DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
for the
HYDROLOGIC RESTORATION
AND
VEGETATIVE PLANTING IN THE LAC DES ALLEMANDS SWAMP
CWPPRA PROJECT BA-34-2
St. James Parish, Louisiana
Prepared by: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6
November 20, 2015
-------
This page is intended to be blank
-------
Contents
Acronyms i
Units of Measure iii
Part 1. Purpose and Need for Proposed Action 4
1.1 Introduction 4
1.2 Purpose of Proposed Action 6
1.3 Problem 6
1.4 Coordination and Consultation 8
Part 2. Proposed Action and Alternative 9
2.1 Alternative 1 No Action 11
2.2 Alternatives Considered But Not Evaluated 11
2.3 Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) 14
2.3.1 Hydrologic Restoration Design 13
2.3.2 Vegetative Plantings 16
Part 3. Affected Environment 18
3.1 Physical Environment 18
3.1.1 Topography, Geomorphology, and Soils 18
3.1.2 Climate and Weather 20
3.1.3 Air Quality 20
3.1.4 Surface Water Resources 19
3.1.5 Hydrology 20
3.2 Biological Environment 25
3.2.1 Vegetation 25
3.2.2 Essential Fish Habitat 28
3.2.3 Fish and Wildlife Resources 28
3.2.4 Threatened and Endangered Species 30
3.3 Other Environmental Considerations 31
3.3.1 Cultural Resources 30
3.3.2 Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice 32
3.3.3 Infrastructure 31
3.3.4 Noise 32
3.3.5 Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive Waste 32
3.3.6 Land Use 33
-------
Part 4. Environmental Consequences of Alternatives 34
4.1 Physical Environment
4.1.1 Topography, Geomorphology, and Soils 34
4.1.2 Climate and Weather 35
4.1.3 Air Quality 35
4.1.4 Surface Water Resources 37
4.1.5 Hydrology 37
4.2 Biological Environment 388
4.2.1 Vegetation 39
4.2.2 Essential Fish Habitat 39
4.2.3 Fish and Wildlife Resources 39
4.2.4 Threatened and Endangered Species 40
4.3 Other Considerations 40
4.3.1 Cultural Resources 40
4.3.2 Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice 40
4.3.3 Infrastructure 41
4.3.4 Noise 41
4.3.5 Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive Waste 41
4.3.6 Land Use 43
4.4 Cumulative Impacts 41
4.5 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 42
4.6 Relationship of Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Effects 42
Part 5. Conclusion 42
5.1 Conclusion 42
5.2 Interagency C oordinati on 42
5.3 Compliance with Applicable Laws and Regulations 43
5.4 Preparers 43
Literature Cited 44
-------
Acronyms
AOI
Area of Interest
CERCLA
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
CPRA
Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority of Louisiana
CWA
Clean Water Act
CWPPRA
Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act
DBH
Diameter at Breast Height
EA
Environmental Assessment
EFH
Essential Fish Habitat
EIS
Environmental Impact Statement
EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FR
Federal Register
GPS RTK
Global Positioning System Real Time Kinematic satellite navigation
HTRW
Hazardous, Toxic and Radiological Waste
LCA
Louisiana Coastal Area
LCWCRTF
Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force
LDEQ
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
LDNR
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources
MSL
Mean Sea Level
MPO
Metropolitan Planning Organization
MSA
Metropolitan Statistical Area
MBTA
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MR
Mississippi River
MSFCMA
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
NAAQS
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAVD 88
North American Vertical Datum of 1988
NEPA
National Environmental Policy Act
NMFS
National Marine Fisheries Service
NPL
National Priority List
NRCS
Natural Resource Conservation Service
O&M
Operations and Maintenance
PPL
Priority Project List (CWPPRA)
PMT
Project Management Team
RM
River Mile
RSLR
Relative Sea Level Rise
i
-------
SCPDC
South Central Planning and Development Commission
SHPO
State Historic Preservation Office
SI
Suitability Index
USACE
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S.C.
United States Code
USFWS
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
WVA
Wetland Value Assessment
11
-------
Units of Measure
ac
Acres
ft
Feet
ha
Hectares
lbs
Pounds
mi2
Square Miles
MSL
Mean Sea Level
ppb
Parts Per Billion
ppm
Parts Per Million
yd3
Cubic Yards
-------
Part 1. Purpose and Need for Proposed Action
1.1 Introduction
Wetland loss is a well-documented and widespread problem throughout coastal Louisiana. The
land area loss rate in Louisiana coastal areas was approximately 17 square miles per year from
1985 to 2010. Some 1,883 square miles were lost from 1932 to 2010 (Couvillion et al., 2011).
The causes of wetland loss in Louisiana are varied and complex and include subsidence, erosion,
sediment deprivation, saltwater intrusion, altered hydrology, and sea level rise (Turner and
Cahoon 1987). The effects of natural processes like subsidence and storms have combined with
human actions at large and small scales to produce a system on the verge of collapse
(LCWCRTF, 1998).
Congress recognized the ongoing severe coastal wetland losses in Louisiana and the increasing
impacts on resources when it passed the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration
Act (CWPPRA) in 1990 (Public Law 101-646, Title III). CWPPRA established a process to
identify, assess, design, and fund the construction of coastal wetland restoration projects.
CWPPRA seeks to provide long-term conservation of coastal wetlands through the restoration,
creation, protection, and enhancement of wetlands. On a yearly cycle, projects are selected from
a list of projects ("priority project lists" or PPLs) to fund planning, engineering and design, and
construction.
CWPPRA identified five federal agencies as Task Force members to participate in the program.
These include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) and the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). The other critical
partner is the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority of Louisiana (CPRA), which
participates in CWPPRA project selection, planning, analysis, implementation and funding.
There are currently 151 active CWPPRA projects. One hundred and one projects have been
completed, benefiting over 112,000 acres. Seventeen (17) projects are currently under active
construction with 33 additional projects currently in the engineering and design phase of
development, three of which were scheduled for construction in FY2014 (lacoast.gov).
The EPA is the federal sponsor for the Hydrologic Restoration and Vegetative Planting in the
Lac des Allemands Swamp Project (BA-34-2) and is responsible for oversight of the project, in
partnership with the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority of Louisiana (CPRA).
The proposed project BA-34-2 was approved for construction on the Tenth Priority Project List
of the CWPPRA. The Task Force approved Phase 1 funding in January 2001. Originally
authorized as the "Mississippi River Reintroduction into Northwestern Barataria Basin
(BA-34)," the project was approved for a scope change by the CWPPRA Task Force in June
2013. The scope change eliminated a planned siphon feature and the project was renamed
4
-------
"Hydrologic Restoration and Vegetative Planting in the Lac des Allemands Swamp" (BA-34-2)
(Project Fact Sheet at lacoast.gov). Project BA-34-2 is located within Region 2, Barataria Basin,
in the Coast 2050 management unit, "Des Allemands," St. James Parish. The project area is
bordered on the south by Bayou Chevreuil and on the west by Highway LA 20 (Figure 1), near
the town of Vacherie, Louisiana. Forest plant species composition, basal area, and vegetative
productivity in the project area reflect a degraded cypress-tupelo swamp.
The CWPPRA Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) requires compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (IN EPA). A draft of the Environmental Assessment of the project is
submitted with the approval package to the CWPPRA Technical Committee with the request for
authorization of Phase II construction funding.
Bayou Chevreuil
Donaldson\(ill0j LA^ \ j'J LA Hwy. 3127
Mississippi River
Lac des Allemands
Thiboasux. LA
Bayou Lafourche ft
lisiana
© CRMS Sites
Highways
3] Barataria Basin
BA-34-2 Project Area
Data Source:
Coastal Protection and
Restoration Authority of LA
Office of Coastal Protection
and Restoration
Operations
2013 NAIP
Date: May 14, 2015
Map ID: 2015-TRO-021
Figure 1. Location Map showing BA 34-2 project area.
5
-------
1.2 Purpose of Proposed Action
The purpose of this project is to restore and maintain selected cypress-tupelo swamp tracts in the
upper Barataria Basin, restore and maintain water quality in the swamp and in Bayou Chevreuil,
in support of the coastal restoration objectives of CWPPRA. The project will enhance an area of
swamp (2,395 acres with an expected 529.96 Average Annual Habitat Units (AAHUs) of
benefit) that would be substantially degraded without the project. The project is expected to
continue providing wetland benefits 30 to 40 years after construction. Benefits include reduced
swamp submergence, increased regrowth of young trees, denser forests in currently stressed
areas, increased swamp productivity, and improved water quality (EPA 2012).
Louisiana is experiencing a land loss crisis that has claimed 1,880 square miles of land since the
1930s. The 2012 Louisiana Master Plan (Master Plan) characterizes this crisis as "nothing short
of a national emergency." The Master Plan estimates that expected annual damages from
flooding by 2061 would be almost ten times greater than damages in 2012, from a coast-wide
total of approximately $2.4 billion to a coast-wide total of $23.4 billion. (Louisiana's
Comprehensive Master Plan for a Sustainable Coast, May 23, 2012). Without action to mitigate
the factors causing degradation, coastal Louisiana will continue to experience loss of coastal
wetland forest functions (SWG, 2005).
The Barataria Basin had a land area of 1,470 square miles in 1932. By 2010, the land area was
1,024, a loss of 455 square miles, or 30 percent over 78 years (Couvillion et al, 2011).
1.3 Problem: The Lac Des Allemands River Basin Initiative identified the following specific
problems within the Lac des Allemands Watershed: 1) Drainage impairments; 2) Water quality
impairments; 3) Loss of marsh; and 4) Decline of cypress forest. Many years of research in this
basin by Louisiana State University and other researchers have demonstrated that the swamps
throughout the basin will eventually change to open water, floating aquatic plants, or fresh
marsh, due to the effects of subsidence and inadequate accretion of sediments and organic
matter. Some areas are already highly stressed and converting to open water, floating aquatic
plants, and fresh marsh due to the effects of impoundment, subsidence, and inadequate accretion
of sediments and organic matter. The Coast 2050 Plan predicted that 60 percent of the swamps in
the basin will change to open water or floating marsh by 2050. These problems are caused by the
loss of river water, with its associated sediment and nutrients, due to the Mississippi River levee
system. Impoundment caused by roads, drainage canals, and spoil banks is also a major cause of
degradation (USDA, 2002).
Forest plant species composition, basal area and vegetative productivity in the project area reflect
a degraded cypress-tupelo swamp. Degradation of the swamp forest is due to a combination of
historical logging, hydrologic alteration, subsidence, and possibly nutria herbivory. Hydrologic
alteration is due to a combination of the elimination of the connection of the swamp to the
6
-------
Mississippi River, impoundment due to road construction, spoil bank placement, drainage canals,
and an impoundment for crawfish aquaculture (EPA 2013).
The area defined as the Des Allemands mapping unit (Figure 2) in the Coast 2050: Towards a
Sustainable Coastal Louisiana report has undergone rapid land loss rates in the past century. The
mapping unit lost some 4,530 acres of the total 23,050 acres of land between 1932 and 1990,
which represents approximately 20 percent of the mapping units in the land area. (LCWCRTF
1998).
Historic Land Loss - hi 1932, this unit had 23,050 acres of marsh. From 1932 to 1956,
approximately 590 acres of wetlands were lost. Most of this loss was due to shoreline erosion in
the fresh marshes around Lac Des Allemands and altered hydrology as the Mississippi
River levee has severed the flow of freshwater, sediment, and nutri ents to the wetlands via
natural distributaries and overbank flooding. Canal and levee construction also impeded the
natural hydrology, causing impoundment of water which kills wetland vegetation and causes
poor regeneration of cypress. The greatest wetland loss in this unit (3,020 acres) occurred from
1956 to 1983. An additional 920 acres of wetlands were lost from 1983 to 1990. The recent loss
was caused mainly by wind erosion and altered hydrology. Also, herbivory, primarily by nutria,
results in eat-outs of fresh marsh vegetation and poor plant regeneration.
