Implementation Plan
The Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy Implementation Plan (the "Plan") presents tasks to guide
evolving federal, state, and local programs which allow flexibility for diverse jurisdictional
priorities and resources.
The Plan establishes a process of implementation in three phases that will 1) strengthen existing
programs, establish a baseline and define additional program needs; 2) initiate regional actions such
as wetland monitoring and mapping; and 3) implement new programs to achieve no net loss and
reach for the goal of net resource gain.
A chart listing all Policy implementation tasks and schedules is found at the end of this
Chapter. A glossary of abbreviations used to designate lead implementors is found at the end of
the Plan.
The Plan tasks scheduled for immediate action contribute to the first phase of Policy
implementation and create the foundation for future actions. They are summarized here in
the order that they appear in the Plan text, which does not connote order of priority.
• Develop and implement a ten year cyclic mapping program to map all tidal and nontidal
wetlands in the Chesapeake Bay watershed at a scale and resolution needed to support the actions
specified in the Policy.
-------
This program will result in the development of new mapping programs in some states but will
require the updating of NWI and digitization of SCS hydric soils information at a minimum.
Federal agencies and states will implement this mapping program on a schedule that correlates
with individual state programs. The maps created are intended to provide more accessible,
more reliable information about wetland locations. These maps are not intended to be used to
substitute for on the ground identification and delineation. (Task Ml)
• Initiate a five year cyclic analysis of the status and trends of Bay watershed wetlands.
The analysis will provide a statistically valid description of changes in wetland locations, types,
acreage and functions and the causes of those changes. This task includes the establishment of
a baseline, development of an annual monitoring and inventory program and production of a
five year status and trends assessment. (Task M2)
• Develop technical guidelines for wetlands protection for land owners, developers and
regulators to use for the design and evaluation of regulated and unregulated activities.
Substantial efforts are already underway and proposed by the regulatory agencies in this task
area. This task will identify technical procedures that can be used to assess and minimize the
wetland impacts of proposed projects and actions. (Task PI)
• Identify a Bay wetlands protection strategy based on information about existing state and
federal programs and the status of Bay wetlands.
State and federal program priorities will be identified in the Bay strategy to provide guidance
for targeting regional activities and funds to achieve the goals of the Chesapeake Bav Wetlands
Policy. (TaskP2)
• Develop advisory criteria for review and approval of mitigation plans.
Criteria will include wetland functional analysis and acreage calculations for wetland impacts
using a wetlands assessment model such as WET II, as well as capability to assure the potential
success of proposed mitigation. The development of criteria for mitigation is critical to the
successful achievement of no net loss of existing wetlands. (Task Cl)
• Formulate and begin execution of incentive programs as appropriate to achieve no net loss and
net resource gain.
Inventory existing and potential incentives for wetlands protection, restoration, rehabilitation
and creation and institute recommendations for increasing their use. (Task C2)
• Develop programs to provide current information to the public about Bay wetlands values and
protection needs.
Make educational materials and experiences more accessible. (Task El)
• Formulate and begin execution of technical training programs for wetland managers in the areas
of wetland identification, delineation, functional assessment, mitigation and creation practices.
Coordinate and improve current technical training programs. (Task E3)
• Coordinate and expand technical assistance programs to support local government protection
efforts.
-------
Establish and maintain central sources of information to provide the public with current
information about wetlands. (Task E4)
• Establish a process to direct wetlands research and funds to achieve the goals of the
Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy.
This task will provide a comprehensive and continuing evaluation and reporting of research and
funding by users, researchers and funders. (Task Rl)
The Plan includes annual reports of implementation progress and five year evaluations of
success in achieving Policy goals based on actual changes in wetland resources. The first five year
evaluation will be in 1995. Oversight of Plan implementation will be provided by the Wetland
Workgroup composed of representatives of lead implementing agencies, scientists and citizens.
Short term tasks scheduled through 1992 will cost approximately $400,000 annually. The plan
proposed for this funding is that federal and state agencies will provide approximately half of the
funds through existing program budgets and for the remaining half to be requested from the
Chesapeake Bay Program budget Funds for long term implementation after 1992 are being
sought from new sources including congressional action. The rate of implementation progress
depends on the availability of funds.
-------
WETLAND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TASK CHART
LEAD AGENCY
MD
MD
MD
MD
TWS
NOAA
FWS
FWS
FWS
TASK NO.
M1a
M1b
M1c
M1d
M2a
M2b
M2c
M3a
M3b
TASK NAME
7/90
MAPPING AND INVENTORY
DEVELOP 10 YEAR MAPPING & INVENTO
Develop mapping strategy
Accomplish mapping
Make maps accessible to public
Establish inventory of aerials
9/90
1YPF
12/90
OGRA
3/91
M
6/91
•
DEVELOP 5 YEAR STATUS & TRENDS ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
Define baseline conditions
Design and initiate monitoring prograrr
Conduct status and trends analysis
MANAGE PUBLIC WETLANDS
Identify public wetlands
Evaluate public stewardship
• .
-
t ....
~~~~
-:
9/91
. — •
13/91
— *
*.M*t
3/92
6/92
9/92
12/92
»****>•
—fc
NOTES
Every 10 years
To be determined
To be determined
Every 5 years
1995
3/93
Evaluation in 1995
Glossary of abbreviations used to designate lead agencies can be found at t* end of tte plan.
-------
WETLAND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TASK CHART
LEAD AGENCY
EPA III
EPA III
EPA III
EPA III
EPA III
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
LRS
ACE-B
ACE-B
ACE-B
EPA-CBP
EPA-CBP
EPA-CBP
TASK NO.
P1a
P1b
P1c
P1d
P1e
P2a
P2b
P2c
P2d
P2e
P2f
P3
P4a
P4b
P4c
P5a
P5b
P5c
TASK NAME
7/90
9/90
12/90
PROTECTING EXISTING WETLANDS
DEVELOP TECHNICAL GUIDANCE D
Procedure guidance document
Evaluate proposed projects
Evaluate effectiveness
Produce handbook for local users
Use delineation manual
IDENTIFY BAYWIDE PROTECTION S
Describe State and Federal
programs and objectives
Conduct demo mgmt projects
Develop Bay strategy
Target resources to strategy
Evaluate regulatory programs
Revise strategies
COORDINATE W/ POP GROWTH CO
OCUfv
TRAT
MM
Coordinate w/ Pop Growth Comm I
CREATE PERMIT TRACKING SYSTEM
Investigate systems
Set up program
Report Data
EVALUATE PROGRESS
Produce annual progress report
Produce 5 year progress report
Evaluate and revise programs
ENT
EGY
t —
• ..
• -—
>**«
»*—*-***•
.*«k*4
*»**
*
3/91
—¥
-*
6/91
... •
9/91
12/91
-.*»
k
"-r
«...
l»W»^
»
£ ^^^
3/92
6/92
•
9/92
• ..
12/92
»•>
_.»
*
NOTES
1995
To be determined
1992-1995
1995
Each year subsequently
1995
Glossary ol abbreviations used to designate lead agencies can be found al tie end of fie plan.
-------
WETLAND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TASK CHART
LEAD AGENCY
FWS
MD
FWS
FWS
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
TASK NO.
C1a
C1b
C1c
C1d
C2a
C2b
C2c
C3a
C3b
C3c
C3d
TASK NAME
7/90
9/90
i#S
3/91
6/91
9/91
12/91
3/92
6/92
REHABILITATION, RESTORING AND CREATING WETLANDS
DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A WETI
Develop mitigation criteria
Develop and adopt assessment model
Investigate fees
Develop public review procedures
.AND'
Mini
3ATIO
FORMULATE AND BEGIN INCENTIVES PROGRAM
Inventory of incentives
Review existing programs
Institute recommendations
DEVELOP AN ACQUISITION PROGRAM
Inventory land acquisition programs
Review acquisition programs
Institute recommendations
Evaluate program effectiveness
• ...
— «—
*»*.
>
4PRC
GRA*
1
-. -t
t ...
4MBH.4
fr-M,*
****.#
,****
* .**,+
•
9/92
12/92
— *
NOTES
To be determined
To be determined
To be determined
To be determined
Glossary ol abbreviations used to designate lead agencies can be found at the end d fie plan.
-------
WETLAND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TASK CHART
LEAD AGENCY
ACE-N
EPA-CBP
EPA-CBP
EPAIII
EPAIII
EPAIII
LGAC
LGAC
LGAC
FWS
VA
VA
VA
VA
TASK NO.
