North Carolina’s Weird and Wonderful: Two-Toed Amphiuma

Photograph of Amphiuma means, the two-toed amphiuma, courtesy of Kevin Stohlgren and Amphibians and Reptiles of North Carolina

Well, Halloween is finally upon us. A holiday favorite of mine, tis the season for pumpkin carving, for plastic skeletons arranged in tableaus, and for viewing classic seasonal films. One such film that I enjoy all year round is from 1954, The Creature from the Black Lagoon. One of the original “monster movies” from the midcentury, the story focuses on a group of scientists on an expedition to capture and study a strange creature living in an Amazonian lagoon. What could possibly go wrong? In that spirit, this month’s weird and wonderful focus is on one of North Carolina’s own mysterious, aquatic creatures: the two-toed amphiuma. 

Chances are good that you have never heard of this animal, let alone seen it. It is highly elusive, being primarily nocturnal in nature and occupying shallow ponds, ditches, and abandoned rice fields in the Coastal Plain and adjacent Piedmont regions of the Carolinas. As for what it actually is, well, that is where the weirdness begins. It is an eel-like salamander that has the honor of being North America’s longest amphibian, ranging in size between 18 inches to almost 4 feet in length. This species gets its name from the fact that it has two tiny pairs of legs, each with two tiny toes. Its underside is typically a light gray color, with the top portion being a uniform black, dark gray, or dark brown. 

Photograph of Amphiuma means, the two-toed amphiuma, courtesy of Kevin Stohlgren and Amphibians and Reptiles of North Carolina

Primarily aquatic, it is hypothesized that two-toed amphiumas may travel between wetlands during heavy rains, crossing over land to get from place to place. Seeing a darkly colored, slimy, eel-like creature emerge from a swamp at night in the rain is probably a scary sight, if you don’t know that what you are watching is just your friendly neighborhood amphibian roaming about the landscape. Well, friendly is probably not an apt description; amphiumas are carnivorous and have the sharp teeth necessary for that dietary lifestyle. They may bite defensively if they feel threatened, and the chompers on large adults can cause some serious wounds. So, if you are fortunate enough to see one of these weird and wonderful animals in the wild, it is best to enjoy the view, but do not touch the amphiuma. 

Photograph of Amphiuma means, the two-toed amphiuma, courtesy of Todd Pierson and Amphibians and Reptiles of North Carolina

Herpetologists (scientists who study reptiles and amphibians) do not know a whole lot about two-toed amphiumas. What is known is that females deposit long strings of eggs, ranging anywhere from 10 eggs to over 300, underneath logs, boards, and other objects in moist or wet areas during the winter months. These strings have been described as “rosary-like” and have been found in some unusual places, including alligator nests. Once a female has laid her eggs, she remains with them until they hatch into aquatic larvae around five months later. These tiny larvae are, on average, around 2.2 inches long, and once they transform into the adult stage, they are around 2.75 inches long. The next time you take a stroll through the hardwood forests and pine savannas of North Carolina’s coastal plains, pay attention to any wetlands you see. They just might house our state’s very own creature from the black lagoon. 

Announcing the Latest Edition of Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States: A Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils – Version 9.0

book cover

The Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States guide has been an essential resource for scientists, environmental consultants, and land managers who work to identify and preserve wetlands. Now, with the release of Version 9.0, the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS) have expanded and refined this resource, updating essential definitions, indicators, and methodologies. This new edition builds on Version 8.2, introducing new region-specific indicators, refined guidelines for identifying hydric soil features, and some adjustments to the thickness requirements for certain indicators, making it a comprehensive tool for accurate hydric soil identification across the U.S.

Key Enhancements in Version 9.0

Hydric soils play a critical role in wetland ecosystems, serving as indicators of saturated conditions essential for wetland health and biodiversity. The new Version 9.0 introduces essential updates that will improve the accuracy of hydric soil identification, from defining region-specific indicators to refining measurement requirements for certain soil features.

1. Introduction of New Field Indicators for Diverse Regions

The guide has introduced new hydric soil indicators tailored to specific ecological regions, enhancing accuracy in previously challenging areas. For instance, the Alaska Gleyed Pores indicator helps address the unique characteristics of cold-region soils, where gleyed matrix colors occur prominently along root channels and pore linings, essential for identifying anaerobic conditions in these climates. With similar additions for areas with sandy, loamy, and clayey soils, the guide allows scientists to make more reliable hydric soil classifications nationwide.

2. Changes to Feature Thickness Requirements

Version 9.0 includes important updates to the minimum thickness requirements for certain hydric soil indicators. These adjustments aim to better align field practice with evolving soil science research, allowing for more nuanced identification of wetland boundaries. For example, indicators like the Depleted Matrix now include modified minimum thicknesses based on specific depth criteria, improving accuracy for areas with marginal wetland conditions. Such changes enable more precise documentation of soil properties and ensure that professionals can account for subtle variations in hydric soil features across different soil types and landscapes.