The problems that have led to the wetland loss within the mapping unit are part of a larger
problem throughout all of coastal Louisiana. Currently, Louisiana loses approximately 70 km2 of
wetlands per year. The Deltaic Plain accounts for approximately 51 km2 of these losses (Barras
et al. 2008).
Figure 2. Mapping Units inside CWPPRA Region 2 (LCWCRTF 1998).
Future Land Loss Projections - In 1990, this unit contained 18,520 acres of marsh and 44,560
acres of swamp. By 2050, approximately 6,730 acres of marsh are projected to be lost, primarily
due to altered hydrology, wind erosion, herbivory, and subsidence. Over 30 percent of the 1990
Ascension
West Area
St. John The
Baptist West Area
St. Charles
West Area
Jefferson
West Area
Orleans
Vest Area
v Lake Jean
a L?'2j J^1"6 River a ux
,Chenes
Lake Boeuf
Cataouatche/
Salvador
Asumption
East Area
West Point
ala Hache
Caernarvon
Lafourche
East Area
,Clovelly
Breton
Sound
American1'
[vvBay
Ba ptiste
Collette
I [ Cheniere f
\J_Ronquille /
I sfa f\Gran^(
Barataria W°^yj>i iarri^Si
Bay \ ./
^ Barataria Barataria x.
Barrier Islands Barrier Shorelines\ West
\ Bay
Pass a
L outre
Fourchon
Figure 1-2. Region 2 mapping units.
7
-------
marsh will be lost, and over 60 percent (26,740 acres) of the swamp is projected to become open
water or floating marsh (LCWCRTF 1998, Appendix D of Coast 2050).
Beneficial Functions - Coastal wetland forests provide a wide range of functions that benefit the
human environment and are of significant economic, ecological, cultural, and recreational value
to residents of Louisiana and the United States. These beneficial functions include:
-wildlife habitat (including migratory songbirds, waterfowl, and threatened and endangered
species;
-flood protection, water quality improvement (including nitrate removal), and storm protection;
-carbon storage and soil stabilization;
-economic benefits of fishing, crawfishing, hunting, timber production, and ecotourism (SWG,
2005).
1.4 Coordination and Consultation
Coordination has been maintained with each of the CWPPRA Task Force agencies, the
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources (LDNR), and the Louisiana Coastal Protection and
Restoration Authority (CPRA). Consultation has been conducted with the USFWS and Louisiana
Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF), in accordance with the Endangered Species Act
of 1973 and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. The EA has been prepared in coordination
with NMFS in determining categories of Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) and associated fisheries
species within the project vicinity. Submittal of the EA is provided to initiate formal federal
consultation requirements pertaining to EFH under the MSFCMA. Federal, State, Tribal and
local agencies, as well as other interested stakeholders, will receive a copy of this EA.
Consultation has also been conducted with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in
accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and Archaeological and Historic
Preservation Act of 1974. Consultation has been initiated with the tribes in regards to cultural
resource findings. The final cultural resources investigation report has been shared with those
tribes who have requested it.
Under the development of PPL 10, the public, parish representatives, and state and federal
agencies, nominated projects across the nine identified hydrologic basins. Ten candidate projects
were selected from the list of nominees proposed in the PPL 10 planning year. These PPL 10
candidate projects were evaluated to determine the long-term net wetlands benefits based on a
20-year project life. The candidate projects were also evaluated to determine conceptual project
designs and cost estimates. Economic analyses were conducted to determine the total fully
funded cost estimate for feasibility planning, construction, and 20 years of operations and
maintenance. Cost-effectiveness was calculated for each project using the fully funded cost
estimate and net wetland benefits over the 20-year project life. At the end of the PPL 10
development process in 2001, the Task Force authorized the original BA 34 proposed project.
The re-scoped BA-34-2 project was approved by the Task Force in June 2013 (LCWCRTF
8
-------
October 2013). The 30 percent Engineering and Design Review was held in Baton Rouge on July
23, 2015. A 95 percent Engineering and Design Review meeting was held by October 28, 2015.
The project management team (PMT) will request approval for construction funding at the
CWPPRA Task Force meeting in January 2016.
The PMT has coordinated and consulted with partners and stakeholders - SHPO, tribes, USFWS,
LDWLF, USACE, St. James Parish, CPRA, and LDNR throughout the process.
Part 2. Proposed Action and Alternatives
The no-action alternative (Alternative 1) and the proposed action (Alternative 2) are evaluated
here. Construction alternatives are designed with a 20-year life span as per the requirements of
CWPPRA. The proposed project features and benefits will likely remain after the 20-year life
span but detailed analyses beyond the 20-year life span are not completed as a part of this
analysis.
There were several alternatives that the project team considered but did not evaluate in greater
detail. An explanation of those considered but not evaluated alternatives is given in Section 2.2,
Alternatives Considered But Not Evaluated.
A number of data-gathering tasks have informed the alternatives analysis. To evaluate the
circulation potential in the swamp under various project alternatives, FTN Associates Ltd.
developed and utilized a two-dimensional, finite element, hydrodynamic model to simulate
movement of water in the Lac des Allemands Swamp (FTN Associates, Ltd., 2015). See
Figure 3.
9
-------
Cut<12 Cut#3 Cut«#4 . CiH»S Cut«6
—r~
Run 1 & 2
Run 3
Figure 3. Three scenarios were modeled to show water movement (FTN 2015).
In March and April of 2015, C & C Technologies, Inc., a sub-contractor to Stantec Consultants,
conducted detailed topographic, bathymetric, and magnetometer and tree count surveys of the
proposed work area (11 gaps), as well as a bathymetry and magnetometer survey of the center
line of Bayou Chevreuil. The magnetometer survey was conducted to locate any magnetic
anomalies in the project area. (C & C Technologies Inc., 2015a).
A cultural resources survey and investigation was conducted to identify any possible cultural
resource sites in the project area. No archeological sites or standing structures were identified
within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the proposed des Allemands Swamp Project (Royal/RCG&A 2015).
Topographic data was collected for eleven potential gap locations along the northern spoil bank
of Bayou Chevreuil. The gaps had five (5) 400 ft. long profiles with the center profile line
positioned along the gap centerline and additional profiles positioned at 25 ft. spacing on either
side of the centerline. Profiles extended 50 ft. beyond the existing levee into Bayou Chevreuil.
Seven (7) 150 ft. long and perpendicular transects spaced at 50 ft. intervals started at the outer
levee boundary and extended into the swamp were also taken. Survey transects are shown in
Figure 4.
10
-------
[sFoiTbahk ga= ]
SURVEY TRANSECT!
[BAYOU CHEVREUIL |
LEGEND
SURVEY TRANSECT I
SPOIL BANK GAP
COASTAL PROTECTION AND
RESTORATION AUTHORITY
Figure 4. Design Survey Layout (C & C, 2015a).
The design survey was performed from March 2015 to July 2015 by C & C Technologies. All
horizontal coordinates are referenced to Louisiana State Plane Coordinate System, North American
Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). All elevations are referenced to North American Vertical Datum of 1988
(NAVD 88) GEOID12A. The surveyors verified the Horizontal and Vertical position of the
Secondary Monument designated "BA 34 SM 02" which was used as the primary benchmark for the
survey (C & C Technologies Inc., 2015a).
2.1 No-Action Alternative 1
Under a no-action alternative, the proposed project would not be constructed. There would be a
continuation of baseline conditions in the proposed project area and land loss would be expected
to continue, with associated losses of wetland functions and values. The project area would
continue to be impounded. Forest plant species composition, basal area, and vegetative
productivity in the project area would continue to degrade.
2.2 Alternatives Considered But Not Evaluated
Alternatives that were considered but were eliminated without detailed environmental evaluation
are presented here.
Elimination of Siphon Features. The BA 34-2 project was originally funded by the CWPPRA
program as the "Mississippi River Reintroduction into Northwestern Barataria Basin, BA 34."
11
-------
The CWPPRA Task Force approved Phase I engineering and design in January of 2001. The
original BA 34 project featured the installation of two siphons to divert water from the MR into
the impounded swamp area (Lacoast.gov BA 34 Fact Sheet of June 2004). Modeling and
preliminary design efforts conducted between 2001 and 2013 revealed that the planned siphon
feature to reintroduce MR water into the project area would not be as efficient in terms of costs
and benefits as envisioned (FTN 2011). The project was re-scoped to eliminate the siphon
feature and was renamed "Hydrologic Restoration and Vegetative Planting in the Lac des
Allemands Swamp Project, BA 34-2" (EPA 2013).
Louisiana
Project
Site
0.4 Miles
0.4 Kilometers
Data Source:
U.S.G.S.
National Wetlands Research Center
Coastal Restoration Field Station
LA Department of Natural Resources
1994 Satellite Imagery
Date: May 30, 2000
Map ID: 20004369
Pipelines
Project areas
CWPPRA PPL10 Nominee:
Region 2
Freshwater Diversion
to the Northwestern
Barataria Basin
Figure 5. Original BA 34 project, showing the larger project area using a freshwater diversion.
12
-------
Spoil Bank Cut Analysis. The model evaluated the effectiveness of three project alternatives or
scenarios to construct cuts to facilitate the exchange of water between the swamp and Bayou
Chevreuil. Of the three scenarios, run number 3 with six cuts at -1.0 ft. NAVD88 produced the
greatest water exchange between the swamp and the Bayou and was recommended by the
modeling team as the preferred alternative. Two alternate gaps were identified in addition to the
initial six gaps, as a fallback in case the cultural resources survey revealed any sites to avoid. The
primary and alternate gaps are shown in Figure 6, below. (FTN Associates, 2015).
Spoil Placement Alternatives. The project management team evaluated three soil disposal
alternatives for placement: Alternative 1- Offsite Disposal; Alternative 2- Landward of Existing
Spoil Bank; Alternative 3- Top of Existing Spoil Bank. Alternative 1 transports the spoil offsite
as to reduce the amount of cypress and tupelo trees removed. Alternative 2 places the material
landward of the existing spoil bank creating additional upland habitat. Alternative 3 places
material atop the existing spoil bank bolstering the existing upland habitat.
Based on cost-benefit analysis and ease of construction, spoil placement alternatives 1 and 3
were eliminated. Alterative 2 is the recommended alternative for the spoil placement portion of
the project, and is discussed further in 2.3.1 below (CPRA 2015b).
13
-------
Hydrologic Restoration
and Vegetative Planting in
the des Allemands Swamp
(BA-34-2) Project Features
¦&'. 'T' * -"
-m*
' i®8- *-3. '' e.f '
ISlszS
Gap ALT. 1 Gap ALT. 2
7
{>¦ ¦
W&wi^Pi '¦
' ' W" """
n
i Sayoo Chevreuil
W 5
Da fa Source:
Coastal Protection and
Restoration Authority of LA
Operations
2013 NAIP
Date: Juner 23, 2015
IVbp ID: 2015-TRO-026
J Spoil Disposal
~ Gap Cuts
~ BA-34-2 Project Area I
Figure 6. Boundary of Proposed Project Area showing project features.
2.3 Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)
Alternative 2, the proposed action, applies a hydrologic restoration strategy in the form of cuts to
spoil banks to open up the impounded swamp. The proposed spoil bank cuts are expected to
improve hydrologic circulation and improve swamp health (FTN 2015).
