Wetlands Engineers Army
Wetlands are among the world' most endangered environments. There are various threats the gravity of which depends essentially on wetland's location and the surrounding human population growth and activity. Because of these threats, The World Conservation Monitoring Centre has, in 1997, put six of the 77 World Heritage natural habitats on the World Heritage Cites in danger (Thorsell and others, 1997).
The assortment of wetland's functions points out their value as ecosystems. Wetlands support an enormous number of animal and plant species as primary productivity habitats (almost 12% of all animal species known). However, rapid rise in population, economic growing and community development needs and cities spread out have put pressure on wetlands area (among other natural environments) (Schuyt and Brander, 2004).
From economic viewpoint, some argue that greater unemployment often result from increase population growth rates (either natural or emigrational) with worsening of the social conditions. In which case, converting wetlands may offer employment or a chance for industrial or agricultural development for the future (Schuyt and Brander, 2004). This debate is highest in the US, Schuyt and Brander (2004) provided a list of 89 economically valuable wetland sites all over the world. Of these sites, 43 (48.3%) are present in the US alone, pointing to the volume of the problem from ecological preservation and economic standpoints.
The aim of this essay is to provide a brief yet, a comprehensive review on wetlands and dredging of wetlands with a spotlight on the laws and rules controlling dredging activities and protecting wetland's environment.
The United States Army Corps of Engineers and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), define wetlands as areas covered, immersed, or waterlogged by either surface or underground water. This water is present at regularity and for a period enough to support or, in reality, supporting the living of forms of plant and animal life acclimatized to survive in such conditions (US Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Information, n.d.). As wetlands are US Water under section 404 of the Clean Water Act, 1977, any person, firm, office, or a local authority develops an interest to place sediment (depositing), dredging or filling in a wetland, needs an authorization for the activity. The US Army Corpus of Engineers is in charge for controlling the section 404 permit procedures. Thus, the US Army Corpus of Engineers District Office makes the final determination if, in a certain district, an area is a wetland, if a particular activity needs approval. When it does, the office is responsible for the permitting processes (US Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Information, n.d.).
The history of wetlands echoes the history of human civilizations. In the wetlands environment of the Nile, Euphrates, Indus, Mekong, and Tigris, civilizations like ancient Egyptian, Sumerian, Babylonian, Chinese and Indian civilizations flourished. In modern history, many consider wetlands risky and unhealthy areas and deny or minimize their ecological and economic value. Because of such a view, Mexico City, Chicago, and Washington DC, grew at the cost of getting rid of almost all their wetland. However, pros to this view take the growth of these cities a proof of their well-judgment (Esteves, 1998).
Schuyt and Brander (2004) looked at the ecological functions and economic value of wetlands. Wetlands contribute to regulate the environmental ecology by storage and recycling of organic and human waste, erosion and salinity control. They have production functions as they provide a source of food, fuel wood, and other raw materials. As a habitat for many plant and animal species, wetlands serve a carrier function. Thus, wetlands provide a biodiversity environment for scientific research. Schuyt and Brander (2004) defined the economic value of wetlands as two types of value. First is the use value resulting from the direct use of wetlands resources (food, wood...)? Second is the nonuse value resulting from their contribution to the carbon cycle, recreational activities, and even human concern to animal, or plant species? As an example, they estimated the total economic value of Charles River wetlands, Massachusetts, US, by $ 95,478,051 US yearly. Another example for Non-US wetlands economic value is the Pantanal Wetland, Brazil where they estimated the total economic value by $15,644.09 US. The total area of wetlands in the world is 62967 Hectares, while their total economic value is nearly $3.5 billion US, which is only a part of other values and functions of the wetland. Therefore, efforts should be directed to conservation and proper guided control of wetlands use for different activities (Schuyt and Brander, 2004).
Dredging literally (Oxford Dictionary) means to collect and bring up materials or clearing up an object or objects from the depth of a water collection (be it a sea, a river or a wetland). It is also defined as (the University English Dictionary) as deepening of a water collection using a dredging instrument or machine. Technically, the word dredging include the concepts of repositioning of what was brought up either by disposal or recycling, and serving the purpose of construction or maintenance of the area dredged (IADC, 2007 (a)).