3. Expanded Guidelines for Recognizing Redoximorphic Features

Redoximorphic features—characteristics indicating soil areas with fluctuating aerobic and anaerobic states—are essential in defining hydric soils. In this latest edition, redoximorphic guidance is enhanced, particularly for sandy and loamy soils. The new definitions cover specific traits of redox concentrations and depletions, such as iron-manganese masses and gleyed matrices, offering field professionals an improved framework for distinguishing between true hydric soil features and naturally occurring soil variations in complex landscapes.

4. Elimination of Outdated Test Indicators

A major update n Version 9.0 is the elimination of outdated test indicators. Previously, some indicators were included on a trial basis to assess their effectiveness in field identification. These test indicators have now been removed, streamlining the guide and allowing users to focus on scientifically validated indicators that provide reliable results. Concepts from retired indicators, such as Vernal Pools, have been integrated into existing indicators like the Depleted Matrix, enhancing these primary indicators without redundant or untested methods. This change ensures that each indicator in the guide meets rigorous standards, improving overall reliability and usability.

5. Integrated Indicators for Simplicity and Efficiency

Several indicators have been retired in this edition, but their key concepts have been consolidated into other indicators to reduce redundancy. For instance, the concepts previously captured in the Vernal Pools indicator now enhance the Depleted Matrix indicator, making it a more versatile tool for wetland delineation. Similarly, other retired indicators have been merged, keeping the guide efficient and accessible while still scientifically rigorous.

6. Revised Appendices and Glossary for Greater Accessibility

Version 9.0 includes a thoroughly updated glossary and appendices that make it easier for users to apply the guide in specific regions. Expanded definitions cover terms like “gleyed matrix,” “anaerobic conditions,” and “organic bodies,” making the guide more accessible to those new to soil science and field identification. In addition, the appendices now provide a consolidated list of approved indicators organized by Land Resource Regions (LRRs) and Major Land Resource Areas (MLRAs), supporting rapid reference for professionals working in various geographic areas.

Why These Updates Matter for Wetland Management

Identifying hydric soils accurately is essential for maintaining and protecting wetland ecosystems, which serve critical functions in water purification, flood control, and biodiversity preservation. The enhancements in Version 9.0, from modified thickness requirements to expanded redoximorphic feature descriptions, provide environmental consultants, regulators, and wetland scientists with the precision needed to navigate these complex landscapes accurately. Improved indicators for specific regions, like coastal, floodplain, and cold environments, make it easier to manage wetlands under diverse climate and soil conditions.

Practical Applications for Field Professionals

With its focus on detail and accuracy, Version 9.0 offers practical benefits for those conducting soil identification and wetland delineation:

  • Land Development Compliance: Accurate soil classification helps ensure that projects comply with the Clean Water Act (CWA) and other regulations, reducing the risk of costly misclassifications.
  • Restoration and Conservation Efforts: Wetland scientists can apply region-specific indicators and adjusted thickness requirements to design effective conservation and restoration projects, especially in fragile ecosystems like floodplains and coastal areas.
  • Agricultural Land Use: Farmers and agricultural consultants can leverage this updated resource to make informed decisions about hydric soil management, supporting sustainable practices that protect adjacent wetland areas.

Accessing and Using Version 9.0

The Field Indicators of Hydric Soils Version 9.0 is available through the NRCS Distribution Center and on the NRCS website. With this latest edition, professionals have access to cutting-edge tools that support not only accurate soil identification but also sustainable environmental management practices. By integrating the advancements in Version 9.0, field practitioners can confidently approach the intricacies of hydric soil identification, contributing to the protection and sustainability of wetland ecosystems across the United States.

This update ensures that wetland delineation remains a robust science, meeting the challenges posed by changing climates and evolving ecosystems. With Version 9.0 in hand, environmental professionals are now better equipped than ever to work at the forefront of soil science and wetland conservation.

Understanding the Proposed Clean Water Act of 2023: A New Era in Water Protection?

The Clean Water Act (CWA) has long been the cornerstone of water protection in the United States, but the environmental landscape has shifted, prompting lawmakers to propose updates to address modern challenges. In October 2023, a group of House Democrats introduced the Clean Water Act of 2023 (H.R. 5983), which aims to restore protections to U.S. waters following the Supreme Court’s Sackett v. EPA decision earlier in the year. The proposed changes could have significant implications for water management, environmental protection, and business regulation across the country.

Why a New Clean Water Act?