Ela-c
E2a
E2b
E3a
E3b
E3c
E4a
E4b
E4c
E5a-c
Rla
R1b
R1c
R1d
TASK NAME
EDUCATION
DEVELOP CURRENT INFORMATION
Develop current info program
DEVELOP LIBRARY AND DATA BAS
Identify System
Implement recommendation
FORMULATE AND BEGIN TECHNICS
Identify State efforts
Designate Federal assistance
Certification program
DEVELOP TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
Develop coordination
Implement assistance
Establish central information sources
DEVELOP WETLAND CURRICULA
Develop curricula
RESEARCH |
ESTABLISH RESEARCH PROCESS
Organize research structure
Inventory projects and sources
Distribute info to users
Develop & Implement procedures to
ensure availability ol information
7/90
PROC
E
LTRi
PRO
9/90
IRAM
• ...
UNIN(
iHfr
**»M»**K4>
4 ***.
iPRO
• --J-i*,iii4.J
iRAMJ
t ...
t
• ...
It «.-
*««<*H*M*
~~~,
3/91
SRAM
->
•
— . •
~— • •
6/91
~*
• ...
~>
9/91
--*
•
• »-
12/91
.«^
»+*«*«*>*•
3/92
•
->
6/92
9/92
• .-
12/92
-w— *
..->
NOTES
To be determined
To be determined
Every two years
Glossary ol abbreviations used to designate lead agencies can be found at the end of tie plan.
-------
CHAPTER H. INTRODUCTION
The announcement by President Bush of a national "no net loss" wetlands policy is the result
of growing public concern about the rapid loss of these important resources. Wetlands provide
essential breeding, spawning, nesting and wintering habitats for a major portion of the region's
fish and wildlife. In addition, wetlands function to purify surface water, moderate flood flows,
maintain year round stream and river flows, reduce erosion and support commercial fishery and
recreation industries.
Chesapeake Bay watershed wetlands are recognized as some of the most important wetlands in
the United States and have received worldwide recognition as "Wetlands of International
Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat" under the 45 nation Ramsar Convention treaty.
Millions of recreationists and students enjoy the richness of Chesapeake Bay wetlands every year
in local, state and national parks, forests and wildlife refuges.
Wetlands lie within the transition areas between better drained, rarely flooded uplands and
permanently flooded deep waters such as rivers, ponds, lakes and coastal embayments. According
to US Fish and Wildlife Service studies, tidal and nontidal wetlands occupy about three percent of
the Chesapeake Bay watershed or approximately 1.2 million acres. (These figures do not include
farmed wetland acreage.) More than 80 percent of these wetlands are nontidal, predominantly
forested wetlands. The remaining 20 percent of Chesapeake Bay wetlands are tidal wetlands
which consist largely of tidal marshes and mud flats. These areas are periodically flooded by salt
or brackish water.
The Chesapeake Bay watershed experienced substantial losses of wetlands between the mid
1950s and late 1970s. Annual losses averaged over 2,800 acres. Tidal marshes were reduced by
about nine percent, whereas nontidal vegetated wetlands were reduced by six percent. With
increasing population growth and development in the Bay watershed wetland losses continue.
In recognition of the importance of wetlands to the environmental quality and economic
productivity of the Bay, the Chesapeake Executive Council adopted the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands
Policy (the "Policy") in December 1988. The Policy includes a commitment to adopt
implementation plans for the Policy by June 1990. In response to this commitment, the Living
Resources Subcommittee appointed a workgroup of representatives from the public and private
sectors to develop the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy Implementation Plan (the "Plan.1")
A description of the Plan tasks, implementors and schedules is presented in Chapter EL
Information about Plan financing is presented Chapter IV. The Plan recommends immediate
actions to prevent the loss of existing wetlands, and long-term actions to protect and increase
wetlands resources in the future. By providing better information and increasing communication
among multiple Bay agencies, Plan implementation will make it easier for land owners,
developers, public officials and citizens to protect, increase and enjoy Chesapeake Bay wetlands.
8
-------
CHAPTER ffl. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
A. Plan Framework
The Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy (the "Policy") stipulates some time periods for
implementation actions which influence the form of the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy
Implementation Plan (the Plan.'") These schedules include cooperative, comprehensive mapping of
all wetland areas at a time interval of not less than every ten years, a statistically valid status and
trends analysis every five years, and a continuing cumulative impact assessment
Implementation of the Policy will be accomplished with a combination of existing and new
programs administered by many jurisdictions and organizations. This includes the states of
Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Maryland, the District of Columbia, numerous Federal agencies (some
with mandated roles in wetland management), many local jurisdictions, public organizations and
the private sector. The Plan is constructed in recognition that all of these institutions have varying
capabilities to respond in terms of priorities, financial resources, and institutional support.
In response to the varying approaches to wetlands protection in each jurisdiction, the Plan has
been designed to guide evolving state, federal and local programs by outlining immediate regional
actions and longer term jurisdictional actions that will accomplish the goals of the Policy.
Accordingly, the tasks proposed can be considered in three phases, moving from current
conditions into the future as envisioned by the signatories of the Policy.
Immediate actions are taken in the first phase of implementation to improve the effectiveness of
existing programs, establish a baseline from which to measure the success of future actions, and
define additional actions needed to accomplish the long range goals of the Policy. Because these
tasks build upon programs already in place, the federal role in this initial stage (especially for
nontidal wetlands protection) is substantial.
A program which is critical in this phase is the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404
program which regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material. In addition, the "Swampbuster"
provisions of the 1985 Farm Bill are important to address wetland loss due to drainage and
cropping. During this phase the states will build upon the Clean Water Act Section 401
certification authority and other state programs already in place. As states develop more advanced
protection programs, their role in the implementation of the Policy will increase in relation to the
federal role .
In recognition that near term budgets are substantially committed, tasks in the first phase of
Policy implementation utilize existing information to target and hold down costs of actions in future
phases. The most significant of these tasks is to develop a Baywide management strategy to target
regional funds and actions to achieve the goals of the Policy.
In the second implementation phase, regional, technical tasks are implemented to support
future, long range actions and measure success. Tasks in this phase initiate mapping, inventorying
and monitoring programs and develop and implement a compensatory mitigation program.
Education and research efforts will accelerate in this phase as well. These and many other actions
on the local, state and federal levels will begin to accomplish the goal of no net loss.
In the third phase of Policy implementation, new programs are initiated to achieve no net loss
and reach for the long term goal of net resource gain. Tasks in this phase provide increased
coordination among wetland management programs and other pollution control and living resource
-------
management programs. Examples of tasks in this phase include more detailed Baywide wetland
management planning, implementation of incentive programs and coordination of acquisition
programs. Increased education efforts will be essential for implementing these advanced
programs.
The Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy requires that the Living Resources Subcommittee
provide an annual report to the Chesapeake Executive Council about the status of the
implementation programs and the effectiveness of the Policy goals in achieving protection and
restoration of Chesapeake Bay wetlands. While the annual report can describe the status of
programs, it is too frequent to provide a comprehensive assessment of progress towards achieving
the Policy goals. For this reason, the Plan includes a cyclic progress evaluation every five years
based on the statistical analysis of status and trends required by the Policy. The first five year
analysis and evaluation will be in 1995, with others every five years subsequently. The baseline
that will be used for the first cycle will be defined in 1990/1991.
Recognizing that jurisdictions will go through the phases of implementation at different speeds,
and with somewhat different approaches, the periodic progress evaluation each five years, based
on changes in wetland resources, will provide a common perspective from which to measure
achievements and refocus efforts.
Oversight of Plan implementation will be provided by the Wetland Workgroup, composed of
representatives of lead implementing agencies, scientists and citizens. Representatives of
organizations who have an interest in participating in the implementation of Plan tasks will be given
an opportunity to be involved. Mailing lists of interested people will be maintained by the Living
Resources Subcommittee to provide notices of meetings, reports and other information about
Policy implementation.
B. Plan Tasks, Implementors and Schedules
Each of the Plan's five focus area sections are organized as follows:
Policy Commitments: Commitments from the Chesapeake Bav Wetlands Policy are quoted in italic
at the beginning of each section. Each Policy commitment is assigned a capital and lower case
letter designation. These letters are cited after Plan tasks to enable the reader to relate Plan tasks
to specific Policy commitments. Capital letters correlate with focus areas as follows: Inventory
and Mapping (M), Protecting Existing Wetlands (P), Restoring, Rehabilitating and Creating
Wetlands (C), Education (E) and Research (R).
Current Programs: A brief summary of existing wetland protection and management programs and
gaps for accomplishing the Policy commitments quoted above is provided.