Based on the previous definitions, classification of dredging is according to its purpose or the machine used. According to its purpose, dredging can be a maintenance dredging to keep the water depth of canal, harbors, or hip basins at the wanted depth. Capital dredging is a part of other civil engineering work, mineral dredging is to bring up valuable minerals or other materials like sand and clay for commercial or industrial purposes. Environmental dredging is to remove polluted or contaminated sediment. Dredging machines are principally two types, mechanical dredgers (like bucket and grab dredgers), and hydraulic dredgers (like suction dredgers). The choice of a dredger depends on costs and availability and specific location conditions (EUDA, n.d.)
Conservation biologists focus their answer to the value of wetlands on the answer to three questions. First is the distinctiveness of wetlands as a natural habitat to several plant and animal species. Second is the utility of wetlands at present and possibilities in the future, and third is the threats endangering wetlands as an ecosystem (Moyle and Kelt, 2004).
Many authors recognize the ecological value of wetlands, as regards dredging, the regular input of water and sediment carrying nutrients offer a good environment for plants to grow quicker. Plants that are not used by humans transform into rich organic debris enriching the soil. They recharge underwater supply of the surrounding area because of the way they can hold water and the rate water goes through the soil. Biological research showed that small changes in water levels caused by procedures like dredging (or inflow of water pollutants) can result in notable effects on the biological ecosystem of wetlands.
An example of how dredging can adversely affect wetland biological diversity is the Essential Fish Habitat Assessment report in 1999 (Action Agency, 1999). A dredging project of 1.8 Hectares presented for permission at Barndoor Bay-New Jersey to construct a marina with facilities was refused. Assessment authorities considered dredging a threat to several species of fish like summer flounder, black sea fish, and bluefish among other species. Dredging was considered a transient (few seasons) threat to some invertebrates (benthic fish prey). Based on these effects of animal life in the specified wetland, authorities refused the proposed dredging project (Action Agency, 1999).
Besides their importance as an ecosystem, Schuyt and Brander (2004) explained how important wetlands are from economic and beliefs of appreciating wild natural life. Wetland owners may not utilize the advantages of their properties, and thus, the impact of exploiting wetlands may be felt by other people. This should call for regulating function at wetlands not degrading them. Some authors believe that wetlands can be a source of pollution, especially if overloading these ecosystems exceeds their capability of filtering pollutants (Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 2006).
The use of dredging material in many industrial and economic activities has turned dredging to an industry. Dredged material can be used in concrete industry, creating new land (hydrophilic fill), or beach nourishment (EUDA, n.d.). The International Association of Dredging Companies infer that dredging industry is important to social and economic growth, with global industrial growth rate 65% in 2006 (compared to 2000). The total turnover of global dredging industry is over 8.3 billion Euros, in 2006 and these figures reflect the jobs and economical profits this industry provides (IADC, 2007 (b)).
Lukens (2000) included two questions in the study template about economic concerns of dredging. First were the economic benefits weighed against the environmental costs of a dredging project, and the second question was there a cost to benefit analysis for the project (who did it and who reviewed it?). Lukens' research about dredging was directed to 34 states authorities, and none of the answers included a specific policy answer to the first question. As regards wetlands, some states responded with specificity ranging economic and environmental criteria to be considered for permit evaluation. Among these criteria were public interest, supporting facilities, effects on nearby land utilization, and environmental impact. Responding to the question, much less number of states have a policy cost to benefit analysis (Lukens, 2000).
When dredging passes the permit procedure, selection of the disposal site for dredged sediment and waste is an essential part of the project. Disposal methods in common use are beach nourishment, ocean placement or placement within banks of the water area, or restricted covered (capped) or confined disposal areas (USACE, 2002).
1- The issue of regulatory authority (jurisdiction): The US Army Corpus of Engineers (USACE) is the authority over dredging and filling since 1899 (the River and Harbor act) and was given this authority of permitting dredging project under section 404 of the Clean Water Act, 1977. For administering section 404, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) shares the responsibility with USACE. Other federal services take part have role applying this section, like the National Corvette Restorers Society (NCRS), US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Supporters of wetlands protection see the role of the USACE essential for preservation of wetlands. Opponents see this role as intrusion on their private properties, besides applying the same rules on wetlands of various values. What adds to the debate is the consensus that section 404 may not be the ideal federal legislation for wetland protection (Copeland and Zinn, 2008).