The primary motivation behind this update is the Supreme Court’s May 2023 ruling in Sackett v. EPA, which narrowed the definition of waters protected under the original Clean Water Act. This decision stripped federal protection from a significant portion of the nation’s wetlands and streams, reducing their regulation. The Clean Water Act of 2023 seeks to restore these protections by expanding the definition of Waters of the United States (WOTUS) and reinstating federal oversight over critical waterways.

Key Provisions of the 2023 Act

  1. Expanded Definitions of Protected Waters
    The Act aims to broaden the scope of protected waters, ensuring that small streams, wetlands, and other water bodies that lost federal protection after the Sackett ruling are once again regulated under federal law. This would close loopholes that have allowed pollution and degradation of these critical water sources.
  2. Stricter Permitting Processes
    The proposed law introduces tougher requirements for obtaining permits to discharge pollutants into protected waters. This is expected to have major implications for industries like construction and agriculture, which frequently interact with water bodies that may now fall under federal jurisdiction again.
  3. Focus on Wetland Conservation
    Recognizing the role wetlands play in flood control, water purification, and habitat provision, the new Act promotes stronger protections and increased restoration efforts for these ecosystems. Wetland mitigation banking is also supported, allowing developers more flexibility while still maintaining conservation goals.
  4. Climate Resilience
    The Act incorporates climate resilience into water management strategies. By funding green infrastructure projects and improving natural flood defenses like wetlands, the legislation seeks to mitigate the effects of climate change on U.S. water systems.

Important Dates and Legislative Progress

The Clean Water Act of 2023 was introduced in the House on October 18, 2023, by Rep. Rick Larsen (D-WA), alongside co-sponsors Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-CA), Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA), and Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM). It was referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on October 25, 2023, and then to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment on October 27, 2023.

On September 11, 2024 a hearing of the subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment was held. The hearing featured testimonies from various stakeholders, including representatives from:

  • Ms. Emma Pokon, Commissioner, Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
  • Ms. Nicole Rowan, Director, Water Quality Control Division, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
  • Ms. Courtney Briggs, Chairman, Waters Advocacy Coalition, on behalf of the American Farm Bureau Federation
  • Mr. Vincent E. Messerly, P.E., President, Stream and Wetlands Foundation, on behalf of the National Association of Home Builders

They discussed the impacts of the Sackett decision on environmental protection, economic development, and the balance between federal and state regulatory roles.

Looking Ahead: What’s Next?

As the Clean Water Act of 2023 moves through the legislative process, it faces both support and opposition. Advocates for the bill emphasize its importance for restoring critical protections and promoting environmental health, while opponents argue that the expansion of federal water regulation could hamper economic development.

With the increasing challenges posed by climate change and population growth, the Clean Water Act of 2023 could play a pivotal role in shaping U.S. water policy for years to come. Keep an eye on this bill as it progresses through Congress, as its final form could have far-reaching impacts on water protection and management.

USACE APT Tool Temporarily Down: Hurricane Helene Shuts Down the National Centers for Environmental Information Headquarters in Asheville, NC

The recent devastation in Western North Carolina, wrought by Hurricane Helene last month, has had far-reaching consequences. NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) headquarters in Asheville have been affected, and as a result of the damage, the data center is shut down. Since the network service provider for the NCEI headquarters is also not functioning, the USACE Antecedent Precipitation Tool (APT) is offline. As a result, wetland delineators and other environmental professionals across the country are unable to access the decades-worth of NOAA data stored on those servers. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in their press release, advises that practitioners “may use the manual procedures described in Chapter 5 of the Regional Supplements to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and Chapter 19 of NRCS’ Engineering Field Handbook.”

Chapter 5 of the Regional Supplements addresses the challenges of identifying wetlands in difficult situations. Some wetlands lack typical indicators like hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, or wetland hydrology due to natural processes or disturbances. This chapter outlines approaches for making wetland determinations in problematic areas and atypical situations, such as those affected by human activities or natural events. It includes guidelines for agricultural and silvicultural lands, problematic vegetation and soils, wetlands that lack hydrology indicators, and wetland/non-wetland mosaics. The procedures emphasize the importance of professional judgment and the use of available data sources to make informed determinations. Field inspectors are encouraged to investigate indicators like volunteer vegetation, undisturbed reference sites, and historical data to determine if wetland conditions exist.

The NRCS Engineering Field Handbook Chapter 19 provides detailed guidance on using hydrology tools for wetland identification and analysis in the Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) states, which include Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota. It outlines the procedures to determine lateral effect distances for wetland drainage systems, utilizing data from the National Soil Information System (NASIS). A key component of the chapter is the hydrogeomorphic (HGM) classification system, which categorizes wetlands based on landscape position, water source, and water movement. The handbook emphasizes the importance of accurately assessing these soil types when calculating lateral effect distances, which is critical for proper drainage system planning. Both of these chapters, while providing great supplemental information, are unable to provide historic data on par with that of the APT tool.