Tasks: The implementation tasks needed to accomplish the commitments from the Policy are listed
in tables with recommended implementors and schedules. Each major task is assigned a capital
letter and number designation. The capital letters correlate with the focus areas (as explained in
"Policy Commitments" above.) The Policy commitments addressed most directly by each
implementation task are referenced in brackets after each major task.
Implementors: The organization with lead responsibility for coordination and completion of each
task (the "lead" agency) is listed first before other major organizational participants. The
abbreviations used to identify implementors are defined in the glossary found at the end of the
Plan.
10
-------
Schedule: Dates for implementation are specified for immediate tasks that build upon existing
programs, provide essential support for future actions and require close coordination among
jurisdictions. The dates established will provide information for budget planning and
implementation before the five year status and trends assessment in 1995. Dates scheduled for
"first phase" implementation tasks are designated with an asterisk (*).
Time frames for long range tasks are noted to indicate that implementation is dependent upon
the completion of other tasks ("To be determined") or that their scheduling is cyclic ("1992,
every year"; "1995, every five years".)
1 1
-------
1. DEFINING THE RESOURCE: INVENTORY AND MAPPING
Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy
The following are the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy commitments for inventorying and
mapping in the Agreement Commitment Report signed by the Chesapeake Executive Council:
• "The signatories shall collectively design and institute a wetland resource monitoring strategy
which will provide for a continuing quantitative evaluation of wetland distribution and
functional characteristics.
Actions:
[M] Formulate and begin execution of a comprehensive inventory, mapping, and monitoring
plan which, at a minimum, includes:
[M(a)J A cooperative, comprehensive mapping of all wetland areas at a time interval of not less
than every ten years.
[M(b)J A statistically valid status and trends analysis every five years.
[M(c)J A continuing cumulative impact assessment.
[M(d)J A monitoring program for existing wetlands sites of various types within selected
physiographic regions to quantify functions and values and document changes occurring
over time within these systems.
[M(e)J A monitoring program for invasive or exotic species and appropriate control methods.
[M(f)J A regional data base of permitted activities."
Current Programs
Numerous federal, state and local wetlands inventory and mapping programs already exist.
These programs exhibit a variety of mapping uses, scales and methods.
The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) is the only comprehensive watershedwide mapping
system. However, NWI has shortcomings. Farmed nontidal wetlands are not included in the
inventory. These maps exclude many unfarmed wetlands as well, especially the nontidal wetlands
which constitute the majority of wetlands in the Bay watershed. The 1:24,000 scale of the NWI is
difficult to use for local development planning and review. Maps are needed that can be overlaid
with local maps and plans.
National Wetlands Inventory maps have been produced for all of Maryland, Pennsylvania, and
Virginia by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Maps produced with older black and white aerial
photographs are less inclusive of all wetland types and sizes than those produced later with color
infrared photographs. Maps in Virginia east of the 78th parallel are the most out dated NWI maps
in the Bay watershed. Not all Chesapeake Bay NWI maps have been digitized, nor is NWI's
MOSS format compatible with most other Bay area geographic information systems.
12
-------
Maryland has produced Nontidal Wetlands Guidance Maps that are a composite of SPOT
satellite images and National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) vector data. Map Image Processing
Systems (MIPS) is used by Maryland to store, access, and analyze digital image data for nontidal
wetlands and a wide variety of other purposes. MIPS is also used by Maryland's Tidal Wetlands
Program to store 1885 aerial photography at a scale of 1"=1000'. Maryland has committed to
using computer technology to effectively meet the requirements of the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands
Policy.
The agencies of the Commonwealth of Virginia have been working cooperatively in recent
years to complete the wetland mapping in Virginia and to update those maps in the coastal areas.
The ultimate goal is to have up to date and digitized maps of the entire state incorporated into the
Virginia digitized database to facilitate planning and protection efforts and track wetland losses and
gains.
The NWI has recently been revised for that portion of Virginia west of the 78th parallel (195).
The VA Department of Conservation and Recreation has contracted with the US Fish and Wildlife
Service to digitize these new maps as well as begin the remapping and digitizing of Tidewater or
coastal Virginia. All digitized data will be made available to the resource and regulatory agencies of
the Commonwealth and the federal government.
NWI maps for Pennsylvania have been completed. To date, Pennsylvania has not developed a
statewide geographical information system.
Some local governments throughout the watershed have undertaken wetland inventory and
mapping programs to assist in land use planning and wetlands protection efforts. A number of
these local efforts are being conducted in response to state programs like the Maryland Critical
Areas Law, and the Virginia Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act criteria. In addition, the
watershed's local governments through their own initiative have undertaken additional wetland
mapping and inventory responsibilities, often in conjunction with other local governments and the
Soil and Water Conservation Districts.
Obtaining available maps and statistics is time consuming and difficult for users. The Bay
community lacks a clearinghouse for identifying mapping resources and needs. Many Bay
agencies invest in mapping products and CIS capabilities to meet specific agency needs. More
interagency coordination is needed to enhance the usefulness and economy of such efforts.
There is no comprehensive program to assess the functions of wetlands, to identify or monitor
direct, indirect or cumulative impacts, or to evaluate the effectiveness and need for specific
management techniques. The limited information generated by the US Fish and Wildlife Service
about trends is dated and is not specific enough for state and local program planning and
evaluation. There are no plans for the Service to perform a new status and trends assessment.
With increasing urbanization in the Bay watershed, frequent updates of trends analyses are needed.
The Baltimore District Corps of Engineers has implemented a computer driven "Permit and
Enforcement System". This system is being used by the Philadelphia District and is scheduled to
be used by the Norfolk District to provide computerized information about permitted activities. The
state of Virginia maintains a permit tracking database for tidal wetlands.
Pennsylvania uses a permit application tracking system (state data base called LUMIS) to
determine status, turn-over time and location of applications requesting permission to impact
wetlands. The state of Maryland established a permit tracking data base in 1989 that monitors tidal
wetlands. Maryland will convert both its tidal and nontidal wetland permit tracking systems in
1991 to the RAMS software developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
13
-------
Alterations to wetlands that are permitted are not currently recorded in regionally comparable
formats to summarize the magnitude of permitted activities and the potential impact those decisions
have on Chesapeake Bay weSands. The impact of past decisions are virtually unknown. The
current inadequate and inaccessible data base weakens enforcement In summary, current
limitations of existing programs Baywide are incomplete data, data incompatibility among
jurisdictions, inefficient access for multiple users, inadequate storage, and lack of analytical
capabilities.
14
-------
Implementation Tasks
M1. Develop and implement a ten year cyclic mapping program to map all tidal and nontidal
wetlands in the Chesapeake Bay watershed at a scale and resolution needed to support the actions
specified in the Policy. This program will result in the development of new mapping programs in
some states but will require the updating of NWI maps and digitization of SCS hydric soils
information at a minimum. Federal agencies and states will implement this mapping program on a
schedule that correlates with individual state programs. The maps created are intended to provide
more reliable indications of wetland locations. These and other maps should not be used to
substitute for on the ground identification and delineation. This task will contribute to the
accomplishment of Policy action [M(a)].
Implementor
Lead:
Other
States
LGAC
FWS
SCS
NOAA
Implementation Task
a. Develop a regional ten year cyclic mapping
program for the Chesapeake Bay watershed
wetlands. Recommendations will include an
assessment and report of existing mapping
programs, recommended actions, costs,
responsible agencies and an implementation
schedule based on funding and manpower
objectives (see Task P2).
At a minimum, the mapping program will
provide for the updating of NWI and the
digitizing of SCS hydric soils information for
the purpose of overlaying these two sources of
information. Though the accuracy of the early
mapped data will vary, the long range objective
of the program will be to produce maps with
one acre resolution for local and regional land
use planning and review. (As the technology
improves, the products will reflect revisions to
the minimum size mapped.)
Recommendations will include mapping
standards to allow exchange of information
among users and overlaying of wetland maps
with other resource and land use maps. The
long-term product will provide information
about wetland locations, types, acreage and
functions. This information will be provided in
a form that can be conveniently incorporated
with information about hydric soils location and
series names, adjacent steep slopes, and
credible soils; perennial waterways; existing
land use; and other important natural features.
The mapped products will be accessible and
useful to local, state and federal public and
private users but will not be intended to
substitute for on the ground identification and
delineation.
Schedule
9/90->*
15
-------
(Above) b. Accomplish the mapping as agreed to in the
mapping program developed in (a) above for the
ten year cycle as resources permit. To be determined
(Above) c. Make hard copy maps of current wetlands
information accessible to the public (see Tasks
E2 and E4c). To be determined
(Above) d. Establish a central clearinghouse to facilitate
EPA-CBP access to existing and proposed federal, state
and local aerial photographs of the Bay region.