Since the primary goal is to increase water exchange between the swamp and Bayou Chevreuil,
Scenario 3 (six (6) gap cuts at -1.0 ft. NAVD88), which produces the greatest exchange, is
preferred. The modelers recommended this scenario as the preferred alternative of the three
scenarios evaluated during modeling. Six (6) gap cuts induce circulation over a greater swamp
area than the alternatives with four cuts (FTN, 2015). As noted above, two alternate gaps were
identified in case the cultural resources survey revealed any sites to avoid (Figure 6).
The specifics of each component in this alternative are described below.
2.3.1 Hydrologic Restoration Design
The design of the gaps was determined from existing projects and from the hydrodynamic
modeling that was conducted by FTN Associates, Ltd. The model was run for the three
14
-------
scenarios as described above. Scenario 3, six (6) gaps with -1.0 ft. inverts NAVD 88
and bottom widths of 50 ft. provides the greatest benefit to the existing swamp. The side
slopes are based on experience with existing projects with similar characteristics. A side
slope of 1 V:4H was used. The locations of the proposed gaps are shown in Figure 7 and a typical
cross section is shown in Figure 8.
SPOIL BANK GAP COORDINATES
NORTHING
EASTING
-SPOIL BANK GAP (TYP.
ACCESS SURVEY TRANSECT
BAYOU CHEVREUIL
LEGEND
SURVEY TRANSECT
SPOIL BANK GAP
Figure 7. Locations of six (6) proposed gaps (from the 30% Design Report, CPRA, 2015)
z 1 ¦
Id
Figure
SPOIL PLACEMENT
SPOIL PLACEMENT
EXISTING GROUND
SPOIL BANK GAP
50.0' MAX. —J
Typical cross-section of spoil bank gap (from the 30% Design Report).
15
-------
Figure 9. Photo of gap looking towards Bayou Chevreuil taken during field work in March 2015.
Three alternatives were analyzed to determine where to place the spoil that is removed from
the gaps. Based on cost-benefit analysis and ease of construction, the alternative chosen places
spoil landward of the existing spoil bank to maximum elevation of +2.5 ft. NAVD 88. This
alternative offsets spoil placement a minimum 150 ft. landward of the bayou and 25 ft. off the
gap, and ensures that no material will slough off into the bayou or excavated gaps (CPRA
2015).
16
-------
Figure 10. Cross section of design drawing superimposed on photo of typical gap (CPRA 2015).
2.3.2 Vegetative Plantings
Modeling data showed that although hydrodynamic activity will be greatly improved in the
project area, the project area will more than likely not ever be completely drained for a
period needed to foster the growth of trees. However, for mitigation efforts and increased
benefits of the project, some trees will be planted in the spoil disposal areas as shown below.
The Q&M plan calls for additional trees to be planted during the O&M phase if monitoring data
indicates more plantings to be beneficial.
15.0' (TYP.)
6
STANDARD TREE SHELTER (SEE DETAIL)
STANDARD TREE SHELTER (SEE DETAIL)
5
4
I
z
3
ja
z
O 2
1
0
•1
Figure 11. Tree layout, typical section (from 30% Design Report).
17
-------
Part 3. Affected Environment
3.1 Physical Environment
The Hydrologic Restoration and Vegetative Planting in the Lac des Allemands Swamp proposed
project is located in the Lac des Allemands River Basin, in the Mississippi River Alluvial Plain,
Southern Holocene Meander Belt Ecoregion (Daigle et al., 2006).
3.1.1 Topography, Geomorphology, and Soils
Topography
The basin is situated between the Mississippi River (MR) and Bayou Lafourche. Elevations
range from approximately +15.0 feet mean sea level (MSL) on the flanks of the natural levee of
the Mississippi River and gradually decrease away from the river to approximately +1.0 MSL in
the swamps and marshes. Elevations gradually increase towards the natural levee of Bayou
Lafourche where they again reach +10.0 MSL. The area is laced with several small bayous with
natural sand/silt ridges. The average height of these ridges is approximately +5.5 MSL. (USDA
2002).
Geomorphology and Soils
The basin is part of coastal Louisiana which was formed by the MR thousands of years ago as it
frequently changed courses. With each course the MR took, the resulting sedimentation created
several distinct delta lobes. The size of the soil particle determined when and where it would
settle out of the river water. Sand, being the largest and the heaviest soil component of river
water, tended to settle out first in a relatively short time frame. Silt and clay particles were
respectively lighter and were carried further away from the main flow of the river channel. These
processes determined the type of landform (ridge, swamp, marsh) and the corresponding
hydrology and vegetative cover it would eventually have. Figure 12 shows a cross-sectional view
of a typical successional pattern of land development for a river delta (USDA 2002).
18
-------
Marsh
Active channel
Natural levee
Buried sedtmeni
Abandoned levee and channel
Figure 12. Generalized succession pattern in the delta area (USDA 2002).
The surface and shallow subsurface of the basin is composed of natural levee, marsh, swamp,
interdistributary and prodelta deposits. The basin landscape contains a series of old tributary and
distributary channels with natural ridges of varying elevations. Sediments deposited as the river
overflowed its banks during floods formed these ridges. As these ridges developed and became
more elevated, they began to isolate some of the basin areas from regular water movement.
These relatively isolated areas became low-energy areas with only seasonal flooding. Floating
and submerged aquatic vegetation thrived in these areas and the vegetative remains comprise the
fibrous material found in the organic soils.
The soils in the basin are two basic types, organic and mineral. Some organic soils are flotant, or
floating soil. This soil is very fragile and is subject to high rates of erosion if increased energy
rates are encountered. This could occur when a healthy, protected freshwater, thin mat marsh is
subjected to such forces as high winds or strong tidal fluctuations. Mineral soils in the basin are
first encountered on the elevated, natural ridges.
This material is usually composed of sand and silt materials. As the ridge progresses down in
elevation, loamy soils would be encountered about midway between the swamp areas and the
ridge. Finally, the last form of mineral soil would be the heavy clays, which were created by the
settling of the fine clay particles in the river water (USDA 2002).
The BA 34-2 proposed project area has mostly Barbary, frequently flooded soils. The Natural
Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) produced a Custom Soil Resource Report for the BA 34
project dated December 12, 2012. The BA 34-2 project is contained within the area of interest
(AOI) delineated in this report. The Barbary series (BA) consists of very deep, very poorly
drained, very slowly permeable soils. These soils formed in recent, slightly fluid to very fluid
19
-------
clayey sediments that have been deposited in water and are continuously saturated and flooded.
These soils are mainly on low, broad, ponded backswamps of the lower Mississippi River
Alluvial Plain. Slope is less than one percent. Cancienne silt loam (CmA) and Schriever clay
(Sm) soil types also occur in the AOI (USDA 2012).
3.1.2 Climate and Weather
Most of Louisiana has a hot, humid, subtropical climate, and is one of the wettest states, with a
yearly average of 57 inches of precipitation. Southern Louisiana has an average January
temperature of 55 F°, and a July average of 82 F°. Hurricanes sometimes strike the coastal areas
of Louisiana, causing loss of life and damage to property. Prevalent winds from the
south/southeast bring in warm, moist air from the Gulf, resulting in abundant rainfall. (Crowe
and Quayle 2000).
The Lac des Allemands River Basin has long summers which are hot and humid, and mild warm
winters occasionally interrupted by incursions of cool air from the north. Rains occur throughout
the year with an average annual precipitation of 58 to 62 inches. In winter, the average
temperature is 54 degrees F, and the average daily minimum temperature is 44 degrees F. In 50
percent of winters, there is no measurable snowfall, and when snow does occur it is usually of
short duration and no more than two to three inches. On occasion, a hurricane impacts the area,
which can bring copious amounts of rainfall and strong damaging winds. River fogs are
prevalent in the winter and spring, when the temperature of the Mississippi River is somewhat
colder than the air temperature (USDA 2002).
3.1.3 Air Quality
National and state ambient air quality standards were developed for specific (criteria) pollutants
as a result of the Federal Clean Air Act of 1970. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
mandated a program by which air quality must be improved and maintained so as to meet the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Under this program, regions are classified as
to their attainment status with regard to each criteria pollutant. St. James Parish is currently in
attainment of all NAAQS. A Clean Air Act general conformity analysis is not required. (40 CFR
5 93.153(b))
3.1.4 Surface Water Resources
The proposed project area is in the East Central Louisiana Coastal Watershed. The USGS
Hydrologic Unit Code is 08090301. The Barataria Basin, including the subsegment in which the
project is located, consists largely of wooded lowlands and fresh to brackish marshes, with some
saline marsh on the fringes of Barataria Bay. Elevation in this basin ranges from minus two feet
to four feet above sea level. The BA 34-2 project area is located adjacent to Bayou Chevreuil in
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) Subsegment Number LA020101 00.
Subsegment LA020101 00 is defined by LDEQ as "Bayou Verret, Bayou Chevreuil, Bayou
20
-------
Citamon and Grand Bayou." According to the LA 2014 303(d) list, subsegment LA020101_00
currently supports the following beneficial uses: Agriculture; Primary Contact Recreation; and
Secondary Contact Recreation. However, the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Use is not supported
due to dissolved oxygen concentrations not meeting the water quality standard (i.e., depressed
dissolved oxygen levels) with causes of impairment identified as nutrients and the presence of
non-native aquatic species. A total maximum daily load (TMDL) for this segment is in effect to
address the low dissolved oxygen levels (LDEQ, Final 2014 Louisiana Water Quality Integrated
Report (305(b)/303(d), July 29, 2015).
Jurisdictional Wetlands
In response to EPA's Solicitation of Views of January 17, 2014, the Corps of Engineers, New
Orleans District, (USACE) commented in a letter to EPA on February 18, 2014. The USACE
noted that the project site may be jurisdictional wetlands or Waters of the U.S., and may require
a wetlands delineation. A jurisdictional finding would require a permit from the USACE under
CWA Section 404 and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. The USACE also noted that the
proposed project is in the Louisiana Coastal Zone, and may require a coastal use permit from the
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources.
3.1.5 Hydrology
In 1904, a dam was placed at the headwaters of Bayou Lafourche and later in the mid-20th
century the Mississippi River was channelized by the construction of artificial levees along its
banks for flood control, eliminating the sediment source and substantially impacting the
freshwater supply to the northern Barataria forests (Reed 1995). Currently, the only freshwater
source in the upper basin is precipitation [150 cm/yr (59 in/yr)] because no rivers or bayous
discharge into these northern forests and marshes (Saucier 1994; Reed 1995; Park et al. 2004).
The reduced sediment supply has resulted in an increase in subsidence causing water levels in
the northern basin to elevate. As a result, the northern Barataria wetland forests have been found
to be flooded for longer durations (Conner and Brody 1989; Keim et al. 2006).
The hydrology of the cypress-tupelo forest within the BA-34-2 project area has been further
altered by the installation of artificial embankments on three sides. In 1931, an elevated roadbed
was built on the western border of the proposed project area during the construction of LA Hwy.
20. In 1956, spoil banks were built along the Bayou Chevreuil shoreline (southern edge of the
project area) with material excavated to deepen the channel (Conner and Day 1992a). In 1957, a
drainage canal, the Vacherie Canal, was constructed immediately north of the proposed project
area and an elevated berm was created with the excavated soil material. In 1969, Board Road
was built on the northern perimeter of the proposed project area by excavating local material to
build an oil field access road (Conner and Day 1992a). Since 1957, the duration of flooding
events has increased to the point of almost constant impoundment of the proposed project area
due to these elevated earthen embankments (Conner et al. 1981). Moreover, LA Hwy 20, Board
Road, and the Vacherie Canal berm formed the guide levees for a crayfish pond that has since
21
-------
ceased to operate) (Conner and Day 1992a). In addition, the Cypress Gas Pipeline Company
installed a 35.6 cm (14.0 in) gas pipeline and canal within the proposed project area sometime in
the 1950's. This pipeline canal bisects the proposed project area and is situated approximately
0.3-0.7 km (0.2-0.4 mi) from LA Hwy. 20. No spoil banks were built along the edges of the
canal with the excavated material. Therefore, the pipeline canal is not thought to intensify the
drainage restrictions in the project area.
