Land Conservation Strategies- Conor Gillespie

Land Conservation Strategies- Conor Gillespie

• 1.
  Cost / BenefitAnalysis for the Restoration of Riverine Systems Impacted by Legacy Sediment Presented to 2012 Choose Clean Water Conference Lancaster, PA By Conor Gillespie, CPESC, MBA [email protected] May 2012
• 2.
  Existing Conditions Legacy Sediment Hydric Soils Basal Gravels Legacy Sediment is the impairment to the aquatic resource
• 3.
  Hard Armor Approach Cost $200 - $250 / lf Existing Grade Legacy Sediment Hydric Soils Basal Gravels Imbricated Wall Artificially Elevated Streambed Short Term Benefit Long Term Risk - Reduced erosion of impairment - Failure of armoring resulting in - Minimal improvement to aquatic resource renewed erosion of impairment
• 4.
  Soft Armor Approach Cost $100 - $150 / lf Existing Grade Legacy Sediment Hydric Soils Basal Gravels Bioengineering Short Term Benefit Long Term Risk - Reduced erosion of impairment - Failure of bioengineering resulting - Moderate improvement to aquatic in renewed erosion of impairment resource
• 5.
  Floodplain Restoration Cost $100 - $200 / lf Existing Grade Hydric Soils Basal Gravels Short & Long Term Benefit - Removal of impairment - Restored function of aquatic resource
• 6.
  Natural Piedmont StreamValley Connectivity between Rooting Zone, Groundwater, and Stream Flow Roots extend to groundwater Cobble/Gravel Bed Floodplain Soils – (Groundwater) Bedrock Shallow, Peaty, Organic, & Porous
• 7.
  Hydrologic Functions: Maximizing Sediment, Nutrient, and Carbon Retention in Natural Systems Beaver Dam Controlled Stream Marshland
• 8.
  Potential Objectives ofRiverine System Restoration  Sediment and Nutrient Reduction  Groundwater Recharge  Stormwater Management  Wetland Creation  Regional Flood Reduction  Carbon Retention  Wildlife Habitat Improvement  Invasive Species Removal  Fisheries Improvements  Thermal Improvements – Base Flow
• 9.
  Big Spring RunRestoration Restore the natural floodplain, stream and riparian wetland functions to its natural ecological potential. Maximize removal of nutrients and sediments Small headwater stream/springs – characteristic of a sedge dominated wet meadow – Bog Turtle Habitat. Areas seasonally flooded and extremely wet. Frequent exchange and interaction between channels and floodplain. Over time, vegetation will encroach upon the channel increasing carbon, nutrient and sediment retention. The objectives will improve over time and not be considered optimum immediately after restoration similar to the previous projects discussed.
• 10.
  Full-Depth Floodplain Restoration Design Features  Channel directly linked to groundwater/bedrock.  Floodplain Elevation – Preferably 6 to 12 inches with vernal pools to maximize – retention areas. This allows the root zone to quickly access and stabilize the floodplain.  Planform is sinuous, single, multi-thread channel or no defined channel; similar to headwater marshes or wet meadows.  Maximize width of floodplain and condition soils for vegetation/root penetration.  Woody debris throughout channel(s) & floodplain.
• 11.
  Big Spring Run Pre-settlementfloodplain
• 16.
  Cost Benefit Analysis Big Spring Run Case Study 3,060 lf of Restoration Benefit Value Hard Armor Soft Armor Floodplain $225 $125 Restoration $170 Total Cost $688,500 $382,500 $522,500 Stream Mitigation Dollar Values Vary Mitigation Possibly Mitigation Mitigation Achieved by State Achieved Achieved Wetland Mitigation $77,500 / ac $0 $0 $310,000 $ / ac* ($60,000 - $85,000) (4 ac) Wildlife Habitat Conservation Minimal Medium Maximum Banking Credits Sediment / Nutrient N – $3.37 ??? / yr ??? / yr ??? / yr Reduction (On-site)** P – $4.73 Short term Short term Long Term Sediment / Nutrient N – $3.37 $0 / yr $0 / yr ??? / yr from upstream sources P – $4.73 Transport Transport Retention Legacy Sediment Re- $14 $2,380 $4,760 $280,000 use*** $3 - $25 / cy (170 cy) (340 cy) (20,000 cy) Floodwater Storage None Minimal 12 ac/ft Infrastructure Maint. Likely Likely Minimal Requirements *Courtesy of Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC; Estimated Wetland Mitigation Credit Prices for the State of PA based off current market conditions ** Prices based of results of PennVEST Spot and Forward Nutrient Auctions; October 28, 2010 - March 21, 2012 *** Courtesy of Joe Sweeney, based on estimated re-sale value of Legacy Sediment from Big Spring Run project
• 17.
  Cost Benefit Analysis Big Spring Run Case Study 3,060 lf of Restoration Benefit Value Hard Armor Soft Armor Floodplain $225 $125 Restoration $170 Total Cost $688,500 $382,500 $522,500 Total Monetary Benefit $2,380 $4,760 $590,000 Simple Return on - 99.65% - 98.75% 12.9% Investment Additional Site Specific Benefits with Monetary Value - Sustainable, Low Impact Site Development - On-site water retention and usage - Reduction in stormwater fee’s due to increased infiltration Future Market Drivers - MS4 Permit Requirements - Chesapeake Bay TMDL’s - Wetland Creation & Mitigation
• 18.
  Thank You