Produce a regularly updated list of the date,
type, scale and agency in possession of the
photography. 6/91 *
M2. Initiate a five year cyclic analysis of the status and trends of Bay watershed wetlands.
Within the limits of the data available, the analysis will provide a statistically valid description of
changes in wetland locations, types, acreage and functions and the causes of those changes. This
task includes the establishment of a baseline, development of an annual monitoring and inventory
program and production of a five year status and trends assessment. This task will contribute to
the accomplishment of Policy actions [M(b,c,d,e)].
Lead: a. Define baseline conditions with which to
FWS measure progress towards achieving net
Other resource loss and gain. 9/90->*
All
1) Produce a summary report of existing
information about Bay watershed wetland
locations, types, acreages, functions and
threats. The report will include information
available about the following topics:
- gains and losses of wetlands acreage and
functions;
- the sources and effects of direct, indirect and
cumulative impacts, distinguishing the impacts
of permitted and unregulated activities where
possible;
- extent and control of exotic species;
- success and failure of restoration,
rehabilitation and creation projects;
- trends in wetland ownership;
- endangered, threatened or rare species habitat;
- significant, representative or unique wetland
areas within watersheds;
- wetland areas subject to high growth
pressure;
- regions of high historic wetland loss;
- wetlands contiguous to other protected open
space. 9/90-12/90
16
-------
Lead:
NOAA
Other
All
Lead:
FWS
Other
All
2) Define a baseline of Bay watershed wetland
locations, types, acreages and functions which
will be used to assess progress in achieving the
Policy goals of no net loss and net resource gain
(Task P5). Information about functions will be
qualitative in nature. The baseline estimate
should draw upon the best information and
statistical sampling methods available at the time
of its development The definition should
include a description of the limitations of the
information and methods used.
3) Prepare a report describing the initial baseline
that will be used in the five year status and
trends analysis in 1995.
4) Produce a report describing a revised baseline
estimate every five years in coordination with
the five year status and trends assessment (Task
M2c).
b. Design and initiate a monitoring and
inventory program for Bay watershed wetlands.
1) Draft a prototype Bay wide monitoring and
inventory program. This prototype will provide
information for developing state monitoring
programs.
2) Incorporate applicable components of the
prototype monitoring and inventory program
into federal, state and local monitoring
programs.
3) Conduct the monitoring and inventory
program as resources permit.
4) Produce annual monitoring reports. The
reports will summarize information from
mapping, monitoring and permit tracking
relevant to topics specified for the five year
status and trends assessment in Task M2al.
c. Produce a statistically valid status and trends
assessment every five years beginning in 1995.
The reports will address the topics specified in
Task M2al. The assessment will take into
account the limitations of the information and
methods described in the baseline.
1/91-6/91
6/91-12/91
6/95-12/95
every five years
6/90-9/91*
3/92->
6/90-9/91
9/91-3/92
3/92->
9/92, every year
1/95-6/95, every
five years
17
-------
M3. Provide an example of Policy implementation with the management of publicly owned
wetlands in the Chesapeake Bay. This task will contribute to the accomplishment of all policy
actions.
Lead: a. Identify locations, acreage, types and
FWS management objectives for wetlands on all
Other federal, state, and where possible local
States government owned land in the Bay watershed. 3/91-3/93
DC
LGAC
Federal
(Above) b. Evaluate effectiveness of agencies'
stewardship in achieving no net loss and net
resource gain goals and revise plans in
coordination with five year progress evaluation 6/95-12/95
(Task P5). every five years
18
-------
2. HOLDING THE LINE: PROTECTING EXISTING WETLANDS
Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy
The following arc the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy commitments for protecting existing
wetlands in the Agreement Commitment Report signed by the Chesapeake Executive Council:
"Watershed Management and Planning
• The signatories to this agreement will use existing programs and develop new programs to limit
permanent and irreversible, direct and indirect impacts to wetlands. Only in rare instances will
losses of wetland acreage or function be allowed or considered justifiable.
• The signatories to this agreement will minimize indirect alterations within the watershed which
have the potential to adversely impact wetlands.
• The signatories will implement management practices designed to reduce cumulative wetland
losses.
Actions:
fPW(a)] The signatories agree to incorporate the principle of wetlands protection and the
management of other sensitive Chesapeake Bay living resource habitats into the various
strategies, policies and guidelines which will result from Population Growth and
Development Commitments of the 1987 Bay Agreement.
[PW(b)J To eliminate or minimize indirect impacts to wetlands, the signatories will coordinate
permitting and management programs and the use of protective buffers and other
techniques which serve to maintain important and functional characteristics of wetlands.
[PW(c)] The signatories agree to develop a Baywide planning process for wetlands with the goal
of protecting wetlands and associated resources through innovative land use controls."
"Regulatory and Protection Standards
• The signatories will, at a minimum, implement protection standards for those areas and
activities not adequately protected under Federal law and programs. These protection standards
will address, but not be limited to: enforcement, buffers, protection of basis wetland
functions, "best management practices," alternative actions, and water-dependent uses.
Actions:
[PR(a)] Review the effectiveness of existing regulatory programs and recommend corrective
actions to honor the policy commitment and monitor and revise such programs as
necessary over time.
[PR(b)] Where not otherwise in place, develop a projected implementation schedule by June 1990
to establish protection standards which honor the policy commitment.
19
-------
[PR(c)J Cooperatively develop a process to identify and protect wetland areas of special concern,
and consider, where appropriate, the institution of procedures under Section 404(c) of the
Clean Water Act.
[PR(d)J Work toward the development of a single Baywide field manual for the delineation of
vegetated nontidal wetlands.
[PR(e)J Develop a guidance document for regulatory and protection standards."
"Incentives
• The signatories will collectively develop and execute a range of private sector incentive
programs which support wetland protection.
• Government sanctioned programs which are counterproductive to wetland protection will be
eliminated whenever possible.
Actions:
[PI] Formulate and begin execution of an incentive policy implementation plan which, at a
minimum includes:
[PI(a)J Identifying state and Federal programs or policies which result in wetland losses and
correcting program deficiencies.
[PI(b)J Enhancing existing incentive programs to encourage wetland protection.
[PI(c)] Creating new incentive programs to encourage wetland protection.
[PI(d)J Investigating the use of penalties or other disincentives to reduce wetland losses."
"Land Acquisition
• The signatories will identify priority areas for wetland preservation.
• The signatories will provide for acquisition of lands for the purpose of protecting significant
wetland values or the public's right to use and enjoy wetlands where such lands are a pan of
acquisition programs administered by public agencies.
Action:
[PA] Develop a strategic plan for land acquisition which includes wetlands and appropriate
adjacent uplands and aquatic areas as a pan of new or ongoing public acquisition
programs."
Current Programs
In the past few years much has been done to improve the level of protection of wetlands in the
jurisdictions of the signatories of the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy. Regulatory programs have
been reinforced with increased personnel, strengthened enforcement and continued education
efforts by local, state and federal agencies. The number of wetland protection programs at the local
level is growing as the pressure on wetlands intensifies with increasing population growth and
20
-------
development Legislation, regulations and policies on all jurisdictional levels are changing rapidly.
These changes reflect growing knowledge of wetlands and their management and protection needs.
The following is a summary of some of the gaps that remain despite current efforts.
Federal, state and local priorities for wetland management are not well defined. Interagency
protection decisions, especially permit decisions, are therefore often difficult to predict by land
owners, planners and developers. Current programs for protecting existing wetlands focus on
short term and site specific management problems, without priorities for protecting and managing
larger resource systems and more significant long term, cumulative threats. In general, current
protection and management efforts are focused on controlling direct impacts within jurisdictional
wetland boundaries.
Advance identification is a procedure authorized by the Federal Clean Water Act to identify, in
advance of individual permit requests, areas that are generally suitable or unsuitable for the deposit
of dredged or fill material. This process has been applied only on a very limited basis in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed. Advance Identification and other planning tools such as Special Area
Management Plans could contribute to the accomplishment of Chesapeake Bav Wetland Policy
goals in every area, particularly in reducing the need for and expense of permit review and
enforcement by providing advanced guidance. The urgent need to apply the limited funding and
personnel available to permit review and enforcement is the largest reason cited for not making
resources available for advance identification.
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act establishes federal authority to protect waters of the United
States (including tidal and nontidal wetlands) from the impacts of the discharge of dredged or fill
material. This legislation does not require permits for clear cutting wetland vegetation, drying up
wetlands by diverting or withdrawing water, or digging out wetlands unless a discharge is
involved. The Section 404 program provides for general permits which currently may allow filling
of up to ten acres of isolated and headwater wetlands (wetlands adjacent to small streams.) Federal,
state and local protection efforts are weakened significantly because of the lack of personnel and
funds for enforcement.