March, I981J Conner et al.—vegetation of swamp sites 321
vaCHERtl
canal
CONTROLLED
FLOODING
1TON ROUGE
(pflLE*NS,
[NATURAL
FLOODING
PERMANENTLY
FLOODED
Figure 13. Diagram of proposed project area, and Conner's reference site, ("natural flooding") as
well as the adjacent former crawfish farm ("controlled flooding"). From Conner et al. (1981).
The scientific record shows that altered hydrological patterns and increased inundation affect
cypress-tupelo habitats. Mature cypress-tupelo wetland forests have been found to be less
productive and incur slower vegetative growth in deep-flooded stagnant waters (Conner and Day
22
-------
1976; Donovan et al. 1988; Conner 1994; Keim et al. 2006; Shaffer et al. 2009; Keim et al. 2012;
Keim et al. 2013). Swamp structure and function also have been reported to be inversely
impacted in impounded habitats (Conner and Day 1992a; Faulkner et al. 2007; Shaffer et al.
2009). Moreover, tree mortality in cypress-tupelo forest increases under impounded conditions
(Conner and Day 1992b; Conner et al. 2002; Shaffer et al. 2009). Vegetative growth in these
swamps is greater in flowing water (Conner and Day 1976; Donovan et al. 1988; Shaffer et al.
2009). Regeneration of cypress-tupelo forest is also negatively affected by deep-flooded stagnant
waters. Seedlings require drainage to elongate their roots (Pezeshki 1991) and survive (Conner
1988; Pezeshki et al 1993; Keim et al. 2006; Faulkner et al. 2007; Faulkner et al. 2009).
Moreover, natural or artificial (planting seedlings) regeneration is not possible in severely
impounded swamps without drainage enhancements (Faulkner et al. 2009).
The Bayou Chevreuil swamp area has been the subject of long-term scientific study. Dr. William
Conner has chronicled the effects of inundation on the proposed project area and its surroundings
since the 1970s (Conner and Day 1976; Conner et al. 1981; Conner and Day 1988; Conner and
Brody 1989; Conner and Day 1992a; Conner and Day 1992b; Conner et al. 2002; Conner et al.
2013). He studied three (3) distinct cypress-tupelo habitats - the impounded area (BA 34-2
project area), the crayfish pond (location described above), and the natural site, also known as
the "LSU Pocket," located off the south bank of Bayou Chevreuil ("natural flooding," see figure
13).
One of Dr. Conner's studies examined the effects of breaching the Bayou Chevreuil spoil bank
(gap creation). This earthen embankment was breached in six (6) locations in 1978. The results
of this five (5) year investigation provided evidence that the productivity of cypress-tupelo
habitats can be enhanced in the immediate vicinity of gapped locations by improving water
exchange. However, productivity in areas progressively further from the gaps did not increase
because drainage did not improve (Conner and Day 1992b). Micro-topographical variation in the
swamp surface has been suggested as a cause of this inhibited drainage (Conner and Day 1992a).
Also, earthen gaps tend to silt in periodically and require maintenance. Currently, these gaps are
only partially functioning due to siltation. Gaps alone will not improve drainage throughout most
large, impounded swamps. Identification of relief, drainage enhancements, and maintenance are
also required to improve cypress-tupelo productivity, survivorship, and regeneration (CPRA,
2015).
The "Controlled Flooding" area, also referred to as the "Crawfish Farm," was previously
impounded by the Vacherie Canal and its spoil banks on the north, LA20 on the west, the board
road on the south, and a levee constructed to connect the board road and the Vacherie Canal on
the east. This impounded area was managed for crawfish production in the 1980s, and the
hydrology was managed using pumps. It was flooded to a depth of about 40 cm in the fall and
drained from June through August or longer. Vegetation in the "Controlled Flooding" area was a
dense, healthy forest when it was actively managed (Conner et al. 1981).
23
-------
The draft Wetland Value Assessment (WVA) based on the Swamp Model discusses hydrology
as 'variable 3 - water regime." As noted in the discussion above, due to the impoundment from
dredged material placed along the bayou shoreline, the project area does not naturally drain.
Without draining, permanent flooding reduces the likelihood of cypress and tupelo regeneration.
The impoundment also limits exchange between the bayou and the project area. This leads to
poor water quality and unsuitable habitat for nekton that would normally be present (CPRA
2015c).
Figure 14 below shows the three water level gages for the project area. BA-34-01 and BA34-02
monitor the water levels in Bayou Chevreuil. BA34-08 monitors the water level within the
impounded swamp. The existing low spots in the spoil bank along Bayou Chevreuil are currently
about +1.5ft. NAVD88. The graph shows that after precipitation events the water level in the
bayou rises and falls as expected. In the project area, the water rises, then drains to
approximately +1.5ft. Without additional precipitation events, the water level can continue to
decrease slowly through evaporation and evapotranspiration. Otherwise, the water level remains
fairly consistently around - 1.5ft. within the project area while water levels in the bayou fluctuate
regularly with tides, precipitation events, and frontal passages.
4.0
4.0
3.5
3.5
-3.0
3.0
2.5
2.5
"S 2.0
1.5
Yjm |
1.0
0.5
0.5
*~
«*»
0.0
0.0
o
1
§ s
o
£
o o
a £
o
o
g
CJ
±|
o
c
en
Q.
g
z:
o
. i
c
LL
Cl
m
OJ
Date
Figure 14. Water level data from July 2004 to April 2005 (FTN 2011).
24
-------
3.2 Biological Environment
The biological environment of coastal Louisiana is of national importance. The estuarine habitats
across coastal Louisiana support approximately 735 species of birds, finfish, shellfish, reptiles,
amphibians, and mammals at some point during that organism's life cycle (USACE 2004). The
biological characteristics of the proposed project area are described below.
3.2.1 Vegetation
The proposed project area habitats generally consist of cypress-tupelo wetland forest. The
dominant soil Barbary association is classified as cypress-tupelo habitat. Reed (1995) cataloged
the alluvial river swamps of the upper Barataria Basin as being dominated by Taxodium
distichum (L.) Rich, (bald cypress) and Nyssa aquatica L. (water tupelo) with Fraxinusprofunda
(Bush) Bush (pumpkin ash) and Acer rubrum var. drummundii L. (swamp red maple) as sub-
dominants. Sasser et al. (2007, 2013) classified the area as swamp habitat.
The virgin cypress forests of the upper Barataria Basin were harvested in the late 19th and early
20th centuries. The current wetland forests of the northern basin are second growth. These
forests regenerated naturally and were estimated to be approximately 100 years in age in the
1980's (Conner and Day 1976; Conner 1988; Faulkner et al. 2007). Conner and Day noted that in
the impounded area, the only trees remaining are those capable of surviving the constant
flooding such as Taxodium distichum (bald cypress) and Nyssa aquatica (water tupelo). Nearly
all the Fraxinus spp. (ash) and Acer rubrum (red maple) had died and those that are surviving are
stressed as evidenced by the dead and dying tops (Conner and Day, 1992b).
A mature tree count survey to count bald cypress and tupelo was conducted in June 2015. Mature
trees were defined as having a fifteen (15) centimeter diameter measured at roughly six (6) feet
above the soil surface. Trees were not catalogued, marked or geo-located. The survey showed
754 mature trees within the six (6) gaps with an average tree count of 92 trees per acre
(C&C, 2015b).
The Wetland Value Assessment (WVA) for the proposed project is based on the Swamp
Community Model and discusses two variables (V) related to vegetation: stand structure (VI)
and stand maturity (V2). A description of the model variables in providing habitat to the modeled
community based on available, contemporary peer-reviewed scientific literature can be found in
the CWPPRA Wetland Value Assessment Methodology, Swamp Community Model, Version
1.2 (Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force, 2012).
Stand structure (Variable 1 in the model) is the composition of overstory closure, midstory cover,
and herbaceous cover. Areas with higher percentages of all three stand components receive a
higher suitability index value (SI) (Table 1). To determine stand structure, the PMT used aerial
imagery to delineate the project area into different classes (Figure 15). We found that the project
25
-------
area consisted of classes 1, 3, 4.
and 6, with class 6 making up the majority of the project area.
I IfiiMrt ri c»l rl rln+n rto + n rli t i
Scrub-
shrub/
Overstory
Midstory
Herbaceous
Closure
Cover
Cover
Class 1.
<33%
Class 2.
>33%<50%
and
<33%
and
<33%
Class 3.
>33%<50%
and
>33%
or
>33%
Class 4.
>50%<75%
and
>33%
or
>33%
Class 5.
>33%<50%
and
>33%
and
>33%
Class 6.
>50%
and
>33%
and
>33%
OR
>75%
and
>33%
or
>33%
Using field data gathered during
field work in April-June 2015, the
PMT adjusted the preliminary
classifications accordingly.
Table 1. Variable 1 - Stand Structure Classes
The stand maturity variable (V2) is made up of the average diameter at breast height (DBH) of
cypress and tupelo, and the basal area in each class. Stands with older, larger trees receive a
higher Suitability Index (SI) number representing a more diverse habitat and higher value to
wildlife. Suitability Index graphs are unique to each variable and define the relationship between
that variable and habitat quality (LCWCRTF 2012). Basal area is the area occupied by tree stems
expressed in feet per acre. Stands with higher basal areas receive a higher SI number because
they are better suited for nesting, foraging, and other habitat functions.
26
-------
Legend
B A-34-2_Proj ecffi ou ndary
V1 classes
Figure 15. Stand Structure (VI) Classes. Class 6 is the area that is not cross-hatched.
For V2, the PMT sampled twelve plots in 2015 within the proposed project area using the
sampling technique recommended in the Swamp Community Model. We measured cypress and
tupelo trees DBFI of trees that were considered canopy dominant and co-dominant. Using our
observed data and the acreage calculated in VI, we were able to extrapolate our findings to the
entire project area (Figure 15). The table below shows percentages for each class.
27
-------
Class
Acres
Percent
1
267
11.1
3
193
8.0
4
96
4.0
6
1837
76.7
Table 2. Percentages for each stand structure class.
Using growth rates for cypress and tupelo from the 2009 WVA for the Louisiana Coastal Area
Amite River Diversion Canal (LCA ARDC) Modification project, we estimated current tree
growth rates of .08 in/year for tupelo and . 1 lin/year for cypress (CPRA 2015c).
3.2.2 Essential Fish Habitat
The proposed project area is not in an area identified as essential fish habitat (EFH) by the Gulf
of Mexico Fisheries Management Council under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Act, P.L. 104-297; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. (Email from Kimberly Clements,
NOAA, July 24, 2015).
3.2.3 Fish and Wildlife Resources
Fisheries
The proposed project area serves as a habitat for freshwater and estuarine species. Freshwater
fishes found in the fresh marshes and associated shallow open waters include largemouth bass,
yellow bass, black crappie, bluegill, redear sunfish, warmouth, blue catfish, channel catfish,
buffalos, freshwater drum, bowfin, and gars. Stable freshwater fisheries occur in the northern
portion of the Barataria Basin, especially within the Lac Des Allemands watershed north of U.S
Highway 90. Lac Des Allemands supports a thriving commercial catfish fishery (Clark, 2000).