We have learned a lot as a result of Hurricane Helene, not the least of which is that climate disasters can happen anywhere, anytime. Bodies of water, even at high elevations, can overflow and devastate local communities, with the added risk of landslides, due to the steep slopes. What we have also learned is that the APT tool, which is used by thousands of environmental professionals, research scientists, and hydrologic engineers across the country, only works when the NCEI servers in Asheville are functioning. Why should people care and pay attention about this, especially when they are struggling to recover and rebuild? Well, the APT tool is crucial for assessing flood risk by considering the amount of precipitation that has fallen over a specific period before a significant weather event. It helps engineers and planners understand the soil’s saturation level, which influences how much additional rain could lead to flooding. By evaluating this antecedent moisture condition, the APT provides better predictive capabilities for water management decisions. This tool is especially important for managing reservoirs, flood control systems, and other water infrastructure. Ultimately, the APT aids in preventing damage from extreme weather events by improving the accuracy of flood forecasting.

Hopefully the above helps people understand why the APT tool is so important. What Hurricane Helene has highlighted is the issue that the APT code is written in such a way that it is hard linked to the NCEI servers: it cannot get NOAA’s data from anywhere else. So this begs the question, is all of that data housed only in Asheville, NC? If so, are there any back-ups, and could the APT tool code be re-written to allow for it to access that back-up data? It seems to me that the APT tool is going to be critical in the coming months and years when it comes to not only redesigning the basic infrastructure, but also to redesigning and rebuilding entire neighborhoods to be more resilient to flood events. It would behoove us all to have the USACE Antecedent Precipitation Tool built back more resilient as well.

Navigating the Aftermath: What Happens When a Major Storm Destroys a Permitted Stream Mitigation Site

In the wake of a major storm, the challenges faced by wetland and stream mitigation companies can be overwhelming. When these natural events cause significant damage to a permitted mitigation site, the ramifications go beyond just the physical destruction. Companies must navigate complex regulatory obligations under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) compensatory mitigation regulations, which remain in effect despite the unpredictable forces of nature. This blog post explores the key considerations and responsibilities for mitigation companies in the aftermath of such an event and outlines the steps required to stay compliant and protect both environmental and financial interests.

Continued Responsibility for Mitigation Success

One of the most critical aspects of the 2008 Compensatory Mitigation Rule is that it holds the permittee responsible for ensuring the long-term success of the compensatory mitigation project, regardless of external factors such as natural disasters. This means that even after a major storm destroys a mitigation site, the company must ensure that the site still meets the intended ecological functions and complies with performance standards over the specified monitoring period. In practice, this means that simply blaming the storm for the destruction is not enough. The mitigation company must still ensure that the site recovers or that alternative actions are taken to restore its ecological value. This responsibility includes making sure that the site provides the necessary environmental services, such as water quality improvement, habitat provision, and flood control, as outlined in the original permit. Failure to meet these performance standards, even due to natural causes, can result in serious consequences, including legal and financial penalties. For this reason, companies must be prepared to respond quickly and effectively when a storm strikes.

Implementation of Remedial Actions

When a storm destroys a mitigation site, companies must act swiftly to implement remedial actions. The USACE expects permittees to address any deficiencies and restore the site to meet the original objectives outlined in the mitigation plan. There are several potential avenues for remediation, depending on the extent of the damage.

Site Reconstruction

The first and most obvious step is to rebuild or restore the damaged areas of the mitigation site. This may involve re-grading stream banks, replanting vegetation, or reconstructing wetlands to ensure they meet the ecological standards originally required. In many cases, physical restoration is the most direct way to return the site to its intended function. However, site reconstruction is not always straightforward. It can be time-consuming and costly, particularly if the damage is extensive. Companies must also be mindful of how rebuilding efforts align with the original mitigation goals, ensuring that the restored site provides the same ecological benefits as before.

Additional Mitigation

If it is not feasible to fully restore the original site, the company may need to provide supplementary mitigation at an alternative location. This is often referred to as “off-site mitigation.” While it can be a valuable way to meet regulatory requirements when on-site remediation isn’t possible, it presents its own challenges. Additional mitigation must still meet the same rigorous standards of performance and provide comparable ecological benefits to the original project.

Adaptive Management

Another option is adaptive management, which allows for modifications to the mitigation plan in response to changing conditions. After a storm, the ecological landscape may shift, making it difficult to implement the original plan. In such cases, the USACE allows permittees to adjust their strategies while still working towards the overall ecological goals of the project. For example, if erosion caused by a storm has significantly altered a stream channel, the mitigation plan may be adapted to stabilize the new channel rather than attempt to restore it to its pre-storm condition. Adaptive management offers flexibility, but it still requires careful planning and regulatory approval to ensure compliance.