Some of the activities impacting wetlands which are not addressed by federal laws are
addressed by Maryland's state Critical Area Tidal Wetlands and Wetland Protection laws.
Maryland's Nontidal Wetlands Protection Act is the first state wetlands statute with "no net loss,
and eventual resource gain" as the main goal. Regulations approved by the Maryland legislature
this year for the Nontidal Wetlands Protection Act will be implemented beginning in January 1991.
Maryland has been regulating the dredging, filling and alteration of tidal wetlands since the passage
of the Tidal Wetlands Act in 1971.
Pennsylvania regulates activities in wetlands under the authority of the Dam Safety and
Encroachments Act of 1978, and the rules and regulations developed pursuant to that Act found at
Title 25 Pennsylvania Code Chapter 105. These rules and regulations provide greater protection to
wetlands than the current federal program developed under the authority of the Clean Water ACL
Pennsylvania has implemented an aggressive wetland protection program which is guided by
the "Department of Environmental Resources Wetlands Protection Action Plan" which was issued
on September 19, 1988. That plan focuses on strengthening the existing program through
improved permit coordination, increased permit review and field enforcement staff, the creation of
an education and technical assistance program, and the adoption of the Federal Manual for
Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. The plan also calls for improvements to the
present regulations to clarify and further define the Commonwealth's role in wetlands regulations
and protection.
21
-------
Since the passage of the Tidal Wetlands Act in 1972, Virginia has had a permit program for
activities in tidal wetlands. Until recently Virginia relied upon federal legislation for the protection
of nontidal wetlands. The passage of legislation establishing the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act
will increase protection to tidal and nontidal wetlands in Tidewater Virginia. The Virginia Water
Protection Permit Program will also increase Virginia's role in protecting nontidal wetlands.
Many agricultural activities are exempt from federal and state regulatory programs. The major
program addressing agricultural drainage of wetlands is the "Swampbuster" provision of the 1985
Food Security Act (Farm Bill). Farmers who fill or drain wetlands and plant commodity crops are
subject to loss of federal agricultural subsidies.
Though the ACE permit tracking system provides a start, existing permit tracking systems do
not to provide information to assess the impacts of permitted activities, to facilitate coordination of
approval and enforcement action among agencies, or to provide easier access for permit applicants
to information about the status of their permits.
Regulatory and protection standards are not agreed upon among public agencies. Such
agreements would increase consistency and ease of application for multiple reviewers and
applicants in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Innovative protection and management approaches
are often discouraged because of lack of standards, manpower, and expertise to assess, follow up
and enforce special conditions. Public works standards and other local development guidelines are
often in conflict with resource protection goals and limiting to innovative management solutions.
A significant component of wetlands protection programs is a sound and usable method for
determining the location of these resources. As wetlands programs continue to develop within the
Bay watershed, the use of a consistent methodology for identifying wetlands is an important goal.
The Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands ("Manual1") was
adopted in 1989 by the US Army Corps of Engineers, US Soil Conservation Service, US Fish and
Wildlife Service, and the US Environmental Protection Agency to provide a consistent
methodology for determining the location of wetlands. Pennsylvania and Maryland have adopted
the Manual for the administration of their wetland regulatory programs. The Manual will continue
to provide the methodology for the full range of wetlands determininations. However, as research
and program development in the area of wetlands types and functions progress, refinements may
be made to the relationship between various types of wetlands identified through the use of the
Manual and specific wetlands program procedures.
The most visible incentives for wetlands protection are negative incentives such as penalties for
permit violation. A significant exception is the conservation reserve program which pays farmers
to take certain areas out of production including farmed wetlands and buffers around wetlands.
Despite their innovation, programs such as tax incentives and transfers of development rights are
not yet found in many areas of the Bay region.
Conservation easements are restrictions on the use of land for the purpose of preserving its
natural features. Easements can be a very effective tool for wetland protection and also benefit the
landowner who may receive monetary compensation or tax benefits for granting the easement.
However, the success of conservation easements as a wetland protection tool is dependent upon
the willingness of property owners to sell or donate their rights to develop their land. Public and
private acquisition efforts often are not planned to reinforce each other to efficiently protect wetland
systems.
22
-------
Implementation Tasks
P1. Develop technical guidelines for wetlands protection for land owners, developers and
regulators to use for the design and evaluation of regulated and unregulated activities. Substantial
efforts are already underway and proposed by the regulatory agencies in this task area. This task
will identify procedures that can be used to assess and minimize the wetland impacts of proposed
projects and actions. This task will contribute to the accomplishment of the Policy actions [PR(a),
P(b)andPR(e)].
Implementor
Lead:
EPADI
Other
All
(Above)
(Above)
Lead:
EPAIH
Other
States
Lead:
EPAHI
Other
All
Implementation Task Schedule
a. Produce and distribute a wetlands protection
guidance document. The document will
describe technical procedures for the design and
evaluation of projects and actions potentially
affecting wetlands. It will address the following
elements of wetland protection at a minimum:
buffers, protection of basic wetland functions,
"best management practices," alternative
actions, water dependent uses, long term
maintenance, and enforcement. Protection 9/90-12/91*
procedures may vary among jurisdictions.
b. Use the guidance document developed in (a)
above to evaluate proposed projects and actions.
Recommend and take actions where feasible to
implement the protection procedures. 9/92->
c. Evaluate effectiveness of the wetlands
protection guidance document in (a) above in
coordination with the five year program 1995, every
evaluation (Task P5). five years
d. Produce or update a handbook similar to that
developed by the Environmental Law Institute
for Pennsylvania and Maryland for use by
citizens and local officials to summarize current
wetland protection and management programs
and to provide information about actions that
can be taken at the local level to protect
wetlands.
To be determined
e. Use the Federal Manual for Identifying and
Delineating Jurisdicrional Wetlands as the
technical basis for the consistent identification of
wetlands in all Bay states and work to refine the
relationship between various types of wetlands
identified under the Manual and specific
wetlands program procedures. 12/90->*
23
-------
P 2. Identify a Bay wetlands protection strategy based on information about existing state and
federal programs and the status of Bay wetlands. State and federal program priorities will be
identified in the Bay strategy to provide guidance for targeting funds and regional actions to
achieve the goals of the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy. This task will contribute to the
accomplishment of Policy actions [PW(c), PR(c), PA and CA(b).
Lead:
VA
Other
(Above)
(Above)
(Above)
(Above)
(Above)
a. Compile a description of existing state and
federal programs and objectives for managing
and protecting wetlands in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed. Informatiocompiled will include
identification of:
1) program priorities,
2) wetlands designated for special management
actions such as restoration, rehabilitation and
expansion (or established processes and criteria
to identify such wetlands), and
3) wetland resource management objectives. 9/90-6/91 *
b. Conduct demonstration watershed
management projects in targeted areas to provide
examples of Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy
implementation. 9/90->*
c. Develop a Baywide wetlands management
strategy based on existing state and federal
management programs (Task P2a) and the
summary of existing information about Bay
wetlands (Task M2a).
d. Target Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy
Implementation Plan tasks and funds to
implement the Baywide wetlands management
strategy.
12/91-12/92*
1992-1995
e. Evaluate the adequacy, gaps, and linkages
among existing regulatory programs to achieve
the goals of the Chesapeake Bav Wetlands
Policy. Report and implement improvements
which are needed including recommended
sources of funding. 1/92-12/92*
f. Revise state and federal management
programs and objectives and the Bay wetlands
management strategy as part of the five year
cyclic evaluation of progress towards achieving
the goals of the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands
Policy (Task P5). Evaluations will be based on
the results of the annual and five year status and 1995, every
trends reports (Task M2). five years
24
-------
P3. Coordinate with the Population Growth and Development Subcommittee to ensure the
incorporation of the principles of wetlands protection and the management of other sensitive
Chesapeake Bay living resource habitats into the various strategies, policies and guidelines which
will result from the Population Growth and Development Commitments of the 1987 Bay
Agreement This task will contribute to accomplishing Policy action [PW(a)].
Lead: a. Coordinate with the Population Growth and
LRS Development Subcommittee to identify
innovative and existing land use controls for
wetlands protection and creation and ensure the
incorporation of wetlands protection into
Subcommittee proposals. 9/90->*
P 4. Create a permit tracking system that will provide information for an assessment of the
cumulative impacts of permitted activities. This system should be accessible to all state and local
regulators and should include information about predeveloped conditions, actions taken and
resulting impacts that can be used to follow up protection and mitigation actions. This task will
contribute to accomplishing Policy actions [M(f), PW(b)].