Fish commonly found in the upper Barataria Estuary may be grouped based on their pattern of
movement between aquatic habitats. Species such as gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum),
buffalo (Ictiobus sppj and yellow bass (Morone mississippiensis) may make seasonal spawning
migrations from Lac des Allemands into and up Bayou Chevreuil (Ross 2001; Fontenot 2006).
Gizzard shad relative abundance in the upper Barataria Estuary typically increases in January
and remains high through the end of April, with spawning occurring from late March through
July (Fontenot 2006). Yellow bass make spring spawning runs into tributaries when water
temperature reach 16-22 °C (Ross 2001). Buffalo have been reported to congregate in large
schools to spawn around the margins of cypress-tupelo swamps on the floodplain of the Yazoo
River in Mississippi in April (Ross 2001).
28
-------
Larval Dorosoma spp., Ictiobus spp., and Lepomis spp. (common sunfish or bluegill) were found
to be more abundant in a dredged canal habitat than bayou habitat. Heterandria formosa
common least killifish) juveniles are more abundant in the bayou habitat than the canal habitat of
the upper Barataria Basin, according to a study done in the AOI in 2007 (Jackson, 2009).
Wildlife
Forested lands provide habitat for songbirds such as the mockingbird (Mimuspolyglottos),
yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus), northern parula warbler (Parula Americana),
yellow-rumped warbler (Densroica coronate), prothonotary warbler (Protonotaria citrea),
white-eyed vireo (Vireo griseus) and others. Additionally, these areas provide important resting
and feeding areas for songbirds migrating across the Gulf of Mexico. Other avian species found
in forested habitats include American woodcock (Philohela minor), common flicker (Colaptes
auratus), brown thrasher (Toxostoma rufum), belted kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon), loggerhead
shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), red-headed woodpecker (Melanerpes erythrocephalus), and other
woodpeckers (Clark 2000).
These habitats also support raptors such as the red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), red-
shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), screech owl (Otus asio), great horned owl (Bubo virginianus)
American kestrel (Falco sparverius), and others (Clark 2000). The project management team
observed a bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) over Bayou Chevreuil during a field visit in
November 2014. The FWS noted that a bald eagle nest was in the proposed project area. (Figure
15).
Waterfowl found in forested lands and associated water bodies include wood duck (Aix sponsa),
green-winged teal (Anas crecca), mallard (Anasplatyrhynchos), gadwall (Anas strepera), and
hooded merganser (Lophydytes cucullatus) (Clark 2000).
Wading birds typically occur in wooded swamp and scrub-shrub habitats. Species found in
nesting colonies include anhinga (Anhinga anhinga), great egret (Casmerodius albus), great blue
heron (Ardea Herodias), yellow-crowned night heron (Nyctanassa violacea), black-crowned
night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax), Louisiana or tricolored heron (Hydranassa tricolor), little
blue heron (Florida caerulea), cattle egret (Bubulcus ibis), snowy egret (Egretta thula), white-
faced ibis (Plegadis chihi), glossy ibis (Plegadis falcinellus), reddish egret (Dichromanassa
rufescens) and roseate spoonbill (Ajaia ajaja) (Clark 2000). The FWS noted that wading bird
rookeries were in the proposed project area. (Figure 15).
Mammals associated with forested lands include nutria (Myocastor coypus), muskrat (Ondatra
zibehticus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), swamp rabbit (Sylvilagus aquaticus), river otter (Lutra
canadensis), and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). Several species of reptiles and
amphibians may also occur in the proposed project area. They include the American alligator
(Alligator mississippiensis), snakes such as the speckled king snake (Lampropeltis getulus),
snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina), American bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) and the green tree
frog (Hyla cinerea) (Clark 2000).
29
-------
3.2.4 Threatened and Endangered Species
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §1536, outlines the requirements for
interagency cooperation under the Act. Specifically, Section 7(a)(1), 16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(1),
directs Federal agencies to assist in the conservation of endangered species and Section 7(a)(2),
16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2), requires agencies, through consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, to ensure their activities are not likely to jeopardize the listed species or adversely affect
their critical habitat. In compliance with these statutes (Endangered Species Act of 1973, 87 Stat.
884, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 48 Stat. 401,
as amended, 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.; and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), 40 Stat. 755, as
amended, 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.), the following Section, in conjunction with Part 2 and Section
4.2.5, serve the purpose of a biological assessment as described in 50 CFR 402.12.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was consulted regarding any potential threatened and
endangered species (T&E) in the proposed project area (USFWS 2015). The USFWS indicated
that there are no T&E species in the AOI, but there is a record of a bald eagle nest within the
project area, and in proximity to some of the proposed project features (Figure 16). The bald
eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) was officially removed from the List of Threatened and
Endangered Species in August 2007 (72 FR 37346) because their populations had recovered
sufficiently to support delisting. Bald eagles are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Act (Eagle Act).
atherine Whitrrw
30
-------
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Louisiana Ecological Services
CWPPRA Project BA-34-2: Hydrologic Restoration & Vegetative Planting in the Lac Pes Allemands Swamp
These data are provided by the
LDWF's Natural Heritage Program.
Please contact them for specific
data way points or for more
detailed information
330-ft buffer
660-ft buffer
q Wading Bird Rookery
1000-ft buffer
Figure 16. Location of Bald Eagle nest and wading bird rookeries (2008 data) in proposed
project area (USFWS, 2015).
Bald Eagles live near rivers, lakes, and marshes where they can find fish, their staple food. Bald
Eagles will also feed on waterfowl, turtles, rabbits, snakes, and other small animals and carrion.
Bald Eagles require a good food base, perching areas, and nesting sites. Their habitat includes
estuaries, large lakes, reservoirs, rivers, and some seacoasts. In winter, the birds congregate near
open water in tall trees for spotting prey and night roosts for sheltering. (Found at FWS website,
2015).
3.3 Other Environmental Considerations
3.3.1 Cultural Resources
The Louisiana State Flistoric Preservation Office indicates that there are no known existing
cultural or historic resources in the project area. The closest archaeological site is 2.5 miles away
from the proposed project area. The State Archaeologist recommended that the proposed project
area be surveyed if the design featured the excavation of the gap areas to the original ground
surface. In June and July 2015, R. Christopher Goodwin & Associates, Inc. conducted a cultural
31
-------
resource (CR) investigation which included background research and field examination of the
locations of eight proposed spoil bank cuts positioned along the north bank of Bayou Chevreuil.
The finding is that there are no sites or cultural resources in the proposed project area (R.
Christopher Goodwin & Associates, 2015). A Notice of No Findings was issued to tribal entities
and to the SHPO. By way of a letter dated September 2, 2015, the SHPO has concurred with the
No Findings.
3.3.2 Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice
According to the 2010 Census of the United States, the population of St. James Parish is 22,102.
The 2014 estimate is 21,638. This number reflects a 2.1 percent loss of population from 2010-
2014. The Parish population diversity profile is:
Black or African-American 49.4 percent
White 49.4 percent
Asian-American 0.3 percent
American Indian 0.2 percent
Hispanic or Latino 1.7 percent
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 48.0 percent
The percent of the population living below the Census definition of poverty was 16.4 percent in
2009-2013, compared with 19.1 percent for the state of Louisiana. The median household
income for 2009-2013 was $55,443. This compares to $44,874 for the state of Louisiana.
The St. James Parish land area is approximately 241.54 square miles, with a population density
of 91.5 persons per square mile. In comparison, the population density of Louisiana is 104.9.
St. James Parish is considered part of the Metropolitan Statistical Area of the New Orleans-
Metairie, Louisiana Metro Area (U.S. Census Bureau 2010).
For a project-specific Census 2010 summary report, a one-mile buffer was added around the
proposed project area boundary using EPA's "EJScreen" mapping tool. The report showed a
population in the buffered proposed project area of 1,056 which represents approximately 4.7
percent of the Parish population.
In comparison with the Parish profile, the proposed project area with the applied buffer has a
population density of 72 persons per square mile. The BA 34-2 area with one-mile buffer
population diversity profile is:
Black or African-American 33 percent
White 66 percent
Some other race 1 percent (USEPA, 2015)
3.3.3 Infrastructure
Substantial oil and gas activity presently occurs, and has historically occurred since the early
1900's, in coastal Louisiana. Oil and gas industry activities related to seismic exploration,
32
-------
drilling, production, pipeline infrastructure, spill control and cleanup, and well site closure have
greatly impacted the wetlands of coastal Louisiana. Oil and gas activities negatively affect
wetland functions by altering marsh habitat and hydrologic regimes (USEPA 1989).
The one (1) known pipeline in the proposed project area has eight (8) feet of mud cover and 12
feet of water cover (Figure 17, C & C Technologies, Inc., 2015a).
Legend
— Gas Transmission Pipelines
— Hazardous Liquid Pipelines
Figure 17. Illustration of oil and gas infrastructure in the proposed project area.
3.3.4 Noise
The proposed project is in a semi-rural area with moderate local traffic on Highway 20. The boat
launch area is located at the intersection of Bayou Chevreuil and the highway. Outboard motor
boat traffic on Bayou Chevreuil is light to moderate during weekdays and offseason and
moderate to heavy on weekends and during fishing season.
3.3.5 Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive Waste
The discharge of dredged material into waters of the United States is regulated under the Clean
Water Act (CWA). In the absence of a known Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive Waste
(HTRW), the proposed project would not qualify for an HTRW investigation.
The USACE Engineer Regulation, ER 1165-2-132, Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive Waste,
states that dredged material and sediments beneath navigable waters proposed for dredging
qualify as HTRW only if they are within the boundaries of a site designated by the EPA or a
state for a response action (either a removal or a remedial action) under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), or if they are a part of a
33
-------
National Priority List (NPL) site under CERCLA. No portion of the project area is included in
the NPL.
Based upon a review of the NPL and CERCLA action sites, as well as a review of the Radiation
Information Database, the probability of encountering IITRW in connection with this proposed
project is very low. The proposed project does not require an HTRW investigation.
3.3.6 Land Use
According to LDEQ, the Land Use/Land Cover in the proposed project area is classified as
mostly forested wetland and some shrub/scrub. The Basin Subsegment 020101 land use as a
whole is illustrated in figure 18 (LDEQ, 2006).
Date January 13 2006
Map Nunber 200001006
Projection UTO Zone 15 NAD 1663
Sources LDEQ 2005 Baratana Basin Land Uta Classification.
LDWF & NBS 2001 Louisana Coastal Marah-Vegetate Type I
LOSCO 2004 TIGER,Une HyarograpNc Polygons tor Louisiana
LOSCO 2004 TlGER'Line Places for Louisiana.
LDEQ 2004 Baain Subsegment*,
ESRI GOT Streams QDTroada LDOTD Parish Bouidartea
Orleans
020101
Percent
41.5%
io.e%
243%
70%
C.7%
2005 Land Use I Land Cover
for
Bayous Verret, Chevreuil, Citamon & Grand
LDEQ Basin Subsegment 020101
Barataria Basin
Forested Wrtland Shrub,-Scrub
Deciduous Forest Land w&ter
Agriculture - Sugarcane 0/} Urban or Bull-up Lan
Agriculture - Bare Field Marafi - Fresh
^ Agriculture - PaBixe'Hay/Idle Unclassified,Cloud
Land Use
Forested Wetland
Deoduous Forest Land
Agrlctflure - Sugarcane
Agriculture - Bare Field
Figure 18. Land Use/Land Cover for Basin Subsegment 020101 (LDEQ 2006).
34
-------
Part 4. Environmental Consequences
Part 4 evaluates the anticipated environmental impacts that would result from the alternatives
evaluated. It includes an analysis of the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the proposed
project alternatives, including the No-Action Alternative. Alternatives that were considered but
not evaluated in Part 2 are not evaluated in this Part.