Force Majeure Considerations

While natural disasters like storms are often considered “acts of God,” the USACE does not automatically exempt permittees from their obligations due to such events. Instead, the USACE expects companies to demonstrate due diligence in their mitigation efforts and work closely with regulatory agencies to develop a remediation plan.

Demonstrating Due Diligence

In the context of a storm-damaged mitigation site, due diligence means showing that the company took reasonable steps both before and after the storm to prevent or mitigate damage. For example, was the site designed with resilience to extreme weather events in mind? Did the company act quickly after the storm to assess the damage and begin remediation efforts? By demonstrating that they took proactive measures, companies can improve their standing with regulatory agencies and potentially reduce the risk of penalties.

Engaging with Regulatory Agencies

Open communication with the USACE is essential. Companies must promptly notify the agency of any damage to the mitigation site and work collaboratively to develop an acceptable plan for remediation. This may include updating the mitigation plan to reflect post-storm conditions or requesting modifications to the permit.

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

Even after a disaster, mitigation companies are still required to meet all monitoring and reporting requirements. In the aftermath of a storm, monitoring should focus on documenting the impact of the storm on the mitigation site and evaluating the effectiveness of any remedial actions. This data will be crucial in demonstrating compliance and showing that the company is actively working to restore the site. Regular updates to the USACE, including detailed reports on the status of the site and any remediation efforts, are vital for maintaining compliance and avoiding enforcement actions.

Financial Assurances

Many mitigation projects require financial assurances, such as performance bonds or escrow accounts, to ensure that there are funds available for restoration in the event of unforeseen issues, including natural disasters. If a storm destroys a site, these financial assurances can be used to fund the necessary remediation efforts. However, failure to adequately restore the site can result in the forfeiture of these assurances, leaving the company financially responsible for completing the restoration without the benefit of the secured funds.

Potential Permit Modifications

In some cases, the USACE may allow for modifications to the permit in response to the storm. This can include extending deadlines to give the company more time to achieve performance standards or adjusting the success criteria to reflect new site conditions. If on-site restoration is no longer feasible, the agency may also approve alternative mitigation options. However, permit modifications are not guaranteed and will require strong justification from the company.

Liability and Enforcement Actions

Failure to adequately address the destruction of a mitigation site can lead to significant legal and financial consequences. The USACE may determine that the company is in violation of its permit conditions, resulting in administrative penalties, fines, or even the suspension or revocation of the permit. This can have long-term impacts on the company’s ability to secure future permits.

Stakeholder Communication

Finally, maintaining open communication with stakeholders, including regulatory agencies, local communities, and clients, is crucial for managing the company’s reputation. Proactive communication can help build trust and foster collaboration, making it easier to navigate the regulatory landscape in the wake of a disaster.

Conclusion

When a major storm destroys a permitted stream mitigation site, the responsibilities of wetland and stream mitigation companies are far from over. The USACE’s compensatory mitigation regulations ensure that companies remain accountable for restoring the site or finding alternative mitigation solutions. By taking proactive steps, demonstrating due diligence, and maintaining open communication with regulatory agencies, companies can successfully navigate these challenges while fulfilling their environmental obligations.

Urgent Call for Chainsaws and Supplies: Help Us Clear the Way in Western NC

I just returned from western NC and need to share an urgent update. While essential supplies like food, water, and fuel are arriving thanks to church groups and other organizations, the real challenge is distributing them. Downed trees are blocking roads and access points, making it extremely difficult to deliver these resources where they are most needed.

I spent several days cutting trees, many of which were massive oaks, over 30 inches in diameter. In the process, I burned through 4 bars and 5 chains. The trees are old and tough, and after sharpening a chain five times, both the chain and bar are done. We urgently need more chainsaws, but even more critically, we need chains and bars.

The Swamp School is launching a chainsaw collection, and we need your help. While monetary donations are appreciated, the real need is for physical chainsaws, chains, and bars, which are in short supply. We’re looking for popular brands like Stihl, Husqvarna, and Poulan Pro, with 16” and 18” chains being the most useful. Please send matched chains and bars if possible.

Donations can be sent to the Swamp School office (address below), and we will personally deliver them to western NC once we have a substantial collection.

Your immediate help can make a real difference.

Thank you!