Lead: a. Investigate the usefulness of the NMFS,
ACE-B ACE and other regional permit tracking systems
Other as a foundation for networking federal, state and
States local data collection, analysis, and access. The
LGAC tracking system should provide information
EPA HI about types of wetlands, acreage, location, kind
FWS of impacts, mitigation, violations and
NOAA enforcement actions. 9/90-12/90*
(Above) b. Initiate or refine federal, state and local
permit tracking programs to increase
compatibility as resources permit 1/91-12/91*
(Above) c. Produce a report of data for inclusion in the
annual and five year status and trends reports
(Task P5). 6/92, every year
P5. Provide an annual and five year evaluation of progress towards accomplishing the
Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy goals based on the results of the annual and five year status and
trends reports produced with Task M2.
Lead: a. Produce an annual report of progress in
EPA-CBP accomplishing the Chesapeake Bav Wetlands
Other Policy goals as part of the annual Chesapeake
LGAC Bay Program Progress Report. The report will
LRS be a summary of reports from separate program
areas including annual monitoring results
(M2b4). 12/90, every year
25
-------
(Above) b. Produce a five year summary of progress in
accomplishing the Chesapeake Bav Wetlands
Policy goals based on the results of the five year
status and trends reports produced with Task
M2. Present the report to the Chesapeake 12/95, every
Executive Council. five years
(Above) c. Examine adequacy, gaps, and linkages
among existing programs to achieve the goals of
the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy. Outline
and implement improvements to regulatory and
nonregulatory programs which will accomplish
Policy goals. Provide a report of program
evaluations and recommended improvements,
including recommended sources of funding (see
P2e). 1/92-12/92
26
-------
3. BUILDING THE BASE: REHABILITATING, RESTORING AND CREATING
WETLANDS
Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy
The following arc the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy commitments for rehabilitating,
restoring, and creating wetlands in the Agreement Commitment Report signed by the Chesapeake
Executive Council:
"Mitigation
• Mitigation will be included for any project conducted by or subject to review or approval by the
signatories.
• Compensatory mitigation shall proceed from the presumption that "in kind, on site" is the
preferred solution. Other solutions, including off site and out of kind mitigation, will only be
allowed when acceptable to public/government agencies and performed in the context of
watershed management planning or other specific objectives.
• The signatories shall require that compensatory mitigation projects incorporate public or private
arrangements for long-term management.
• Compensation projects will generally be designed and evaluated cooperatively among project
sponsors, the signatories, and appropriate public and private entities.
• Monitoring and evaluation of the success of compensatory mitigation replacement projects shall
be incorporated by the signatories as a fundamental part of the mitigation process.
Actions:
[CM] The Federal signatory, in consultation with appropriate government agencies, will
develop updated standards and criteria in compliance with the overall wetland protection
goals and specific mitigation policies incorporating state-of-the-art technological,
ecological and biological applications."
"Incentives
• The signatories will collectively develop and execute a range of private sector incentive
programs which encourage rehabilitation, restoration, and creation of wetlands.
Actions:
[Cl] Formulate and begin execution of an inventive policy implementation plan which, at a
minimum, includes:
[CIB(a)J Enhancing existing incentive programs to encourage the rehabilitation, restoration and
creation of wetlands.
fCI(b)J Creating new incentive programs to encourage rehabilitation, restoration, and creation of
wetlands."
27
-------
"Land Acquisition
• The signatories will facilitate acquisition of lands for wetland rehabilitation, restoration, and
creation projects beyond that achieved through compensatory mitigation.
Actions:
[CA(a)J Develop criteria for the identification of areas where rehabilitation, restoration and
creation projects can be undertaken.
[CA(b)J Develop a plan for the acquisition of land and property interest in areas where wetlands
rehabilitation, restoration and creation projects will be undertaken."
Current Programs
All three Bay states require some mitigation for unavoidable permitted impacts to tidal
wetlands. Policies to require mitigation for permitted impacts to nontidal wetlands have been
developed in Maryland and Pennsylvania and are under consideration in Virginia. However,
mitigation is still not required for many regulated activities which result in wetland impacts. When
mitigation is required, clear guidance is not established for either regulatory agencies or regulated
communities.
The inexact science of freshwater wetland restoration and creation often results in unsuccessful
attempts at mitigation, frequently provides little insight into appropriate management strategies and
frequently makes it difficult to determine whether a project is successful. Closer monitoring of
current and future projects is needed to address this lack of scientific knowledge and technical
skills. As our body of knowledge and skills expands, it should provide the basis for a continual
evolution in appropriate protection programs.
Investments in restoration, rehabilitation and creation are discouraged by institutional barriers,
lack of access to suitable sites and lack of experience and success with wetland restoration and
creation technology. In addition to these negative incentives, few positive incentives exist to
encourage efforts to achieve net resource gain.
Existing incentive and land acquisition programs are insufficient because they do not
specifically target money for wetland restoration, rehabilitation and creation efforts, nor do they
offer clear policy guidance. Incentive and acquisition programs should be strengthened to take
advantage of the best opportunities for successful restoration and rehabilitation projects. This
effort would contribute significantly to a net resource gain in wetland resources.
28
-------
Implementation Tasks
C1. Develop and implement a replacement mitigation program for wetland impacts.
Replacement mitigation shall be defined as the construction, restoration or enhancement of wetland
acreage and function to mitigate for wetland impacts that cannot be avoided, minimized, rectified or
reduced. The mitigation program will incorporate the technical guidance established for protecting
existing wetlands (Task PI). This task will contribute to the accomplishment of Policy action
[CM].
Implementor
Lead:
FWS
Other
States
DC
Federal
Lead:
MD
Other
(Above)
Lead:
FWS
Other
(Above)
(Above)
Implementation Task Schedule
a. Develop advisory criteria for review and
approval of mitigation plans. Criteria will
incorporate wetland functional analysis and
acreage calculations for wetland impacts using a
model as specified in task (b) below.
10/90-12/91*
b. Develop and adopt a wetland assessment
model to determine the wetland functions which
are being affected by proposed work. The
model should be developed to maintain
consistency in the application of functional
assessment analysis. 10/91-6/92
c. Investigate the feasibility of a system for
requiring and using a fee (impact, application,
etc.) when permit applicants are not required to
conduct replacement mitigation or when
applicants are required to conduct replacement
mitigation at a replacement ratio less than 1:1
according to federal and state permit
requirements.
To be determined
d. Each of the states and federal agencies will
evaluate procedures for public review of and
comment on compensatory mitigation.
Recommend and adopt improvements as
appropriate. 1/92-12/92
C2. Formulate and begin execution of incentive programs to achieve no net loss and net
resource gain. This task will contribute to the accomplishment of Policy action [Clj.
Lead:
PA
Other
All
a. Prepare an inventory report of all existing
and potential incentives for wetland protection,
restoration, rehabilitation and creation.
9/90-9/91
29
-------
(Above)
(Above)
b. Each state and federal agency will review
existing programs to make recommendations
about how incentives identified above can be
incorporated. Provide a report of
recommendations.
c. Institute recommendations above as
appropriate and make information about
incentives available to the organizations targeted
by them.
9/91-12/91
To be determined
C 3. Develop a land acquisition program that builds upon current acquisition programs where
they exist The program will use the Bay and state management strategies for the identification of
areas when acquisition for protection, rehabilitation, restoration and creation projects can be
undertaken. (See Task P2.) The program will support protection programs for purposes of "no net
loss", but will provide a more important role in contributing to "net resource gain" by identifying
and providing opportunities for wetland creation. This task will contribute to the accomplishment
of Policy action [CA].
Lead:
PA
Others:
All
(Above)
(Above)
(Above)
a. Prepare an inventory of all existing and
potential land acquisition programs for wetlands
protection, restoration, rehabilitation, and
creation.
b. Review and recommend improvements to
acquisition programs for wetland protection,
restoration, rehabilitation and creation in regard
to the implementation of the Bay and state
wetland management objectives identified with
Task P2.
c. Institute recommended changes where
feasible to implement Bay and state wetland
management objectives.
d. Reevaluate program effectiveness in
coordination with annual and five year Bay
program reassessment (Task P5).
1/91-12/91
1/92-9/92
To be determined
To be determined
30
-------
4. EXTENDING THE VISION: EDUCATION
Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy
The following are the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy commitments for education in the
Agreement Commitment Report signed by the Chesapeake Executive Council:
• "Develop and maintain ongoing education and training programs, technical assistance services,
and wetland data base systems to improve our understanding of wetland values, Junctions,
management techniques, status, and trends.