Each component of the Affected Environment is evaluated across an appropriate spatial and
temporal scale (i.e. short term and long term) to determine the environmental impacts associated
with each alternative. These impacts are classified as Direct, Indirect and Cumulative. Direct and
Indirect impacts were listed for each alternative and can either be designated as no impact, not
significant impact or significant impact.
The assessment of environmental consequences (i.e. impacts) is based upon a review of the best
available information and relevant reference materials. Quantitative and qualitative information
is used in the assessment. Factors that influence the assessment of impacts include, but are not
limited to, the duration of the impact and the abundance or scarcity of the resource.
4.1 Physical Environment
This section describes potential impacts to the physical environment described in 3.1 Physical
Environment. Areas discussed include geomorphology, soils and topography, air quality, climate
and weather, hydrology, and surface water resources.
4.1.1 Topography, Geomorphology, and Soils
No Action Alternative 1
Under the no action alternative, the existing wetlands and open water would not experience any
construction activity resulting from this proposed project. Under this alternative, the topography
of the proposed project area would continue to change as land is lost and converted to open
water.
Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)
Direct Impacts: To relieve impoundment and increase movement and interchange between the
impounded area and Bayou Chevreuil, six gap/cuts to the spoil bank area will be made.
Construction impacts include clearing and grubbing approximately 16 acres, excavating the gaps
of approximately 9,500 cubic yards of soil, and removing approximately 1,500 trees. Vegetative
plantings will follow the construction activities. The table below shows line items for
construction activities and equipment (CPRA, 30% Report, Cost Estimate, 2015).
35
-------
Work or Material Quantity Unit Notes**
Mobilization/Demobilization 1 LS 3 Marsh Buggies, 1 dozer, 1 barge, 1 tug
Survey 1 LS Gaps & placement areas + buffer
Clear and Grub 10 Acre Clearing, grinding and spreading of small to medium brush
Mature Tree Removal 1,700 Each Tree cutting/stump removal and dropping for pickup
Tree Transport to Dock 150 Load Loading of 40 cy hopper and transport to staging area
Tree Offsite Disposal 150 Load 40 cy trailer to offsite location + $30 tipping fee per ton (density of tree is 51 pcf)
Gap Excavation/Placement 9,500 CY Gaps & placement areas
Bald Cypress Tree Plantings 600 Each $5 per plant, $12.5 for installation; 15 on 15 centers
WaterTupelo Tree Plantings 600 Each $5 per plant, $12.5 for installation; 15 on 15 centers
Standard Tree Shelters 1,200 Each Cypress & tupelo trees 15 on 15 centers; 200 trees per acre, tubex protectors
Table 3. Construction Activities and Equipment
Indirect Impacts: It is unlikely that there will be any indirect impacts on topography,
geomorphology, and soils resulting from Alternative 2.
4.1.2 Climate and Weather
Neither the No-Action Alternative 1 nor Alternative 2 will impact climate or weather. The
scientific record suggests that the improved swamp health from the action alternative may have a
beneficial effect and help create a carbon sink and reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide (Burkett
and Kusler 2000; Bridgham et al. 2006).
4.1.3 Air Quality
No Action Alternative 1
The No-Action Alternative would not result in any changes in the existing air quality in the area.
Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)
Direct Impacts: Impacts resulting from Alternative 2 would be associated with the emissions of
diesel engines that would power the construction equipment, including but not limited to marsh
buggies, dozer, electric generators, backhoe, and watercraft. The duration of the impact is limited
and will occur over a period of approximately 159 working days or less. Emissions would consist
primarily of nitrogen oxides, with smaller amounts of carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide,
particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds.
St. James Parish is currently in attainment of all National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS). The proposed project is unlikely to affect the Parish's attainment status. However, St.
James Parish is represented by the South Central Planning and Development Commission
(SCPDC), the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the area. The South Central area is
at risk for being designated as non-attainment for ozone and particulate matter (PM) NAAQS in
the next few years. Due to the sensitivity of ozone and PM levels in the area, the SCPDC has
applied to and been accepted by EPA into the EPA Ozone Advance and PM Advance
programs. The Advance programs are a collaborative effort between EPA, states, and local
36
-------
governments to enact expeditious emission reductions to help near non-attainment areas remain
in attainment of the NAAQS.
The EPA recommends that to reduce potential short-term air quality impacts associated with
construction activities, the agencies responsible for the project should also include a
Construction Emissions Mitigation Plan and adopt this plan in the Record of Decision (ROD).
In addition to all applicable local, state, or federal requirements, the EPA recommends that the
specific mitigation measures be included in the Construction Emissions Mitigation Plan in order
to reduce impacts associated with emissions of NOx, CO, PM, SO2, and other pollutants from
construction-related activities (40 CFR § 1502.14(f) & 1502.16(h)). Construction emissions will
be addressed and minimized with appropriate mitigation measures such as:
Fugitive Dust Source Controls:
• Stabilize open storage piles and disturbed areas by covering and/or applying water or
chemical/organic dust palliative where appropriate at active and inactive sites during
workdays, weekends, holidays, and windy conditions;
• Install wind fencing and phase grading operations where appropriate, and operate water
trucks for stabilization of surfaces under windy conditions; and
• Prevent spillage when hauling material and operating non-earthmoving equipment and
limit speeds to 15 miles per hour. Limit speed of earth-moving equipment to 10 mph.
Mobile and Stationary Source Controls:
• Plan construction scheduling to minimize vehicle trips;
• Limit idling of heavy equipment to less than 5 minutes and verify through unscheduled
inspections;
• Maintain and tune engines per manufacturer's specifications to perform at EPA
certification levels, prevent tampering, and conduct unscheduled inspections to ensure
these measures are followed;
• If practicable, utilize new, clean equipment meeting the most stringent of applicable
Federal or State Standards. In general, commit to the best available emissions control
technology. Tier 4 engines should be used for project construction equipment to the
maximum extent feasible;
• Lacking availability of non-road construction equipment that meets Tier 4 engine
standards, the responsible agency should commit to using EPA-verified particulate traps,
oxidation catalysts and other appropriate controls where suitable to reduce emissions of
diesel particulate matter and other pollutants at the construction site; and
• Consider alternative fuels and energy sources such as natural gas and electricity (plug-in
or battery).
Administrative controls:
• Prepare an inventory of all equipment prior to construction and identify the suitability of
add-on emission controls for each piece of equipment before groundbreaking;
37
-------
• Develop a construction traffic and parking management plan that maintains traffic flow
and plan construction to minimize vehicle trips; and
• Identify sensitive receptors in the project area, such as children, elderly, and infirmed,
and specify the means by which impacts to these populations will be minimized (e.g.
locate construction equipment and staging zones away from sensitive receptors and
building air intakes).
Indirect Impacts: It is unlikely that there will be any indirect impacts on air quality resulting
from Alternative 2
4.1.4 Surface Water Resources
No Action Alternative 1
The No-Action Alternative would not have any direct impacts on surface water resources.
Impounded conditions would continue and the forest species would continue to degrade. Swamp
flooding is assumed to increase due to relative sea level rise.
Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)
Direct Impacts: Future Conditions with the proposed action. With implementation of the
proposed action, it is expected that there would be an impact to water quality through a
temporary increase in turbidity within the Bayou near construction activity areas. Any increases
in turbidity would likely be diminished by the movement of the Bayou, and any free floating
sediment would likely settle downstream. Dr. Shaffer noted that hydrologic restoration should
improve the water quality of aquatic bodies surrounding the swamp which are often hypoxic in
the warm months (Shaffer 2011).
Indirect Impacts: Alternative 2 is not anticipated to negatively impact dissolved oxygen levels
within the subsegment or contribute to the causes of the current impairment as identified on the
LA 2014 303(d) list. Certain long-term benefits to water quality may be realized in the locale of
the proposed project as the increased wetland plant acreage has the ability to take up and
sequester nutrients - identified as causative agents of depressed dissolved oxygen levels within
the subsegment. However, the impacts of this project are not expected to significantly affect
nutrient levels in the subsegment as a whole.
4.1.5 Hydrology
No Action Alternative 1
Under the No-Action Alternative impounded conditions would continue and forest species would
continue to degrade. Swamp flooding is assumed to increase due to relative sea level rise.
Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)
Two (2) recent studies completed for the BA-34-2 project indicate that restoration of the cypress-
tupelo habitats can be achieved by improving drainage within the proposed project area. Dr.
Gary Shaffer (2011) performed an ecological review of the proposed project area through field
38
-------
investigation and literature review. Dr. Shaffer concluded that it is highly likely that cypress-
tupelo habitats of the proposed project area will become sustainable if the impairments to
hydrology are removed (Shaffer 2011).
FTN (2015) conducted a 2D hydrodynamic model for the BA 34-2 proposed project using
hydrological, topographic, and meteorological data. The model predicted that water levels in the
swamp will emulate that of Bayou Chevreuil if the spoil bank is breached in six (6) positions to a
depth of -0.3 m (-1.0 ft.) NAVD88. Currently, the water levels in the swamp do not follow that
of the bayou due to swamp inundation (FTN 2015).
To quantify the benefits this project will receive for this variable, the PMT used data from the
modeling report. Bathymetry along with water level data allowed us to determine how different
areas hydrology will be altered. Having this information and knowing the gaps will be excavated
to an elevation of-1.0 ft., we can then determine what areas will be relieved of permanent
flooding. Areas lower than -1.0 ft. will remain permanently flooded regardless of work. Areas
with elevations between -1.0 ft. and +1.5 ft. will be relieved of permanent flooding after the
proposed project is constructed. Areas above +1.5 ft. will experience similar flooding regimes
with or without the project (CPRA, 2015).
4.2 Biological Environment
This section describes potential impacts to the biological environment described in 3.2
Biological Environment, which includes vegetation, essential fish habitat, fish and wildlife
resources, and threatened and endangered species. The threatened and endangered species
section, concurrently with Part 2 and Section 3.2.5 serves as a biological assessment as described
in 50 CFR 402.12.
4.2.1 Vegetation
No Action Alternative 1
Under the no action alternative 1, the project area will continue to be impounded via the spoil
bank along Bayou Chevreuil, LA20, and the natural ridge on the east. In addition to flooding
caused by impoundment, swamp flooding is assumed to increase due to relative sea level rise
(e.g. subsidence+ sea level rise, no accretion).
Vegetation in the project area will continue to degrade. Basal area of both cypress and tupelo
will continue to decline as trees die and little or no regeneration occurs in the future. However,
the few trees that do survive may grow at a relatively rapid rate due to the lack of competition for
light. Stand structure will continue to degrade, with less tree cover over time. Stand maturity will
increase over time. As stand maturity increases so will basal area. The basal area will decrease if
mortality overcomes regeneration. Water regime continues to be permanently flooded, with little
or no flow/exchange.
39
-------
Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)
Direct Impacts: Under this Alternative, planting of cypress and tupelo trees and alleviation of
impoundment will help to slow the rate of degradation of swamp vegetation in the project area,
and to reverse it, at least temporarily. Basal area of cypress and tupelo will increase immediately
in planted areas, and basal area of all tree species will either decrease more slowly in the future,
or increase over time. We expect trees to grow at a slightly lower rate and tree regeneration to
increase, particularly episodically during droughts. Stand structure will improve immediately in
areas that are planted, and, over time, in all degraded areas, including those areas not planted.
Stand maturity and basal area will increase over time throughout the project area, but especially
in degraded areas, and even more so in degraded areas that are planted.