Marc Seelinger
marc@swampschool.org
(877) 479-2673 – Work
swampschool.org
Please ship your donations to:

The Swamp School
315 S. Salem St., Suite 310
Apex, NC 27502

Maximize Your Success: Advanced Wetland Mitigation Banking Strategies for Environmental and Financial Gains

Wetland mitigation banking has emerged as a critical tool in environmental conservation, offering a unique approach to offsetting the impacts of development on wetland ecosystems. For environmental consultants and land developers, mastering the advanced techniques in wetland mitigation banking not only ensures compliance with environmental regulations but also maximizes financial returns. In this article, we’ll explore the key strategies for successful wetland mitigation banking and how they can lead to both ecological and economic success.

Understanding Wetland Mitigation Banking

Wetland mitigation banking involves the restoration, creation, enhancement, or preservation of wetlands to compensate for losses incurred by development projects. These efforts generate credits that can be sold to developers who need to offset their environmental impacts. The demand for mitigation credits has been steadily rising, making wetland mitigation banking a profitable venture for those who can navigate its complexities.

Why is Wetland Mitigation Banking Important?

Wetlands play a crucial role in maintaining biodiversity, regulating water flow, and improving water quality. However, these ecosystems are often at risk due to urbanization and agricultural expansion. Mitigation banking ensures that when wetlands are impacted by development, new or restored wetlands replace their ecological functions, providing a net benefit to the environment.

Advanced Site Selection Strategies

The success of a wetland mitigation bank starts with selecting the right site. Not all sites are created equal, and choosing the best location requires careful consideration of various factors.

Key Considerations for Site Selection:

  • Hydrology: The water source and flow are the lifeblood of any wetland. Ensure that the site has a reliable water source, whether from surface water, groundwater, or a combination of both.
  • Soil Quality: The soil must support the wetland vegetation and provide the necessary conditions for water retention. Conduct thorough soil testing to determine its suitability.
  • Proximity to Impacted Areas: Ideally, the site should be located near the areas where development impacts are occurring. This increases the value of the credits generated and makes the bank more appealing to potential buyers.

Selecting a site with these characteristics not only enhances the ecological success of the mitigation bank but also boosts its market value. Sites with optimal conditions are more likely to generate higher-quality credits, which can be sold at a premium.

Designing and Planning the Mitigation Bank

Once a site is selected, the next step is designing and planning the mitigation bank. This phase involves creating a detailed mitigation plan that outlines the goals, objectives, and success criteria for the bank.

Essential Elements of a Mitigation Plan:

  • Hydrological Modeling: Use advanced hydrological models to predict water flow and ensure the wetland will function as intended. This modeling is crucial for designing water control structures and vegetation zones.
  • Vegetation Planning: Select plant species that are native to the area and well-suited to the site’s hydrological conditions. Proper vegetation planning is key to establishing a resilient wetland ecosystem.
  • Regulatory Compliance: Ensure that the mitigation plan meets all regulatory requirements. Work closely with agencies like the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to secure the necessary permits and approvals.

A well-designed mitigation bank not only fulfills regulatory obligations but also maximizes the ecological and financial outcomes of the project.

Implementation and Construction Best Practices

The implementation and construction phase is where the mitigation plan comes to life. This stage involves grading the land, installing water control structures, and planting vegetation.

Best Practices for Implementation:

  • Grading and Excavation: Carefully shape the land to create the desired hydrological conditions. This may involve removing excess soil, creating channels, or building berms.
  • Water Control Structures: Install weirs, culverts, and other structures to manage water flow and maintain the appropriate water levels within the wetland.
  • Planting and Seeding: Use native plants and seeds to establish vegetation. Consider timing the planting to coincide with the wet season to increase the chances of successful establishment.

Proper execution during this phase ensures that the wetland will develop as planned, providing the necessary ecological functions and generating high-quality mitigation credits.

Monitoring, Management, and Maximizing Financial Returns

Long-term monitoring and management are essential for the success of a wetland mitigation bank. Regular monitoring helps track the progress of the wetland and allows for adaptive management if issues arise.

Key Monitoring Activities:

  • Water Quality Testing: Regularly test the water quality to ensure that the wetland is functioning as intended.
  • Vegetation Surveys: Conduct surveys to monitor the health and diversity of the plant community.
  • Wildlife Monitoring: Track the presence of key species to gauge the success of the wetland as a habitat.

Effective management not only maintains the ecological health of the wetland but also ensures that the mitigation credits remain valuable in the marketplace.

Maximizing Financial Returns:

  • Credit Pricing: Set competitive prices for credits based on market demand and the quality of the mitigation provided.
  • Marketing and Sales: Build relationships with developers and regulatory agencies to increase the visibility and attractiveness of your mitigation bank.

Conclusion

Wetland mitigation banking offers a win-win scenario for both the environment and developers. By mastering the advanced techniques of site selection, design, implementation, and management, you can create a successful mitigation bank that delivers significant ecological benefits while maximizing financial returns. As demand for mitigation credits continues to grow, those who excel in this field will find themselves well-positioned for long-term success.