Actions:
[E] Formulate and begin execution of an education plan which, at a minimum, includes:
[E(a)J A current information program available to the public on the values of and need to protect
wetlands.
[E(b)J Development of a Baywide library system and data base for wetland information.
[E(c)J Technical training programs for government representatives, consultants, land developers
and interested parties in the areas of wetland identification, delineation, functional
assessment, and mitigation practices.
[E(d)J Development of technical assistance programs to support local government protection
efforts, including mapping, management programs, model ordinances, etc.
[E(e)J Development of wetland curricula for academic institutions."
Current Programs
Many existing programs contribute or have the potential to contribute to the accomplishment of
the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy education objectives. These private and public efforts
effectively accomplish specific audience needs. The following is a summary of some of the gaps
left by existing programs for accomplishing the education objectives of the Policy.
The most frequent and urgent request for education and information about wetlands is for
current information about wetland locations, values and management requirements. The only
comprehensive inventory of wetlands, the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), fails to provide
complete information about wetland locations. The maps most frequently used to provide
information about wetlands for local development planning, the Soil Conservation Service Soil
Surveys, are not designed to provide information about wetlands and are of a scale and format that
is difficult to overlay with other mapped information. Programs are not developed in the Bay states
to collect or analyze the data available to determine wetlands trends and threats. Information about
wetland regulations and management techniques is also difficult to collect and interpret
The State of Maryland has been offering workshops for several years about wetlands values,
the Cowardin classification system, and how to identify and delineate nontidal wetlands. The
workshops have been open to local planners, consultants, and other government personnel. The
3 1
-------
State has also developed a certification program to ensure uniform and professional standards. An
exam has been developed for this program which will be given in the spring. The State of
Maryland has put together a Nontidal Wetlands Public Information Package designed with the
general public as the target audience. The package explains the values of nontidal wetland
regulations. The package is designed so that it can be used in its entirety for group presentations,
workshops, or classes, or parts of the package can be used to meet specific education or
information needs and requests. The package includes various fact sheets, each of which is geared
toward a specific target audience (i.e. agriculture, forestry, property owner, developer). Also
included in the package is information on the values of nontidal wetlands, the Nontidal Wetlands
Protection Act, and the State Nontidal Wetlands Program.
The federal agencies have begun a coordinated training program for delineation of wetlands
within the Bay states, but additional interagency coordination for education and training is needed.
Opportunities for combining resources and reinforcing separate agency efforts are often not taken,
leaving many gaps in topics covered and audiences served. Most audiences and educators are
unaware of what materials and programs are available for education about wetlands. No complete
inventory of such information exists.
The demand for technical training and education far exceeds that currently available. Courses
offered by the private sector are often prohibitively expensive and inconveniently located for public
and private sector audiences with limited budgets. Privately sponsored courses may also present
information that is not consistent with public policy. Most training is limited to delineation topics;
very few programs address more complex topics such as wetland assessment, management and
creation.
There is a growing unmet need to provide on site technical assistance for land owners and
managers. The specialized assistance available through each public agency is frequently not
adequate for providing integrated assessments of management problems and opportunities. The
shortage of personnel is a major factor limiting agency capabilities to respond to current requests
for assistance. Additional coordination among agencies is needed to utilize existing program
capabilities more efficiently.
Standards for technical training and advanced education in wetland science are not established.
The result is lack of guidance for program planning as well as lack of criteria for assessing
professional credentials.
Examples of successful wetland management and associated benefits and other positive
incentives for wetlands protection and creation are not emphasized by existing programs.
Although experiential education programs are the most popular among audiences and educators,
too few wetland sites are managed for citizen education, particularly near urban areas.
The importance of watershed land use management by local governments for wetland
protection, the effects of indirect and cumulative impacts and the nature and importance of non-tidal
wetlands are not well addressed by existing education and information programs. Educational
materials about these topics are needed.
32
-------
Implementation Tasks
E1. Develop programs to provide current information to the public about Bay wetlands values
and protection needs. This task will contribute to the accomplishment of Policy action [E(a)j.
Implementor
Lead:
ACE-N
Other
All
(Above)
Implementation Task
a. Produce film and slide shows to provide
information about the multiple values of and
threats to tidal and nontidal wetlands of the
Chesapeake Bay, and the importance of land use
planning for wetland protection. The shows
will be designed for use in professional
meetings, training seminars, school classes and
media programs.
b. Designate a lead agency in each state and a
lead for the federal agencies to investigate and
provide greater opportunities for the public to
experience wetland values and management first
hand with outdoor recreation, educational tours
and exhibits. Participation from the private
sector should be encouraged. The following
actions should be considered:
1) Where needed acquire and maintain access to
local wetland sites for public education and
recreation.
- Work with local governments and interest
groups to identify potential sites and costs for
acquisition.
- Identify sources of funding for public access
and maintenance.
- Design outdoor exhibits to educate audiences
about the value of wetlands and actions the
audience can take to protect them.
- Schedule guided tours and workshops in local
wetlands with the state wetland training
coordinator (Task E3 below) for targeted
audiences.
- Coordinate with volunteer organizations to
contribute to site maintenance. Investigate
school internship programs for maintenance
manpower.
- Expand the Chesapeake Bay Public Access
Guide to include a wetland category that will
guide the public to established wetland exhibits
and attractions.
Schedule
10/90-9/91*
33
-------
2) Support private and public programs to
conduct guided field trips in the Chesapeake
Bay watersheds to expose targeted audiences to
the broad policy issues associated with tidal and
nontidal wetlands protection and management
3) Expand or create wetlands exhibits at zoos,
science centers, aquariums and museums to
provide more hands on demonstrations of
wetlands values and other wetlands topics.
Develop program messages. Meet with
program directors to discuss messages and
existing program models.
4) Recommend the expansion of the National
Estuarine Research Reserve System program to
include nontidal wetlands in the Chesapeake To be
Bay watershed determined*
Lead: c. Take appropriate measures to facilitate public
LRS input into the implementation of all tasks in the
Other Plan. Maintain a mailing list of interested
CAC citizens. Provide notification of Wetland
Workgroup meetings, task reports and other
information about implementation of the Policy.
Make copies of all reports produced through
Plan tasks available to the Chesapeake Bay
Liaison Office for circulation. 10/90->*
E 2. Develop a Bay wide library system and data base for wetland information. This task will
contribute to the accomplishment of Policy action [E(b)].
Lead: a. Work with Bay wetland data users and
EPA-CBP providers on a continuing basis to identify
Other information availability and needs, how and
All where data should be stored and accessed and
how the information system will be funded and
maintained. 12/90->*
(Above) b. Implement recommendations as feasible and
appropriate. 6/91->
E 3. Formulate and begin execution of technical training programs for government
representatives, consultants, land developers and interested parties in the areas of wetland
identification, delineation, functional assessment, mitigation and creation practices. This task will
contribute to the accomplishment of Policy action [E(c)].
34
-------
Lead:
EPAIH
Other
States
LGAC
LRS
Lead:
EPA HI
Other
LRS
Federal
Lead:
EPAHI
States
Federal
a. Employ or designate state wetland training
and technical assistance coordinators to work
with local, state and federal agencies and interest
groups on a continuing basis. Coordinators will
assist interested parties to:
1) Identify training and assistance needs.
2) Develop training schedules and identify sites
for training sessions in identification,
delineation, assessment and management.
3) Develop recommendations for assistance to
support local management efforts.
4) Administer training programs.
5) Make recommendations about the desirability
and method for the adoption of a common set of
standards for certification and certification tests
for wetland managers in the Bay states.
b. Designate appropriate federal agency trainers
to assist in the production of training programs.
(See (a) above.)
c. Where feasible, adopt certification standards
and programs.
10/90->*
10/90-12/90
1/91-3/91
3/91
3/9l->
To be determined
3/91, every year*
To be determined
E4. Develop technical assistance programs to support local government protection efforts,
including mapping, management programs and model ordinances. This task will contribute to the
accomplishment of Policy action [E(d)].