As noted in section 4.1.5, we expect that hydrologic restoration will reduce tree mortality,
increase regeneration, and improve overall tree health (Shaffer 2011). Combined with the
proposed tree plantings, we expect that over time, project features will increase overstory closure
in areas with low overstory closure. The spoil bank area has red maple and green ash on it. As
these species regenerate faster than cypress and tupelo, they will likely populate the area within a
few growing seasons. Tree protectors will be used with all planted seedlings and saplings to
guard against nutria herbivory.
Using growth rates for cypress and tupelo from the 2009 WVA for the Louisiana Coastal Area
Amite River Diversion Canal (LCA ARDC) Modification project, we estimate future tree growth
rates of ,1338in/year for tupelo and ,1837in/year for cypress for the primary area. For the
secondary area we used . 1032in/year for tupelo and . 1419in/year for cypress. It is assumed that
trees in the secondary area will receive reduced benefits and therefore a less than optimal growth
rate (CPRA 2015c).
A tallow control program associated with this Alternative should prevent Chinese tallow
(Triadica sebifera) from becoming established. Chinese tallow is an invasive, non-native species
that can prevent or hinder native species such as bald cypress from becoming established. A
control program implemented in the O&M phase will help increase the survivability of the bald
cypress and tupelo trees planted.
No significant adverse impacts are expected.
Indirect Impacts'. Under this Alternative, planted bald cypress and tupelo trees should provide a
suitable seed source for additional tree recruitment once the planted trees have reached maturity.
4.2.2 Essential Fish Habitat
As the location of the proposed project is an area that is not identified as EFH, there are no
impacts for the No Action nor the Proposed Action and, therefore, no need for consultation.
40
-------
4.2.3 Fish and Wildlife Resources
No Action Alternative 1
Under a no-action alternative, the proposed project would not be constructed. There would be a
continuation of baseline conditions in the proposed project area and land loss would be expected
to continue, with associated losses of swamp functions and values. The project area would
continue to be impounded. Forest plant species composition, basal area, and vegetative
productivity in the project area would continue to degrade and would negatively impact the
habitats of the fish and wildlife species which utilize the project area. Continued degradation of
the habitat to eventual unvegetated, increasingly open water areas would diminish the habitat
value to all species.
Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)
Under this alternative, if the proposed project is constructed, the improved hydrologic and
vegetation features will improve the swamp habitat conditions for several species of wildlife
including migratory and resident waterfowl, wading birds, raptors, and mammals as described in
3.2.3.
4.2.4 Threatened and Endangered Species
The USFWS identified no species as a threatened or endangered species that may occur within
the proposed project area boundary. This section, concurrently with Part 2 and Section 3.2.5,
serves the function of a biological assessment as described in 50 CFR 402.12.
No Action Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)
Under the No-Action Alternative, no direct or indirect impacts are anticipated for threatened and
endangered species. No avoidance measures will be required.
4.3 Other Considerations
4.3.1 Cultural Resources
The No-Action Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) will not significantly affect
cultural resources. No archeological sites or historic standing structures were identified within
the proposed project area during fieldwork. (R. Christopher Goodwin & Associates, Inc. 2015).
4.3.2 Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice
No Action Alternative 1
In the No-Action Alternative, the swamp in the proposed project area would continue to be
degrade. The amount of fishery habitat lost in the proposed project area would have no
significant impact on the commercial fishery but recreational and subsistence fishermen may be
adversely impacted by the conversion of wetlands to open water.
41
-------
Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)
Direct Impacts: This Alternative may beneficially impact the local economy, Louisiana and
some of the other neighboring towns. The Contractor(s) hired to construct the proposed project
may need to hire workers locally. Also, the local economy may receive an economic benefit
because the workers will likely spend money locally to purchase personal items, food and
lodging.
Indirect Impacts: This Alternative may help buffer the AOI from tropical storm impacts (Shaffer,
2011).
This Alternative will have no significant adverse impact and may have a minor beneficial
economic impact on the local area. No environmental justice populations will be
disproportionately affected by the proposed Action.
4.3.3 Infrastructure
No Action Alternative 1
The No-Action Alternative would not have any direct or indirect effect on infrastructure in the
proposed project area.
Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)
Under this Alternative there will be no significant impacts on infrastructure. The pipeline in the
proposed project area will not be affected by construction activities.
4.3.4 Noise
No Action Alternative 1
The No-Action Alternative would not cause any change in the existing noise conditions in the
proposed project area. There would be no impact to noise levels.
Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)
Under Alternative 2, short-term increases in noise associated with construction activities and
equipment use would occur. There would be no long-term changes in the ambient noise levels
associated with this project. Hearing protection may be required for construction crew and
visitors to the construction site. Noise impacts are limited in to the immediate project area. The
closest noise-sensitive receptor is Vacherie Elementary School, which is 2.2 miles northeast of
the swamp in a straight line from Bayou Chevreuil. The duration of construction is limited,
estimated at approximately 159 working days.
4.3.5 Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive Waste
There is no hazardous, toxic or radioactive waste within the proposed project area boundary. The
No-Action Alternative 1 and the Proposed Action Alternative 2 will not significantly impact
Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive Waste.
42
-------
4.3.6 Land Use
Under the No-Action Alternative and Action alternative there would be no significant impact on
land use in the proposed project area.
4.4 Cumulative Impacts
The cumulative impacts of restoration projects similar to the proposed project are discussed fully
in the Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Restoration Plan and the Louisiana Coastal Area
Programmatic EIS documents (LCWCRTF 1993; USACE 2004). These documents are
incorporated here by reference. To reiterate the problem, coastal Louisiana has been losing land
at approximately 70 km2 per year (Barras et al. 2008). The reasons for this rate of loss include
natural subsidence, reduction of riverine inputs of sediment due to the construction of levees and
dams (upriver), hurricanes, and hydrologic modification through channelization of marsh
habitats. Restoration projects such as the proposed project BA 34-2 seek to offset this land loss
through various methods, including hydrologic restoration and vegetative plantings such as the
proposed project.
Future restoration projects are not likely to be proposed in the upper Barataria Basin. Agencies
are beginning to focus their restoration efforts in other coastal areas as described in the Master
Plan in an effort to maximize the limited amount of resources available to restore coastal
Louisiana (CPRA, 2012).
4.5 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
The unavoidable adverse impacts of the Action Alternative 2 are related to construction
activities. Construction activities will generate noise and air emissions but their impact is limited
and temporary in duration, estimated to be not more than 159 working days.
4.6 Relationship of Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Effects
All action alternatives have some short-term, localized, adverse impacts in the form of lost or
disturbed freshwater wetlands and long-term beneficial impacts. These impacts will be mitigated
in the short-term through avoidance measures and in the long-term by the creation of additional
acres of wetlands. No long-term adverse impacts to the affected resources are expected.
Beneficial impacts in the mid and long-term will be realized by the proposed project. These
benefits are expected to be sustained for the duration of the 20-year project life.
43
-------
Part 5. Conclusion
5.1 Conclusion
Coastal Louisiana is losing wetlands at a rate of approximately 70 km2 per year (Barras et al.
2008) due to natural and anthropogenic causes. Restoration projects, such as the one proposed,
seek to offset these losses in an attempt to slow or prevent the loss of wetland habitat in the
future.
This EA finds that the Hydrologic Restoration and Vegetative Planting in the Lac des Allemands
Swamp (BA-34-2) proposed project would have long-term beneficial impacts in coastal
Louisiana and would not result any significant direct, indirect or cumulative adverse impacts.
Construction-related adverse impacts are considered to be minor to moderate and not significant
due to their limited duration and best management practices to minimize adverse impacts. This
conclusion is based on a comprehensive review of relevant literature, site-specific data, project-
specific engineering and environmental reports, as well as cumulative experience gained through
other restoration projects in coastal Louisiana. The proposed action is projected to have no
significant impacts.
5.2 Interagency Coordination
Coordination in development of the proposed action and its alternative, and the selection of the
proposed action has been maintained with each CWPPRA Task Force agency. The project was
vetted publicly through the CWPPRA process, which provides opportunities for the public and
CWPPRA agencies to comment on the proposed project. Coordination with USFWS and NMFS
ensures that impacts to potential threatened or endangered species are evaluated. Coordination
with NMFS confirmed that impacts to Essential Fish Habitat were correctly evaluated. In this
case, there is no EFH in the project area. The PMT has prepared a Joint Permit Application with
supporting documentation on behalf of the landowner as permit holder to submit to the USACE.
The Louisiana State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) also provided guidance on the presence
of any historic or cultural resources that may be impacted by the project area, and has reviewed
and accepted the No Findings of the Cultural Resources Investigation. Coordination with Tribal
entities was initiated. A Notice of No Findings in the project area was sent to the tribal entities
on July 23, 2015, with a request for consultation. The Seminole Tribe of Florida, the Choctaw
Nation of Oklahoma, the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, and the Jena Band of Choctaw Indians
concurred with the No Findings.
5.3 Compliance with Applicable Laws and Regulations
Applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations were taken into account during the
development of the proposed action to ensure compliance with these laws and regulations.
44
-------
5.4 Preparers, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Dallas, Texas
Barbara J. Aldridge, Environmental Protection Specialist, CWPPRA Project Manager, NEPA
Coordinator, Marine, Coastal, & Analysis Section
Robert Cook, Environmental Scientist, Watershed Management Section
Robert Kirkland, Physical Scientist, Surface Water Center, Marine, Coastal, & Analysis Section
Jeffrey Riley, Environmental Scientist, Air Planning Section
With Assistance from the CPRA BA 34-2 Project Management Team, Baton Rouge
and Thibodaux, Louisiana
Logan R. Boudreaux, Coastal Resources Scientist
Glen Curole, Coastal Resources Scientist
Gregory Mattson II, Project Engineer, Engineering Division
Garvin D. Pittman, Project Manager, CPRA PM Contractor (CB&I)
45
-------
Literature Cited
Barras, J.A., J.C. Bernier and R.A. Morton. 2008. Land area change in coastal Louisiana—A
multidecadal perspective (from 1956 to 2006). U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations
Map 3019, scale 1:250,000, 14 p. pamphlet.
Bridgham, S.D., J.P. Megonigal, J.K. Keller, N.B. Bliss and C. Trettin. 2006. The carbon balance
of North American wetlands. Wetlands 26:889-916
Burkett, V. and J. Kusler. 2000. Climate change: Potential impacts and interactions in the
wetlands of the United States. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 36:313-320
C & C Technologies, Inc., 2015a. Hydrologic Restoration in Lac des Allemands Swamp Project
(BA-34-2), Survey Report, May 19, 2015.
C & C Technologies, Inc., 2015b. Hydrologic Restoration in Lac des Allemands Swamp Project
(BA-34-2), Spoil Area & Tree Count Survey Report, August 17, 2015.
Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority of Louisiana. 2012. Louisiana's Comprehensive
Master Plan for a Sustainable Coast. 189 pages.
Clark, D.R., 2000. Donaldsonville, Louisiana to the Gulf of Mexico, general investigations—
reconnaissance study, a planning aid report. January 2000. USFWS, Lafayette, LA, 18 pp.
Conner, W. H. 1988. Cypress Regeneration in Coastal Louisiana and the Impact of Nutria
upon Seedling Survival. P. 130-136 in: Wetlands: Proceedings 13th Annual Conference of the
Society of Wetland Scientists, New Orleans, LA 990 p.
Conner, W. H. 1994. Effect of Forest Management Practices on Southern Forested Wetland
Productivity. Wetlands 14: 27-40.
Conner, W. H. and M. Brody. 1989. Rising Water Levels and the Future of the Southeastern
Louisiana Swamp Forest. Estuaries 12: 318-323.
Conner, W. H. and J. W. Day, Jr. 1976. Productivity and Composition of a Baldcypress-Water
Tupelo Site and a Bottomland Hardwood Forest Site in a Louisiana Swamp. American Journal
of Botany. 63: 1354-1364.