Take the next step in your wetland mitigation banking success—register now to secure your spot in our essential webinar on wetland mitigation banking on October 24, 2024.

Webinar Info Here

North Carolina’s Weird and Wonderful: Little Brown Jug

Photograph of a little brown jug plant with one stalk, one leaf, and one flower.

Many gardeners out there are entering their busy season, as fall is the perfect time to install new vegetation in gardens and natural landscapes. Utilizing species native to a particular area and making sure they are the appropriate ecotype of that species is increasing in popularity amongst gardeners. Native plant gardens tend to exhibit large and/or colorful species of flowers, shrubs, and vines, while overlooking some of the less-flashy plants present in our state. One such North Carolina plant is Hexastylis arifolia, otherwise known as the little brown jug. This low-to-the-ground herbaceous perennial is often overlooked on woodland hikes, as the flowers are not particularly eye-catching. Those that notice it may confuse this species with wild ginger, Asarum canadense, which is in the same family, but has deciduous leaves, whereas little brown jug is an evergreen. 

Photographs of the foliage and flower of Hexastylis arifolia by Reina Kornmayer

Little brown jug has triangular to arrow-shaped leaves that are leathery in texture and release a spicy odor when torn. This species was used as a ginger substitute by early settlers, and local indigenous tribes used extracts and infusions from the leaves and roots to treat respiratory ailments and heart problems. This plant gets its name from its flowers, which are jugs often hidden beneath the leaf litter due to their short stems and rhizomes. These small, urn-shaped flowers grow to be about an inch long, are in bloom from March through May, and can be brown, green-brown, or purple-brown on the outside and a dark purple-brown on the inside. If the flowers are right at ground level, and they are not brightly colored, how is this species pollinated? Well, that is where the weirdness begins! 

Can you find the jug in the above image? Photograph of Hexastylis arifolia by Reina Kornmayer.

It was previously thought that both the Asarum genus and the Hexastylis genus were pollinated by carrion flies and fungus gnats. On the surface, this makes sense: the flowers of both genera are on the ground and are flesh-colored, matching the preferred foods of those groups of insects. However, research performed on wild ginger, Asarum canadense, since the 1980s has gathered evidence supporting the hypothesis that this species is self-pollinating. Fascinating information, you are probably thinking, but wasn’t this article about the little brown jug, and not its distant relative? Subsequent research on the Hexastylis genera has demonstrated that the distance between their anthers and stigmas in each flower is too great for self-pollination on their own. They need a little assistance, namely an insect one.

While wild ginger does not produce an odor, Hexastylis arifolia releases a very faint odor that resembles rotting flesh. Now, I have personally attempted to smell this odor on little brown jugs in the wild, and it is very hard to detect. You must get your nose at the right spot to smell the mild odor of decay. It is now thought that little brown jugs are pollinated by various species of carrion beetles. This group of beetle species spends its time on the forest floor searching for decaying flesh and poop in which to lay eggs; thus, the flowers of little brown jug would be easy to access. As these species excel at following scent trails to rotting refuse, they can easily locate these flowers. It is hypothesized that, once inside of the flower, the beetles move the pollen from the anther to the stigma while they scramble around, assisting the self-pollination process. So next spring, when you are taking a hike through a North Carolina forest, pay attention to the herbaceous plants along the forest floor. Chances are that the little brown jug is among them, waiting for a beetle to come along and pollinate one of their flowers. That, my friends, is one weird and wonderful plant! 

Restoring the Klamath River: A Journey of Cultural Revival and Environmental Healing

The following blog post is a summary of the article “Anything that can be built can be taken down”: The largest dam removal in U.S. history is complete — what happens next? by Lucy Sherriff, published by the BBC on September 3, 2024. To read the original article, click here.

Brook Thompson, a member of the Karuk and Yurok tribes from Northern California, has been fishing on the Klamath River since childhood, where fishing was a way of life. To her and her family, the river was not just a resource but a vital part of their culture and identity. However, in 2002, a massive fish die-off devastated the river, marking a turning point for her community. Thompson recalls how, at seven years old, she witnessed thousands of dead salmon along the shore, an event that had never been recorded in the tribe’s history. This tragedy was linked to low water flow from the Iron Gate Dam, which highlighted the detrimental effects of the dams on the Klamath River ecosystem and the tribe’s livelihood.