Lead:
LGAC
Other
States
Federal
(Above)
a. Develop and exchange information with
other agencies about existing local technical
assistance needs and services to increase
coordination of federal, state and local
assistance efforts. 12/90->*
b. Implement the recommendations regarding
local assistance developed in Tasks E3a3 and To be
E4a (above) as appropriate. determined*
35
-------
(Above) c. Establish and maintain central sources of
information to provide the public with
information about wetland values and
management needs, state wetland maps and
statistics, summaries of existing regulations and
protection programs and indexes to wetland
education materials and current research. 9/90-3/91 *
1) Assign the responsibility of providing a
central source of information about wetlands to
a lead state agency in each state. 9/90
2) Identify funding mechanisms to make
mapped wetlands information available to local,
state and regional users. Consideration should
be given to charging a small fee for maps. 12/90-3/91
E 5. Develop wetland curricula for educational institutions in the Bay watershed. This task will
contribute to the accomplishment of Policy action [E(e)].
Lead: a. Work with local and state public school
FWS educators to develop wetland curricula for
Other public schools. Successful examples such as
States Maryland's Patapsco River School Action
DC Project should be considered for expansion to
PIES include a wetland component. This curriculum
emphasizes watershed concepts and the
importance of individual action for resource
protection. 3/92-6/92
(Above) b. Work with federal and state wetland
managers and college and university educators
to develop curricula about wetland topics for
institutions of higher learning and requirements
for a wetlands science major. 3/92-6/92
(Above) c. Develop a packaged curriculum about
wetlands in the Chesapeake Bay watershed for
optional use by schools based on the
recommendation resulting from (a) and (b)
above. 6/92-12/92
36
-------
5. EXTENDING THE VISION: RESEARCH
Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy
The following are the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy commitments for research in the
Agreement Commitment Report signed by the Chesapeake Executive Council:
• "The signatories to this agreement will, to the extent possible, facilitate the undertaking of
research projects which have the potential to improve wetland management.
• The signatories will evaluate and adjust their wetland management practices and regulatory
standards such that they reflect principles validated through scientific research.
Action:
[R] The signatories will collectively update a prioritized listing and description of those
research projects which offer significant opportunities for improving wetland
management practices. At a minimum, the research plan shall consider the following:
[R(a)J Continued research of basic wetland structure and Junction.
[R(b)J Research to quantify the relationship between upland, wetland, and aquatic natural
processes including chemical, ecological, geomorphological and hydrologicalprocesses
in various watersheds.
[R(c)J Evaluation of the potential individual and cumulative effects the following factors have
upon wetlands including:
- Current "best management practices" designed to reduce nutrient and sediment loads to
wetlands.
- Alteration of the land/water interface.
- Increased boating activity.
- Shallow water dredging impacts on biologic and hydrologic functions of wetlands.
- Structural shore erosion practices.
- Stormwater management practices.
[R(d)J Evaluation of the design, effectiveness and success of artificial wetlands including those
developedfor:
- Compensatory mitigation.
- Wildlife and waterfowl improvement projects.
- Non-structural sfiore erosion control.
- Stormwater management.
- Acid mine drainage reduction.
- Wastewater treatment.
[R(e)J Comparison of natural and artificial wetlands.
[R(f)J Research on the potential mitigative measures which could be used to counteract wetland
loses due to acid rain, sediment starvation, sea level rise, and invasion of exotic species.
37
-------
[R(g)J Studies investigating the feasibility and effects of wetlands created for stormwater
management upon other wetland functions, particularly with regard to fish and wildlife
habitat and trophic structure and support."
Current Programs
Research is by its nature is a dynamic undertaking. As understanding of natural systems such
as wetlands advances, new problems are constantly identified and needs for additional information
change. This implies a need for a continuing, comprehensive reevaluatipn of the priorities for
research efforts. In recognition of this reality, one time efforts to prioritize research efforts can be
viewed as futile, or at least doomed to very brief useful lifespans. To ensure that the focus of
wetland research efforts in the Chesapeake Bay region remains appropriate to the needs of the
management programs, it will be necessary to constantly review those efforts and reevaluate
priorities for future work.
A Comprehensive Research Plan was adopted by the Executive Council in July 1988. Under
that plan, the Research Planning Advisory Group of the Scientific and Technical Advisory
Committee has as one of its responsibilities the development and annual updating of a list of overall
research priorities. To perform this task the Advisory Group contacts each Chesapeake Bay
component to determine the research needs of managers. The Advisory Group does not have
responsibility for linking research priorities with research support, but that topic is currently under
discussion by the Group.
The effort to prioritize wetlands research will be effective only to the extent that it directs
support for research. Projects which address high priority information needs must receive similar
priority in funding if the research goals of the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy are to be achieved
Implementation of the Policy requires first and foremost, the establishment of a process for
interdisciplinary exchange to establish priorities for wetland specific research and to link those
priorities to funding on a continuing basis.
38
-------
Implementation Tasks
R1. Establish a process by which wetlands research in the Chesapeake Bay region can be
inventoried, evaluated and directed toward the goals of the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy. It is
essential that representatives of all of the following three interest groups participate: 1) researchers,
2) managers/regulators including federal, state and local agency personnel representing major land
use concerns such as forestry, agriculture, and economic development and 3) funding agencies.
This task will contribute to accomplishment of Policy action [R].
Implementor
Lead:
VA
Other
LRS
Lead-
VA
Other
All
Lead:
VA
Other
All
Implementation Task
a. Request that a Bay organization such as the
Scientific Technical Advisory Committee or
other Bay organization schedule and organize
research planning surveys and/or meetings; the
preparation of inventories produced with task
Rib; and the production of a report of research
priorities identified with Tasks Rlc (below).
b. Inventory information needed toconduct this
task including the following:
1) Inventory of ongoing and recently completed
research including a summary of findings in
each of the seven categories of research
specified in the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands
Policy. (See pages 36 and 37 of the Plan.1
Research information in each of the seven
categories should be further subdivided based
on physical or biological characteristics (e.g.
tidal wetlands-euhaline, mesohaline, oligohaline
and tidal freshwater, extensive, fringing,
shrub/scrub, open water, etc., riparian and
isolated.)
2) Inventory of wetlands management issues,
including identification of specific information
needs.
3) Inventory of wetlands research funding
programs, including identification of funding
program objectives. This inventory will review
activities in each of the focus areas of the Plan.
c. Distribute inventories generated in Rib
(above) to participants identified in Rl. Survey
and/or convene participants as needed to review
and prioritize proposed projects on the basis of
management needs, and transfer those priorities
to funding program planning.
Schedule
10/90
9/90-3/91,
every two years
9/91,
every two years
39
-------
d. Develop and implement procedures to ensure
that information about research and funding
generated by previous tasks is made available to
wetland managers in a timely and useful
manner. (See Tasks E2 and E4c.) 9/91->
40
-------
CHAPTER IV. FINANCING
Several federal and state agencies have some funds, staff and other resources dedicated to
existing wetlands protection programs which affect tidal and nontidal wetlands located within the
Bay watershed. One purpose of the Plan is to target these limited resources to improve the
protection provided. The Plan also identifies additional efforts that are necessary to achieve the
goals of the Chesapeake Bay Wetlands Policy. The availability of funds will significantly
influence the pace at which these tasks can be carried out.
In preparing the Plan, the Workgroup outlined funding needs for initial Plan tasks during years
1990-1992. Most of the tasks carried out within this time period involve one time costs for task
completion within one to two years. These initial tasks will provide the foundation for future
actions and will require coordination among state and federal agencies.
Short term tasks scheduled through 1992 will cost approximately $400,000 annually. This
estimate does not include agency staff time and other inkind support. The plan proposed for this
funding is for federal and state agencies to provide approximately half of the funds through
existing program budgets and for the remaining half to be requested from the Chesapeake Bay
Program budget Funds for long term implementation after 1992 are being sought from new
sources including congressional action. The rate of implementation progress depends on the
availability of funds.
41
-------
GLOSSARY OF IMPLEMENTORS
ACE-B
ACE-N
CAC
DC
EPA-CBP
EPA-III
Federal
FWS
LGAC
LRS
MD
NMFS
NOAA
PA
PIES
SCS
States
VA
US Army Corps of Engineers - Baltimore District
US Army Corps of Engineers - Norfolk District
Citizens Advisory Committee - Chesapeake Bay Program
District of Columbia
US Environmental Protection Agency - Chesapeake Bay
Program
US Environmental Protection Agency - Region HI
Federal agencies (ACE-B,ACE-N,EPA-CBP,EPA-ffl,
FWSJNMFS,NMFS,NOAA,SCS)
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Local Government Advisory Committee - Chesapeake Bay
Program
Living Resources Subcommittee - Chesapeake Bay Program
Maryland state agencies
National Marine Fisheries Service
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Pennsylvania state agencies
Public Information and Education Subcommittee -
Chesapeake Bay Program
US Soil Conservation Service
State agencies in Maryland, Pennsylvania and Virginia
Virginia state agencies
42
------- |