2- The question of Mitigation: It is the improvement, restoration or making of wetland to replace lost ones because of permitted activity. Dredging of wetlands as an activity, or secondary changes resulting from dredging like change of water level, change of sedimentation, flow, or drainage patterns are among the activities that require mitigation (Wetlands & Waterways Program, n.d.).
In 1990, the agencies responsible for regulatory function under section 404 of the Clean Water Act signed a memorandum of agreement (MOA) outlining a series of three steps leading to mitigation. First whenever possible all kinds of industrial activities in wetlands should be avoided, second step is if these activities can not be avoided, then their influences on a wetland should be kept to a minimum. Finally when the previous two steps can not be achieved and the minimum impact is not suitable or satisfactory, then mitigation is properly justified. The MOA recognizes if mitigation is justified, it should on one to one basis regarding the functioning area of mitigated wetland (Copeland and Zinn, 2008). This MAO was criticized by wetland protection supporters because of three basic issues: Mitigation is, thus, a rationalization to wetland exploitation. Supporters of wetland protection believe also that unfavorable influence on wetlands can not be completely mitigated as measures of mitigation are not suitably maintained or observed. In 2008, the USACE and EPA circulated a new rule of mitigation to replace 1990 MOA. This rule clarifies what is a profitable project to compensate by mitigation. The rule also recognizes and sets the standards for mitigation banking (in advance mitigated wetlands), in-lieu (during a period of time) fee programs, and the permitting authority (permittee) responsible mitigation. Under this rule, all mitigation projects must have a plane (working and maintenance), reasons for location selection and objectives among 12 required components of the mitigation project (Copeland and Zinn, 2008).
Action Agency (1999). EFH Assessment Example No 1. Retrieved 28/08/2008, from http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/habitatprotection/pdf/efh/consult_guidance/EFH%20Assessment%20Example%20No%201.pdf
Copeland, C and Zinn, J A from Resources, Science, and Industry Division. (2008). CRS Report for Congress - Wetlands: An Overview of Issues. Washington DC: Congressional Research Service.
Esteves, F.A (1998). Considerations on the Ecology of Wetland, with Emphasis on Brazilian Floodplain Ecosystems. Oecologia Brasiliensis, 4, 111-135.
European Dredging Association (EUDA) (n.d.). Definition of dredging. Retrieved 27/08/2008, from http://www.european-dredging.info/
Florida Department of Environmental Protection. (2006). A Guide to Living with Florida's Wetland. Miami: Retrieved 28/08/2008, from http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wetlands/docs/erp/fsewet.pdf
International Association of Dredging Companies (IADC) (2007) (a). What is Dredging. Retrieved 26/08/2008, from
http://www.iadc-dredging.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=101&Itemid=206
Internal Association of Dredging Companies (IADC) (2007) (b). Dredging Figures - 2000 to 2006. Retrieved on 27/08/2008, from
http://www.iadc-dredging.com/images/stories/pdf/dredging-in-figures.pdf
Lukens, J L (2000). National Coastal Program Dredging Policies: An Analysis of State, Territory & Commonwealth Policies Related to Dredging & degraded Material Management (Volume I). Retrieved 27/08/2008, from http://coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/resources/docs/finaldredge.pdf
Moyle, P and Kelt, D (2004). Essays on Wildlife Conservation. Davis: The University of California.
Schuyt, K. & Brander, L., January 2004: Living Waters, Conserving the Source Of Life: The Economic Values Of The World's Wetlands. WWF International.
US Army Corpus of Engineers - South Atlantic Division (n.d.). Regional Regulatory Information: What is a Wetland. Retrieved 26/08/2008, from http://www.sam.usace.army.mil/PA/regulatory/Wetland.htm
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Education Center (2002). Navigation Lessons. Dredging - Keeping Our Underwater Highways Open: Lesson 6 - What is dredging. Retrieved 28/08/2008, from http://education.usace.army.mil/navigation/dredging.html
Thorsell J, Levy R F, and Sigaty T (1997). A Global Overview of Wetland and Marine Protected Areas on the World Heritage List. Retrieved 26/08/2008, from http://www.unep-wcmc.org/wh/review/wetlands/wetlands.pdf
Wetlands & Waterways Program. (2002). Mitigation. Baltimore: Maryland Department of the Environment.
We provide a professional essay writing service that thousands of our customers use as an effective way of improving their grades, improving their research and saving them lots of time.