Conner, W. H. and J. W. Day, Jr. 1992a. Diameter growth of Taxodium distichum (L.) Rich,
and Nyssa aquaticah. from 1979-1985 in Four Louisiana Swamp Stands. American Midland
Naturalist 127: 290-299.
Conner, W. H. and J. W. Day, Jr. 1992b. Water Level Variability and Litterfall Productivity of
Forested Freshwater Wetlands in Louisiana. American Midland Naturalist 128: 237-245.
46
-------
Conner, W. H., Gosselink, J. G. and R.T. Parrondo. 1981. Comparison of the Vegetation of
Three Louisiana Swamp Sites with Different Flooding Regimes, American Journal of Botany,
Vol. 68, No. 3, (March 1981), pp. 320-331.
Conner, W. H., I. Mihalia, and J. Wolfe. 2002. Tree Community Structure and Changes from
1987-1999 in Three Louisiana and Three South Carolina Forested Wetlands. Wetlands 22(1):
58-70.
Couvillion, B.R., Barras, J.A., Steyer, G.D., Sleavin, William, Fischer, Michelle, Beck, Holly,
Trahan, Nadine, Griffin, Brad, and Heckman, David. 2011. Land area change in coastal
Louisiana from 1932 to 2010: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3164, scale
1:265,000, 12 p. pamphlet.
Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority of Louisiana (CPRA), 2012. Louisiana's
Comprehensive Master Plan for a Sustainable Coast, effective May 23, 2012.
CPRA, 2015a. Monitoring Plan for BA-34-2 Hydrologic Restoration and Vegetative Planting in
the des Allemands Swamp, Glen P. Curole, June 2015.
CPRA, 2015b. 30% Design Report, BA-34-2 Hydrologic Restoration and Vegetative Planting in
the des Allemands Swamp, State Project Engineer Gregory A. Mattson, E.I.et al July 13, 2015.
CPRA, 2015c. Draft Project Information Sheet for Wetland Value Assessment, BA-34-2
Hydrologic Restoration and Vegetative Planting in the des Allemands Swamp, August 2015.
Crowe, M. and R. G. Quayle 2000. Observed climate trends for the globe and the southeastern
United States. In Current Stress and Potential Vulnerability-Implications of Global Climate
Change for the Gulf Coast Region. Ed. Ning, Z. H. and K. K Abdollahi, GCRCC and Franklin
Press, Baton Rouge, LA.
Daigle, et al., 2006, Ecoregions of Louisiana (color poster with map, descriptive text,
summary tables, and photographs): Reston, Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey (map scale
1:1,000,000).
Donovan, L. A., K. W. McLeod, K. C. Sherrod, Jr., andN. J, Stumpff. 1988. Response of
Woody Swamp Seedlings to Flooding and Increased Water Temperatures. I. Growth, Biomass,
and Survivorship. American Journal of Botany 75 (8): 1181-1190.
Faulkner, S. P., P. Bhattarai, Y. Allen, J. Barras, and G. Constant. 2009. Identifying
Baldcypress-Tupelo Regeneration Classes in Forested Wetlands of the Atchafalaya Basin,
Louisiana. Wetlands 29 (3): 809-817.
Faulkner, S. P., J. L. Chambers, W. H. Conner, R. F. Keim, J. W. Day, E. S. Gardiner, M. S.
Hughes, S. L. King, K. W. McLeod, C. A. Miller, J. A. Nyman, and G. P. Shaffer. 2007.
Conservation and Use of Coastal Wetland Forests in Louisiana. P. 447-460 in: The Ecology of
Tidal Freshwater Swamps of the Southeastern United States, W. H. Conner, T. W. Doyle, and K.
W. Krauss, Ed. Springer Science.
47
-------
Fontenot, J. F. 2006. Seasonal abundance, GSI, and age structure of gizzard shad Dorosoma
cepedianum in the upper Barataria Estuary. Master's thesis. Nicholls State University,
Thibodaux, Louisiana.
FTN Associates, Ltd., 2011. Numerical Modeling of the Mississippi River Reintroduction into
the Northwest Barataria Basin (BA-34), FTN Associates, Ltd., Baton Rouge, LA. Report
submitted to the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority of Louisiana, Baton Rouge, LA.
FTN Associates, Ltd., 2015, Hydrodynamic Modeling for Hydrologic Restoration of the Lac des
Allemands Swamp (BA-34-2), FTN Associates, Ltd., Baton Rouge, LA. Report submitted to the
Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority of Louisiana, Baton Rouge, LA.
Jackson, Sean, 2009, Seasonal Diversity and Abundance of Larval and Juvenile Fishes in the
Upper Barataria Estuary, Spring 2009, Unpublished master's thesis, Nicholls State University,
Thibodaux, Louisiana.
Keim, R. F., J. L. Chambers, M. S. Hughes, J. A. Nyman, C. A. Miller, J. B. Amos, W. H.
Conner, J. W. Day Jr., S. P. Faulkner, E. S. Gardiner, S. L. King, K. W. McLeod, and G. P.
Shaffer. 2006. Ecological Consequences of Changing Hydrological Conditions in Wetland
Forests of Coastal Louisiana. P. 383-395 in: Coastal Environment and Water Quality, Y.J. Xu
and V.P. Singh, eds. Challenges in Coastal Hydrology and Water Quality, Water Resource
Publications, Highlands Ranch, Colo. 534 p.
Keim, R. F., T. J. Dean, and J. L. Chambers. 2013. Flooding Effects on Stand Development in
Cypress-Tupelo. P. 431-437 in: Proceedings, 15th Biennial Southern Silvicultural Research
Conference, Hot Springs, AK. USDA Forest Service Technical Report SRS-175.
Keim, R. F., C. W. Izdepski, and J. W. Day, Jr. 2012. Growth Responses of Baldcypress to
Wastewater Nutrient Additions and Changing Hydrologic Regime. Wetlands 32: 95-103.
Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force, LCWCRTF. 1993.
Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Restoration Plan: Main Report and Environmental Impact
Statement.
Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force and the Wetlands
Conservation and Restoration Authority, LCWCRTF. 1998. Coast 2050: Toward a Sustainable
Coastal Louisiana. Louisiana Department of Natural Resources. Baton Rouge, LA. 161pp.
Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force. 2012. Wetland Value
Assessment Methodology: Swamp Community Model, Version 1.2. 33 pages.
Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force 2013, 22nd Priority
Project List Report, LCWCRTF October 2013.
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Final 2014 Louisiana Water Quality Integrated
Report (305(b)/303(d)), July 29, 2015.
48
-------
Natural Resource Conservation Service, NRCS. 2000. Soil Survey of St. James Parish,
Louisiana. U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Natural Resource Conservation Service, NRCS. Custom Soil Resource Report for St. James
Parish, Louisiana, Lac des Allemands Swamp, Dec. 10, 2012, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Park, D., M. Inoue, W. J. Wiseman, Jr., D. Justic, and G. Stone. 2004. High-Resolution
Integrated Hydrology-Hydrodynamic Model: Development and Application to Barataria Basin,
Louisiana. U. S. Dept. of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS
Region, New Orleans, LA. OCS Study MMS2004 - 063. 74 pp.
Pezeshki, S. R. 1991. Root Responses of Flood-tolerant and Flood-sensitive Tree Species to
Soil Redox Conditions. Trees 5: 180-186.
Pezeshki, S. R., R. D. DeLaune, and W. H. Patrick, Jr. 1993. Responses of Forested Wetland
Species to Alteration in Soil Hydrology/Chemistry. P. 878-885 in: Wetlands: Proceedings 13th
Annual Conference of the Society of Wetland Scientists, New Orleans, LA 990 p.
R. Christopher Goodwin & Associates, Inc., 2015, for Royal Engineering, Negative Findings:
Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation of the Proposed Coastal Protection and Restoration
Authority (CPRA) Hydrologic Restoration Project Area, St. James Parish, Louisiana, August
2015.
Reed, D., ed. 1995. Status and Trends of Hydrologic Modification, Reduction in Sediment
Availability, and Habitat Loss/Modification in the Barataria-Terrebonne Estuarine System. Barataria-
Terrebonne National Estuary Program, Thibodaux, LA, 20: 388 pp.
Ross, S.T. 2001. The Inland Fishes of Mississippi. University Press of Mississippi, Jackson,
Mississippi.
Sasser, C.E., Visser, J.M., Mouton, E., Linscombe, J., and Hartley, S.B. 2008. Vegetation types
in coastal Louisiana in 2007: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008-1224, 1 sheet,
scale 1:550,000.
Sasser, C. E., J. M. Visser, E. Mouton, J. Linscombe, and S. B. Hartley. 2014. Vegetation
Types in Coastal Louisiana in 2013. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map
3290, 1 sheet, scale 1:550,000.
Saucier, R. T. 1994. Geomorphology and Quaternary Geologic History of the Lower
Mississippi Valley. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
364 pp.
Science Working Group (SWG). Conservation, Protection and Utilization of Louisiana Coastal
Wetland Forests: Final Report to the Governor of Louisiana from the Coastal Wetland Forest
Conservation and Use Science Working Group, April 30, 2005.
49
-------
Shaffer, G. P. 2011. Review of Ecological Benefits of the Proposed Mississippi River
Reintroduction into Northwest Barataria Basin (BA-34) Project. Contract Report Prepared for
the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority of Louisiana (CPRA), Baton Rouge, LA. 6 pp.
Shaffer, G.P., W.B. Wood, S.S. Hoeppner, T.E. Perkins, J. Zoller and D. Kandalepas. 2009.
Degradation of Bald Cypress-Water Tupelo Swamp to Marsh and Open Water in Southeastern
Louisiana, USA: An Irreversible Trajectory? Journal of Coastal Research 54: 152-165.
Turner, R.E., and Cahoon, D.R., Causes of wetland loss in the coastal central Gulf of Mexico,
1987.
U.S. Census Bureau, 2010. St. James Parish Quick Facts Report, found at
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/22/22075.html.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Lac des Allemands River Basin Initiative Final Report,
Prepared for The Citizens of Ascension, Assumption, Lafourche, St. Charles, St. James, and St.
John the Baptist Parishes, September 2002.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Custom Soil Resource
Report for St. James Parish, Louisiana, Lac des Allemands Swamp, December 10, 2012.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, USACE, Feb. 18, 2014. Letter in response to Solicitation of
Views.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, USACE. 2004. Final Programamatic Environmental Impact
Statement, Louisiana Coastal Area (LCA) Ecosystem Restoration Study. Volume 2.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, USEPA. 1989. Onshore Oil and Gas Activities Along
the Northern Gulf of Mexico Coast: A Wetland Manager's Handbook. Final Report; Authored by
Louisiana Geological Survey, Louisiana State University. USEPA Region 6; Dallas, TX, March
10, 1989.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, USEPA. 2012, EPA and State of Louisiana, Scope of
Services, Cooperative Agreement for the Hydrologic Restoration and Vegetative Planting in the
Lac des Allemands Swamp Marsh Creation (BA-34-2).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, USEPA. 2013. Request for a Change in Scope and
Name for the PPL 10-Mississippi River Reintroduction into Northwestern Barataria Basin
Project (BA-34), presentation at the meeting of the CWPPRA Task Force, June 2013.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, USEPA. 2015. EJSCREEN Census 2010 Summary
Report for BA 34-2 with 1-mile buffer.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service website www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/bald-
and-golden-eagle-information, 2015.
U.S. Geological Survey, USGS. 2011. Hydrologic Restoration and Vegetative Planting in the
Lac des Allemands Swamp Marsh Creation (BA-34-2) Land/Water analysis.
50
------- |