When is Aquatic Resource Type Conversion Appropriate: A Framework for Cleaning Sand out of the Gears and a Case Study for McInnis Marsh

Jennifer Siul, Eric Stein, Jeff Brown
{"title":"When is Aquatic Resource Type Conversion Appropriate: A Framework for Cleaning Sand out of the Gears and a Case Study for McInnis Marsh","authors":"Jennifer Siul, Eric Stein, Jeff Brown","doi":"10.1672/ucrt083-08","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Wetland and stream restoration projects may sometimes involve converting one “type” of aquatic habitat to another “type” (e.g., managed salt ponds into tidal marshes, depressional wetlands into streams, marsh into transition zone habitat). This “type conversion” may be necessary and beneficial in the context of addressing watershed plans or regional restoration goals, or in achieving resiliency to climatic changes (Goals Project 2015). Conversion can also occur through other large-scale, complex actions (e.g., mitigation banking initiatives). Whether driven by habitat restoration goals or compensatory mitigation needs or both, regulatory oversight typically governs the process. Holistically assessing such conversion through the regulatory lens is challenging for permitting programs. To address this challenge, an interagency team of federal and state regulators and resource managers in California developed a structured and transparent approach for evaluating the appropriateness of aquatic resource type conversion. The resulting framework can support project planning and inform regulatory evaluation by helping to answer: 1) what loss or gain of function is expected from various aquatic resource type conversions, and 2) whether conversion might be ecologically (or functionally) appropriate. The intent is to support agencies’ technical and regulatory decisions by providing a standardized, transparent set of tools and approaches that can inform discussions between agencies and with project proponents during the project evaluation phase, with a goal of ensuring that projects are not only permittable, but environmentally beneficial.","PeriodicalId":481187,"journal":{"name":"Wetland Science and Practice","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wetland Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1672/ucrt083-08","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Wetland and stream restoration projects may sometimes involve converting one “type” of aquatic habitat to another “type” (e.g., managed salt ponds into tidal marshes, depressional wetlands into streams, marsh into transition zone habitat). This “type conversion” may be necessary and beneficial in the context of addressing watershed plans or regional restoration goals, or in achieving resiliency to climatic changes (Goals Project 2015). Conversion can also occur through other large-scale, complex actions (e.g., mitigation banking initiatives). Whether driven by habitat restoration goals or compensatory mitigation needs or both, regulatory oversight typically governs the process. Holistically assessing such conversion through the regulatory lens is challenging for permitting programs. To address this challenge, an interagency team of federal and state regulators and resource managers in California developed a structured and transparent approach for evaluating the appropriateness of aquatic resource type conversion. The resulting framework can support project planning and inform regulatory evaluation by helping to answer: 1) what loss or gain of function is expected from various aquatic resource type conversions, and 2) whether conversion might be ecologically (or functionally) appropriate. The intent is to support agencies’ technical and regulatory decisions by providing a standardized, transparent set of tools and approaches that can inform discussions between agencies and with project proponents during the project evaluation phase, with a goal of ensuring that projects are not only permittable, but environmentally beneficial.
什么时候是适当的水生资源类型转换:清理泥沙的框架和麦金尼斯沼泽的案例研究
湿地和溪流恢复项目有时可能涉及将一种“类型”水生生境转变为另一种“类型”水生生境(例如,将管理盐塘转变为潮汐沼泽,将洼地湿地转变为溪流,将沼泽转变为过渡带生境)。这种“类型转换”在解决流域计划或区域恢复目标或实现气候变化弹性的背景下可能是必要和有益的(目标项目2015)。转换也可以通过其他大规模、复杂的行动(例如,缓解银行举措)来实现。无论是出于栖息地恢复目标还是补偿性缓解需求,或两者兼而有之,监管监督通常都是这一过程的主导。从监管角度全面评估这种转化对审批项目来说是一个挑战。为了应对这一挑战,加利福尼亚州的一个由联邦和州监管机构以及资源管理人员组成的跨机构小组制定了一种结构化和透明的方法来评估水生资源类型转换的适当性。由此产生的框架可以通过帮助回答以下问题来支持项目规划并为监管评估提供信息:1)各种水生资源类型的转换预期会损失或获得哪些功能,以及2)转换是否可能在生态(或功能)上适当。其目的是通过提供一套标准化、透明的工具和方法来支持各机构的技术和监管决策,这些工具和方法可以在项目评估阶段为各机构之间和项目支持者之间的讨论提供信息,其目标是确保项目不仅是允许的,而且对环境有益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信