The Yurok and Karuk tribes have long opposed the dams, seeing their removal as essential to their survival. The dams blocked fish migration, severely diminishing salmon populations. The tribes’ deep cultural and spiritual connection to the river made the decline of salmon particularly painful. After years of activism and negotiations, the largest dam removal project in U.S. history was completed in 2024, opening over 400 miles of the river. This was a monumental victory for the tribes, as they had been told their demands were impossible. The return of the river’s natural flow brings hope for the recovery of fish populations and the tribe’s cultural practices.

The Klamath River basin, once one of the most productive salmon rivers on the West Coast, had suffered severely due to the dams. Salmon populations plummeted, and the tribes were forced to import fish for their cultural ceremonies. The dams also caused toxic algae growth, further damaging the water quality. The removal of the dams began in 2023, and although the water released downstream was initially dirty, the river has already begun to heal. Tribal members expect fish populations to recover significantly over the coming decades, with predictions estimating an 81% recovery by 2061.

Restoring the land exposed by the drained reservoirs is an ongoing challenge. The tribes, along with environmental organizations, have been working since 2011 to prepare for this restoration, collecting seeds from native plants to reestablish vegetation in the area. These efforts have involved hand-collecting seeds from hundreds of species, including culturally significant plants such as oak trees. The process has been complex, involving careful planning to ensure the genetic suitability of the plants for the local ecosystem. Despite challenges such as wildfires and drought, the restoration team has seen promising results, with wildlife beginning to return to the newly planted areas.

For Thompson and her community, the restoration of the river and the land represents more than just environmental recovery; it is also about healing their connection to their ancestral lands. The removal of the dams symbolizes the reclaiming of their role as stewards of the land, a responsibility passed down through generations. It offers hope not only for the future of the river’s health but for the survival of their cultural traditions tied to the salmon and the ecosystem. Thompson views this restoration as a forward-looking process, blending traditional ecological knowledge with modern scientific practices. While the river may never return to exactly what it once was, the tribes are committed to ensuring its future health for generations to come, believing that they can create a better, more sustainable future for their people.

Beavers as Ecosystem Engineers: Transforming the Landscape in Devon, England for Flood and Drought Resistance

The following blog is a summary of the article Research backs beavers in fight against flooding and droughts by the Devon Wildlife Trust, published online on May 29, 2024. To read the full article, click here.

A decade-long study conducted by the University of Exeter and Devon Wildlife Trust has highlighted the positive impact of beavers on flood and drought management in Devon, England. After being hunted to extinction 400 years ago, beavers were rediscovered living on the East Devon River Otter in 2014. It is unclear how the beavers found their way back, but their legal right to stay was granted in 2020. Forming close-knit family groups, these beavers now inhabit 20 family territories along the river. Beavers are also known as “ecosystem engineers”, as they reshape the landscape to suit their needs by constructing dams. These dams inevitably result in the creation of wetlands, which are prime habitat for the beavers, and an excellent form of flood control for humans. Why? Well, wetlands are able to store large amounts of water, which decreases flooding risks for the surrounding areas.

The research, which combined drone imagery with water depth monitoring, revealed that beaver-created wetlands in four territories stored over 24 million liters of water, equivalent to around 10 Olympic-sized swimming pools. These wetlands help mitigate flooding by reducing storm flows by 30% during heavy rainfall, offering protection to flood-prone communities downstream. Moreover, during droughts, such as the one in 2022, beaver wetlands released stored water slowly, maintaining river flows and creating “green oases” that support various wildlife species.

To further support the benefits of beavers, Devon Wildlife Trust is advocating for the expansion of beaver habitats and is working with two local, East-Devon based landowners through the Department of Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (Defra)-administered Farming in Protected Landscapes Grant Scheme. Surrendering farmland to the beavers results in a loss of income for farmers, as they lose precious grazing and crop space. This initiative provides financial assistance to farmers, compensating them for that loss. The Farming in Protected Landscapes Grant Scheme is currently only working with Clinton Devon Estates and Bicton College, who are making space for beaver wetlands on their land. The resulting wetlands not only support diverse wildlife but also offer unique learning opportunities for students, as seen at Bicton College, where portions of their working dairy farm were turned into beaver habitat.

Devon Wildlife Trust next goal is to make this innovative “green finance” approach available to more farmers and landowners who are open to transitioning some of their land to wetland habitat. Ed Parrish, the Director of Land-based Operations at Bicton College, supports that goal, stating ” We would like to see this type of funding expanded so that other landowners can be rewarded for the benefits they are providing to the environment when they allow beavers to create wetland habitats.” Dr. Holly Barclay, the Trust’s Green Finance Officer, emphasized the importance of these natural solutions in addressing climate-related challenges such as increasing floods and droughts. The Devon Wildlife Trust aims to develop new funding streams that reward land managers for the societal benefits provided by beaver wetlands, highlighting the cost-effectiveness of these nature-based solutions in mitigating the effects of severe climate events.