Land Conservation Strategies- Conor Gillespie
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Land Conservation Strategies- Conor Gillespie

on

  • 707 views

Presentation given by Conor Gillespie on June 4, 2012 at the Third Annual Choose Clean Water Conference.

Presentation given by Conor Gillespie on June 4, 2012 at the Third Annual Choose Clean Water Conference.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
707
Views on SlideShare
707
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Land Conservation Strategies- Conor Gillespie Land Conservation Strategies- Conor Gillespie Presentation Transcript

    • Cost / Benefit Analysis for the Restoration of Riverine Systems Impacted by Legacy Sediment Presented to2012 Choose Clean Water Conference Lancaster, PA By Conor Gillespie, CPESC, MBA Conor@landstudies.com May 2012
    • Existing Conditions Legacy Sediment Hydric Soils Basal Gravels Legacy Sediment is the impairment to the aquatic resource
    • 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
    • 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
    • Floodplain Restoration Cost $100 - $200 / lf Existing Grade Hydric Soils Basal Gravels Short & Long Term Benefit - Removal of impairment - Restored function of aquatic resource
    • Natural Piedmont Stream ValleyConnectivitybetweenRooting Zone,Groundwater,andStream Flow Roots extendto groundwater Cobble/Gravel Bed Floodplain Soils – (Groundwater) Bedrock Shallow, Peaty, Organic, & Porous
    • Hydrologic Functions: Maximizing Sediment, Nutrient, and Carbon Retention in Natural SystemsBeaver Dam Controlled Stream Marshland
    • Potential Objectives of Riverine 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
    • Big Spring Run Restoration Restore the natural floodplain, stream and riparian wetland functions to its natural ecological potential. Maximize removal of nutrients and sedimentsSmall 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 willimprove over time and not be considered optimum immediately after restoration similar to the previous projects discussed.
    • Full-Depth Floodplain Restoration Design Features Channel directly linked to groundwater/bedrock. Floodplain Elevation – Preferably 6 to 12 inches withvernal pools to maximize – retention areas. This allowsthe root zone to quickly access and stabilize thefloodplain. Planform is sinuous, single, multi-thread channel or nodefined channel; similar to headwater marshes or wetmeadows. Maximize width of floodplain and condition soils forvegetation/root penetration. Woody debris throughout channel(s) & floodplain.
    • Big Spring RunPre-settlement floodplain
    • Cost Benefit Analysis Big Spring Run Case Study 3,060 lf of RestorationBenefit Value Hard Armor Soft Armor Floodplain $225 $125 Restoration $170Total Cost $688,500 $382,500 $522,500Stream Mitigation Dollar Values Vary Mitigation Possibly Mitigation Mitigation Achieved by State Achieved AchievedWetland Mitigation $77,500 / ac $0 $0 $310,000$ / ac* ($60,000 - $85,000) (4 ac)Wildlife Habitat Conservation Minimal Medium Maximum Banking CreditsSediment / Nutrient N – $3.37 ??? / yr ??? / yr ??? / yrReduction (On-site)** P – $4.73 Short term Short term Long TermSediment / Nutrient N – $3.37 $0 / yr $0 / yr ??? / yrfrom upstream sources P – $4.73 Transport Transport RetentionLegacy Sediment Re- $14 $2,380 $4,760 $280,000use*** $3 - $25 / cy (170 cy) (340 cy) (20,000 cy)Floodwater Storage None Minimal 12 ac/ftInfrastructure Maint. Likely Likely MinimalRequirements*Courtesy of Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC; Estimated Wetland Mitigation Credit Prices for the State of PA based offcurrent 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
    • Cost Benefit Analysis Big Spring Run Case Study 3,060 lf of RestorationBenefit Value Hard Armor Soft Armor Floodplain $225 $125 Restoration $170Total Cost $688,500 $382,500 $522,500Total Monetary Benefit $2,380 $4,760 $590,000Simple 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
    • Thank You