20030179 Ver 6_Public Notice Comments_20071018

Placing Priority on Restoration Over Preservation for Mitigation Pro...
Subject: Placing Priority on Restoration Over Preservation for Mitigation Proposals for In-Stream
Permitted Impacts
From: "Todd Miller" <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:18:03 -0400
To: <[e-mail]>
John Dorney
NC Division of Water Quality
2321 Crabtree Boulevard
Raleigh , NC 27604
Reference: Placing Priority on Restoration Over Preservation for Mitigation Proposals for
In-Stream Permitted Impacts
Dear Mr. Dorney:
The North Carolina Coastal Federation (NCCF) is North Carolina 's largest nonprofit environmental
group focused exclusively on protecting and restoring our state's coastal habitat and aquatic resources.
NCCF submits these comments to the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ) regarding the Division's
decision-making process for issuing water quality certifications (WQC) for projects that involve
mitigation to offset impact to in-stream flow conditions. In specific, we would like these comments to
be considered in the context of promoting the removal of dams that degrade in-stream conditions in
our rivers and streams that provide critical habitat for fishery resources.
In specific, we do not believe that any WQC should be issued with mitigation requirements for
in-stream impacts that are not commensurate with the impacts to aquatic resources resulting from the
proposed operation to be permitted. For example, mitigation through a land preservation approach
that does not involve high-quality habitat under the threat of development is unacceptable to us. In
addition, land preservation should not be used for compensatory mitigation if viable restoration
opportunities are available. Finally, we do not believe that any land preservation used for mitigation
that is predominantly located outside of the 8-digit hydrological unit code (HUC) where the impacts
are to occur is appropriate.
Mitigation that does involve preservation should be targeted to pristine areas and not highly disturbed
1 of 3 10/19/2007 10:38 AM

Placing Priority on Restoration Over Preservation for Mitigation Pro...
ecosystems. According to NC's Stream Mitigation Guidelines (2003),
"For preservation to be an acceptable mitigation option the channel should be generally ecologically
important and in a relatively undisturbed condition. "
In cases where projects impact in-stream conditions, NCCF has been an early proponent of dam
removals in North Carolina . For example, we partnered with the US Fish & Wildlife Service in 1999
to remove the Raines Mill dam outside of Goldsboro ,opening 150 miles of rearing habitat for
alewife, blueback herring, American shad, Hickory shad, American eel, stripped bass, Atlantic
sturgeon and shortnose sturgeon (USFWS, 1999).
DWQ should recognize that damming represents a major disturbance to river ecosystems. In fact, the
widespread damming of the nation's rivers has been repeatedly implicated in the loss of aquatic
biodiversity (Williams et al., 1992; Vaughn and Taylor, 1999; Bednarek, 2001). Large dams that alter
natural flow regimes reduce fluvial geomorphic complexity, translating into losses of preferred habitat
for native aquatic organisms (Poff et al., 1997; Thoms, 2006; Poff et al., 2007; Moyle and Mount,
2007). Thus preservation of waterways with existing dams isn't appropriate mitigation since these are
not "relatively undisturbed" areas.
Finally, we encourage that the US Census Bureau growth estimates be carefully evaluated to determine
if mitigation proposals that involve preservation are offering lands that are subject to development
pressures. It is estimated that the State of North Carolina has experienced a population increase of
~10% from 2000-2006. If lands offered for preservation are in locations that do not appear to be under
any development pressures, that greatly reduces their preservation value.
In a more general context, land preservation is not capable of offsetting lost ecological functions and
values of the impacted freshwater ecosystems. The use of preservation for compensatory mitigation
should only be considered acceptable in a few, select situations where no viable restoration
opportunities are available. In North Carolina ,restoration of damaged ecosystems should always be
given priority in any mitigation proposal. Opportunities to remove dams in the state hold considerable
large scale restoration potential. These benefits can further enhanced if the NC Ecosystem
Enhancement Program leverages private mitigation efforts on our rivers and streams by targeting other
dam removal projects for completion.
According to NC's Stream Mitigation Guidelines (2003), mitigation for stream impacts "...should
be within the same subbasin (8-digit H.U.C.)". It is our understanding that DWQ does not accept
out-of-HUC mitigation if other, more appropriate in-HUC opportunities are available. Considering
this, we encourage careful evaluation of restoration options before preservation proposals for
2 of 3 10/19/2007 10:38 AM

Placing Priority on Restoration Over Preservation for Mitigation Pro...
mitigation are given any consideration.
Dams displace native species populations by fragmenting riverine habitat. These mostly impassable
structures isolate populations of sensitive freshwater taxa by substituting artificial lake-like zones for
what would otherwise be free-flowing habitat. Thus it is understandable that dam removal is
becoming more and more common, as scientific evidence emerges demonstrating the rapid recovery of
native riverine communities. NCCF supports the use of well conceived and carefully managed dam
removals to restore habitat for endangered and threatened riverine species. In particular, NCCF
supports the use of dam removal as "in-kind" mitigation during the FERC relicensing process, as this
approach strikes a balance between ecology and economy.
We request that you consider these concerns as your process applications for WQC that involve
in-stream impacts.
With best regards,
Todd Miller
Executive Director
North Carolina Coastal Federation
3609 Highway 24 (Ocean)
Newport, NC 28570
[phone] [phone] (fax)
www.nccoast.org
Celebrating 25 Years of Coastal Conservation (1982-2007)
3 of 3 10/19/2007 10:38 AM